A prospective insight into the reproduction of <i>Sternbergia clusiana</i> K. Gawl.: an endangered species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sternbergia clusiana (SC) is a bulbous plant having an alluring ornamental flower, medicinal properties, and an endangered status due to climate-change ecology. However, the methods of propagation for conserving this notable species have been neglected. The main aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of plant growth regulators (PGRs) on SC regeneration by virtue of a asexual propagation method, with the intention of preserving this endangered species from extinction. In this regard, having collected the bulbs from a wild habitat, bulbs were cut in accordance with the chipping technique. Thereafter, pieces were treated with 6-benzylaminopurine (BAP) at 250, 500, and 1000 mg·L−1, 1-naphthaleneacetic acid (NAA) at 100, 250, and 500 mg·L−1, putrescine (PU) at 50, 100, and 200 mg·L−1, BAP and NAA combination, BAP and PU combination, and a control. Pieces were then transferred into primary and terminal growing media under laboratory and greenhouse conditions, respectively. Next, the number, length, width, and weight of bulbs were determined. The greatest bulb number (2.10 counts), bulb length (26.75 mm), bulb width (16.25 mm), and bulb weight (3.13 g) were observed in the PU treatments. In addition, the results showed that even though the treated bulbs with BAP and PU combinations had preferable performance generally, the results were inconsistent. Taken together, this research indicates that utilizing asexual propagation along with PGRs, in the proper dosage, can serve as a mechanism to protect the endangered geophyte from extinction in nature.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".