MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2903886401 · doi:10.5539/jas.v10n10p224

Induction of Indirect Somatic Embryogenesis on Embryonic Axis of TRI2025 Tea Clone

2018· article· en· W2903886401 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ratna Dewi Eskundari, Taryono Taryono, Didik Indradewa, Yekti Asih Purwestri

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant tissue culture and regeneration
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKementerian Riset, Teknologi dan Pendidikan Tinggi
KeywordsSomatic embryogenesisSomatic cellCamellia sinensisEmbryoExplant cultureBiologyclone (Java method)EmbryogenesisBotanyIncubationHorticultureCell biologyIn vitroGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tea (Camellia sinensis L.) is classified as cross-pollinated crop and vegetative multiplication becomes commercially the main method of propagation with some limitations such as high heterogeneity and poor in survival rate and also in rooting. A proven tissue culture method, somatic embryogenesis, is the only challenging way to meet the needs of tea seedlings in large quantities. The study was conducted with TRI2025 tea clone selected from Polyclonal garden of PT. Pagilaran (Batang, Central Java). The explants were cultured on MS media supplemented with four concentrations of 2,4-D (0, 1, 2, and 5 mg L-1) in two incubation conditions; dark and light. The results showed the only concentration of 2,4-D that can induce somatic embryo was 2 mg L-1 2,4-D in light condition and its percentage was about 5%. Other concentrations of 2,4-D that given for treatments both in two conditions will not induce somatic embryo. This study needs more improvements for getting powerful and efficient of method to get somatic embryo-derived plant and also for futher successful genetic engineering of tea biotechnology.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural Science→Same topicPlant tissue culture and regeneration→French-language works237,207→