MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Rhizosphere persistence of three Pythium oligandrum strains in tomato soilless culture assessed by DNA macroarray and real-time PCR

2007· article· en· W1768317793 on OpenAlexaff
Gaëtan Le Floch, James T. Tambong, Jessica Vallance, Y. Tirilly, André Lévesque, Patrice Rey

Bibliographic record

VenueFEMS Microbiology Ecology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Pathogens and Resistance
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRhizosphereBiologyPythiumInoculationBotanyHorticulturePersistence (discontinuity)Biological pest controlBacteriaGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In tomato soilless culture, plant-disease optimal control and growth promotion are achieved when the rhizosphere is heavily colonized by the biocontrol agent Pythium oligandrum. Discrepancies in performance are generally attributed to the poor persistence of P. oligandrum on roots. In this study, three selected strains of P. oligandrum were introduced into the rhizosphere of greenhouse-grown tomato plants, and their persistence was assessed by DNA macroarray hybridization and real-time PCR. The experimental data from DNA detection and plate counting were compared. PCR-based methods detected P. oligandrum throughout the 6-month growing season, whereas plate counting indicated its presence only over the first 3 months. Moreover, the DNA array method provided information about the various Pythium species present in the rhizosphere: P. dissotocum was frequently detected on roots of plants, without distinction between plants inoculated or not inoculated with the antagonist. The detection of other Pythium species was noticed sporadically (P. ultimum, P. sylvaticum and P. intermedium), independent of the treatment. Even though the yield enhancement is not significant throughout the entire growing season, data obtained from epidemiological studies demonstrate an enhancement of P. oligandrum persistence on the rhizosphere of plants and less use of mycoparasitism.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

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 integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations42
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFEMS Microbiology EcologySame topicPlant Pathogens and ResistanceFrench-language works237,207