Epigenetic and Genetic Integrity, Metabolic Stability, and Field Performance of Cryopreserved Plants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cryopreservation is considered an ideal strategy for the long-term preservation of plant genetic resources. Significant progress was achieved over the past several decades, resulting in the successful cryopreservation of the genetic resources of diverse plant species. Cryopreservation procedures often employ in vitro culture techniques and require the precise control of several steps, such as the excision of explants, preculture, osmo- and cryoprotection, dehydration, freeze-thaw cycle, unloading, and post-culture for the recovery of plants. These processes create a stressful environment and cause reactive oxygen species (ROS)-induced oxidative stress, which is detrimental to the growth and regeneration of tissues and plants from cryopreserved tissues. ROS-induced oxidative stresses were documented to induce (epi)genetic and somatic variations. Therefore, the development of true-to-type regenerants of the source germplasm is of primary concern in the application of plant cryopreservation technology. The present article provides a comprehensive assessment of epigenetic and genetic integrity, metabolic stability, and field performance of cryopreserved plants developed in the past decade. Potential areas and the directions of future research in plant cryopreservation are also proposed.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".