Callogenesis and in vitro Regeneration of Baru (Dipteryx alata Vog.) Esprouts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of different concentrations of 6-benzylaminopurine (BAP) and naphthalene acetic acid (ANA) on calogenesis and regeneration from baru leaf and apex segments. The explants were obtained from baru plants previously established in vitro from almonds and cauline apices. The leaf segments were placed in Petri dishes containing MS medium (Murashige & Skoog, 1962) with concentrations (0.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0 and 5.0 mg L-1) BAP combined with ANA (0.0 and 2.0 mg L-1). The shoot apices were inoculated in test tubes with the same medium using the concentrations (0.0, 0.5, 1.0 and 1.5 mg L-1) BAP combined (0.0 and 0.1 mg L-1) ANA. After 25 days of inoculation, the percentages of callus and texture in leaf explants and apices were evaluated. The number of shoots was also evaluated by the Scott-Knott test at 5% of probability. The most efficient concentration in the formation of callus in leaves was 3.0 mg L-1 BAP + 2.0 mg L-1 ANA (68.88%), at apexes the most efficient concentration was 1.0 mg L-1 BAP without ANA with 100% calogenesis. The most effective concentration was 1.0 mg L-1 BAP without ANA with an average of 1.90 of shoots in relation to the concentrations evaluated.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".