MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391793795 · doi:10.53555/sfs.v10i1s.2283

Ethyl Methanesulfonate (EMS)-Mediated Fruit Mutants Of Bitter Gourd (Meghna-2): A Popular Landrace Of West Bengal

2023· article· en· W4391793795 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Umme Salma, Debadrita Giri, Mohit K. Sinha, Suprabuddha Kundu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Survey in Fisheries Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvances in Cucurbitaceae Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthyl methanesulfonateWest bengalBitter gourdBiologyHorticultureMutantBotanyTraditional medicineGeneticsMedicineGeneSocioeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ethyl methanesulfonate (EMS) is a stable and effective chemical mutagen. Bitter Gourd (Meghna-2) seeds were treated by 0.3, 0.5, and 1% EMS for 24 h and 48 h to optimize EMS mutagenesis. Median lethal dose of EMS was obtained at 0.3% EMS treated for 48 h. After treated by 0.3% EMS for 48 h, 250 M1 plants were grown in field for phenotype determination. In comparison to the control, a decline in germination, leaf shape, fruit size, fruit shape, vine length, and emergence was seen in the M1 generation when the concentration of applied EMS was increased. The fertility of M1 bitter gourd was very low and only 24 lines produced seeds after self crossing. Of the mutant 24 lines in the plant growth, five were dwarf, two were tall, four had retarded fruit size, and 13 had abnormal branching and flowering. Only four lines (G 6, G 9, G 14 and G 15) raised from M2 generations of Meghna-2, were screened critically and observed no significant reduction in seed germination and pollen viability but the fruit size was significantly decreased. Interestingly, the short fruit type and round shape of Meghna-2 (G 9) was chosen amongst the four due to farmer’s acceptability, which was grown further to confirm the stability.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.440

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.159
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Survey in Fisheries SciencesSame topicAdvances in Cucurbitaceae ResearchFrench-language works237,207