MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3200314409

Micropropagation and Cryopreservation of Endangered Plant Species- Draba yukonensis and Cirsium hillii. (Canby) Fernald

2021· dissertation· en· W3200314409 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Akansha Saxena

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Atrium (University of Guelph) · 2021
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant tissue culture and regeneration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndangered speciesBiologyBotanyMicropropagationEcology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study utilized in-vitro techniques for long-term conservation and revival of the threatened species, Hill’s Thistle (Cirsium hillii. (Canby) Fernald) and Yukon Draba (Draba yukonensis). Micropropagation protocols were developed from seed derived shoots. The cryopreservation protocol for in-vitro shoot tips of Hill’s thistle was established using the droplet-vitrification method which produced 90% shoot tips regrowth. The plants from cryopreserved shoot buds exhibited comparable or better survival and growth in the field compared to plants from non-cryopreserved shoot buds when transplanted to their natural habitats in the Bruce Peninsula National Park, Ontario. The Yukon Draba plants were successfully micropropagated and acclimatized in the greenhouse. Droplet-vitrification method used to optimize cryopreservation protocol for Yukon Draba using in-vitro shoot tips which resulted in 100 % survival and 66 % regrowth. Collectively, these results provide evidence of the successful application of in-vitro technologies for ex-situ conservation and recovery of endangered plant species.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Atrium (University of Guelph)→Same topicPlant tissue culture and regeneration→French-language works237,207→