MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4313434094 · doi:10.25081/jp.2022.v14.8138

Effect of culture media and auxin on growth and glucosinolate accumulation in the hairy root cultures of mustard (Brassica juncea)

2022· article· en· W4313434094 on OpenAlexaff
Sun Ju Bong, Jennifer Park, Do Yeon Kwon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Phytology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant tissue culture and regeneration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlucosinolateBrassicaAuxinHorticultureDry weightBiologyBiopesticideBotanyFood scienceAgronomyBiochemistryPesticide

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Brassica juncea is a vegatable that are rich in glucosinolate (GSL) content. The hairy root (HR) cultures system is one of the most useful tools for secondary metabolites (SM) biosynthesis under various growth conditions. In the past, GSLs were mostly used as biopesticides in agriculture, anti-nutritional factors in fodder, and flavors in condiments. However, in recent days, GLSs have received much attention in human health. To investigate the growth response and variation of GSLs accumulation, HRs of mustard were grown in different growth media and auxins. The HRs growth pattern varied largely under the treatments of growth media and auxin. The full-strength SH media responded greatly for achieving the highest dry weight (DW) followed by the ½ SH media and the lowest DW was obtained in full-strength MS media. In all the auxin treatments the HRs production was higher than that of the control. It was noted that at higher NAA and IBA concentrations HR production was increased than that at the lower concentrations. In addition, different growth mediums significantly influenced the GSLs accumulation in mustard HR. The results revealed that ½ B5 media showed the highest total GSLs content followed by B5 and ½ SH. Treatment of mustard HRs with auxins such as IAA and IBA negatively influenced the accumulation of GSLs except for 4-methoxyglucobrassicin. We, therefore, suggest that HRs are a viable option for improving the GSLs content from the HR culture of mustard and that SH and ½ B5 medium provides an alternative approach for mass production of HRs and GSLs in mustard, respectively.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.266 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Phytology→Same topicPlant tissue culture and regeneration→French-language works237,207→