MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Molecular cytological characterization of two novel durum -<i>Thinopyrum intermedium</i>partial amphiploids with resistance to leaf rust, stem rust and<i>Fusarium</i>head blight

2013· article· en· W1538739360 on OpenAlexaff
Jian Zeng, Guangwen Cao, George Fedak, Brent McCallum, T. Fetch, Allen Xue, Yong Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueHereditas · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersMinistry of Education, IndiaMinistry of Earth Sciences
KeywordsStem rustBiologyMeiosisChromosomeRust (programming language)PucciniaPlant disease resistanceBotanyBlightResistance (ecology)CultivarAgronomyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thinopyrum intermedium, a wild relative of wheat, is an excellent source of disease resistance. Two novel partial amphiploids, 08-47-50 and 08-53-55 (2n = 6x = 42), were developed from wide crosses between durum wheat and Th. intermedium. Meiotic analysis showed that pollen mother cells of the two partial amphiploids formed an average 20.49 bivalents for 08-47-50 and 20.67 bivalents for 08-53-55, indicating that they are basically cytologically stable. GISH analysis revealed that the two partial amphiploids carried different chromosome compositions. 08-47-50 had fourteen chromosomes from Th. intermedium and its alien chromosomes included six St-, four E(e) - and four E(e)-St translocated chromosomes, whereas 08-53-55 had four St- and ten E(e)-St translocated chromosomes. Fungal disease evaluation indicated that both partial amphiploids had a high level of resistance to FHB, leaf rust and stem rust race Ug99. These two novel partial amphiploids with multiple disease resistance could be used as a new source of multiple disease resistance in bread wheat and durum wheat breeding programs.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.352
Threshold uncertainty score0.353

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations19
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHereditasSame topicWheat and Barley Genetics and PathologyFrench-language works237,207