MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2988815867 · doi:10.1186/s13007-019-0506-9

Development, progress and future prospects in cryobiotechnology of Lilium spp.

2019· review· en· W2988815867 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Methods · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant tissue culture and regeneration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersChinese Universities Scientific FundNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsLiliumBiologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Lilium is one of the most popular flower crops worldwide, and some species are also used as vegetables and medicines. The availability of and easy access to diverse Lilium genetic resources are essential for plant genetic improvements. Cryopreservation is currently considered as an ideal means for the long-term preservation of plant germplasm. Over the last two decades, great efforts have been exerted in studies of Lilium cryopreservation and progress has been made in the successful cryopreservation of pollen, seeds and shoot tips in Lilium . Genes that exist in Lilium, including those that regulate flower shape, color and size, and that are resistant to cold stress and diseases caused by fungi and viruses, provide a rich source of valuable genetic resources for breeding programs to create novel cultivars required by the global floriculture and ornamental markets. Successful cryopreservation of Lilium spp. is a way to preserve these valuable genes. The present study provides updated and comprehensive information about the development of techniques that have advanced Lilium cryopreservation. Further ideas are proposed to better direct future studies on Lilium cryobiotechnology.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.735

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.324 · 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