Bibliographic record
Abstract
以美洲黑杨杂种优良无性系南林895杨（Populus×euramericana cv．‘Nanlin895’）为转基因受体材料，以嫩芽或腋芽为外植体材料组织培养再生植株，利用农杆菌介导法转化成Bt基因和CpTI基因。结果显示较合适的组培再生与遗传转化系统为：叶分化培养基为MS＋6-BA 0．5mg／L＋TDZ 0．002mg／L，芽伸长培养基为MS＋6-BA 0．2mg／L＋TDZ 0．001mg／L＋Km 10mg／L＋Carb 500mg／L，生根培养基为1／2MS；预培养3d，菌液浓度OD600 1．0-1．3左右，侵染时间20min，共培养4d，叶盘转化频率可达28．7％。对Km^r植株经PCR分析，筛选获得了18株整合有成Bt基因和1株整合有CpTI基因的转基因植株。部分转基因植株的初步饲虫实验表明，饲喂转基因杨树叶片可明显抑制杨小舟蛾的生长发育。
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 | 0.001 | 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".