IN VITRO PROPAGATION METHODS OF ORNAMENTAL CONIFERS WITH EMPHASIS ON SPRUCE SOMATIC EMBRYOGENESIS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AshihArA h., stAsollA C., loukAninA n., thorpe t. A. (2001). Purine metabolism during white spruce somatic embryo development: salvage of adenine, adenosine and inosine. Plant Science, 160: 647-657. Attree s. M., BudiMir s., Fowke l. C. (1990). Somatic embryogenesis and plantlet regeneration from cultured shoots and cotyledons of seedlings from stored seeds of black and white spruce (Picea glauca and Picea mariana). Canadian Journal of Botany, 68: 30-34. Attree s., Moore d., sAwhney V. k., Fowke l. C. (1991). Enhanced maturation and desiccation tolerance of white spruce somatic embryos: effects of a non-plasmolysing water stress and abscisic acid. Annals of Botany, 68: 519-525. Attree s. M., Fowke L. C. (1993). Embryogeny of gymnosperms: advances in synthetic seed technology of conifers. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture, 35: 1-35. Attree s., poMeroy M. k., Fowke L. C. (1995). Development of white spruce (Picea glauca) somatic embryos during culture with abscisic acid and osmoticum, and their tolerance to drying and frozen storage. Journal of Experimental Botany, 46: 433-439. BongA J. M., kliMAszewskA k., Von AderkAs P. (2010). Recalcitrance in clonal propagation, in particular of conifers. Plant Cell, Tissues and Organ Cultures, 100: 241-254. BozhkoV p. V., Von Arnold S. (1998). Polyethylene glycol promotes maturation but inhibits further development in Picea abies somatic embryos. Physiologia Plantarum, 104: 221-224. BozhkoV p. V., FilonoVA l. h., Von Arnold S. (2002). A key developmental switch during Norway spruce somatic embryogenesis is induced by a withdrawal of growth regulators and is associated with cell death and extracellular acidification. Biotechnology and Bioengeneering, 77: 658-667. BudiMir S. (2004). Developmental histology of organogenesis and embryogenic tissue in Picea omoroka culture. Biologia Plantarum,
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
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".