Blue sky’s the limit? Somatic embryogenesis as a means of propagating recalcitrant blue spruce ( <i>Picea pungens</i> ) cultivar Hoopsii
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The ‘triple-blue’ cultivar of blue spruce ( Picea pungens Hoopsii) is notably recalcitrant towards the realm of traditional vegetative propagation methods. Its ability to naturally proliferate is limited by ovule and embryo abortion during the growing season, leading to low viable seed yield. In this study, we established a protocol using somatic embryogenesis (SE) as a means of propagating this popular ornamental cultivar. We collected cones from Hoopsii trees at seven different timepoints throughout the growing season (mid-June to late July in Ottawa (Plant Hardiness Zone 5A)). Female megagametophytes were harvested following each collection and immature zygotic embryos were plated onto induction media. Early somatic embryos began developing from the embryonic tissue (ET) three to five weeks following induction. The highest ET initiation frequency occurred from embryos collected June 20–July 10, suggesting that developmental stage of the embryo was a significant factor in SE induction. The conversion of mature somatic embryos into plantlets (emblings) was completed in eight–ten weeks at a rate of 92.8%. In this study, we demonstrate that in vitro somatic embryogenesis using our optimized protocol is a fast and prolific method for the mass propagation of Hoopsii blue spruce. This is the first report on the production of somatic Hoopsii emblings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".