Over Expression of Chitinase and Chitosanase Genes from <i>Trichoderma harzianum</i> under Constitutive and Inducible Promoters in order to Increase Disease Resistance in Wheat (<i>Triticum aestivum</i> L)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Powdery mildew of wheat, caused by Erysiphe graminis f.sp. tritici is a serious threat to wheat grain production in many parts of the world. Efforts have been made to engineer resistance into wheat using single gene technology which culminated in the improved resistance efficiency but never a complete control. Some efforts of expressing genes for disease resistance under the control of constitutive promoter resulted in the production of abnormal plants. We used double gene technology and over expressed a couple of antifungal genes i.e., chitinase and chitosanase from Trichoderma harzianum simultaneously into winter wheat genotype Florida . They were expressed separately under the constitutive promoter ( Ubiquitin- 1) from Maize and stress cum disease inducible promoter ( Vst -1) from Vitis vinefera . Six lines achieved under constitutive promoter and five lines under inducible promoter showed the co-integration and expression of chitinase and chitosanase genes. All these lines showed multiple copy integration of both these genes except one line which showed single copy integration of chitinase under ubiquitin promoter. The copy number varied for Chitinase (1-3) and Chitosanase (2-10). Different promoters did not seem to have any impact on transformation efficiency. Pathological analysis done with E.graminis showed a decrease in the susceptibility for both types of transgenic plants. A decrease in susceptibility was seen upto 75% when the transgenics were under inducible promoter. While in transgenics under constitutive promoter the decrease in susceptibility of upto 60% was seen. All the primary transforments with the exception of a couple showed normal growth.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".