MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210541884 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2021-0273

Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging of Scots pine seeds and the assessment of germination potential

2022· article· en· W4210541884 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Teemu V. Tuomainen, Katri Himanen, Pekka Helenius, Mikko I. Kettunen, Mikko J. Nissi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSeed Germination and Physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Regional Development FundNiemi-säätiöItä-Suomen Yliopisto
KeywordsScots pineGerminationPinus <genus>Magnetic resonance imagingHorticultureRelaxation (psychology)SeedlingBiologySeed testingBotanyNuclear magnetic resonanceMedicinePhysicsRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The availability of Scots pine seeds (Pinus sylvestris L.) with high germinability is necessary for artificial forest regeneration. In this work, Scots pine seed orchard seeds were magnetic resonance (MR) imaged to noninvasively investigate the association of the anatomical images and quantitative relaxation times with the structure and germinability of the seeds. Relaxation time differences compared to the germination day were also investigated. The average whole seed relaxation times T1 (two methods), T2, and [Formula: see text] were 430 ± 59, 660 ± 20, 14 ± 1.7, and 0.83 ± 0.33 ms, respectively. It was observed that the seed structures had statistically significant (p < 0.05) differences in relaxation times, while no differences could be observed in relation to the rate of seed germination. Furthermore, the obtained data were compared to radiographs. Empty seeds were observed to provide a minimal MRI signal, whereas intact and mechanically damaged seeds provided a profound signal with distinguishable structures. The mechanically hardest region, i.e., the seed coat, was not visible in MRI as opposed to radiographs. Some seeds determined to be mechanically damaged by radiography were able to germinate, and mechanical faults could be distinguished in MRI. As such, MRI can be seen complementary to the currently used methods to optimize seed sorting and to interpret germination potential.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicSeed Germination and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207