Effects of Explant Source and Orientation on Secondary Somatic Embryogenesis in Hevea brasiliensis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
) via secondary somatic embryogenesis (SSEis) is a reliable method. However, its efficiency is relatively low. The aim of this study was to understand more about the factors related to SSEis in rubber trees, trying to improve the efficiency of somatic embryo (SE) yield. Our study showed that the orientations of explants, i.e., the fragments of primary SE (PSE), on the medium affected secondary SE (SSE) yield significantly. Among five experimental tests, the highest yield was 2.6 ± 0.9 secondary somatic embryos (SSEs) per explant, which was achieved by orienting the abaxial side of the explant in contact with the medium and then the adaxial side after a period of culture time. Based on histological evidence, SSEis was induced from the epidermal cells and adjacent cells on the adaxial side of the explants. A remarkable difference in embryogenic capacity difference existed among individual PSE. The concentrations of soluble proteins, starch, soluble sugars, and the superoxide dismutase activity (SOD) levels in the explants were measured during a 25-day long SSEis induction treatment and compared between explants of high and low embryogenic capacity. This study proves that the explant orientation toward the culture medium plays a crucial role in SSEis, while the concentration changes of these biochemical compounds correlate to morphological changes in the explants during induction, as do the changes in SOD activity. Furthermore, the trend of the dynamic changes in the explants reflected a process of de-differentiation and re-differentiation, which started from mature SE tissues during SSE induction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".