MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A review of genetic approaches to the management of blister rust in white pines

2010· review· en· W1956304590 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueForest Pathology · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicYeasts and Rust Fungi Studies
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest ServiceGovernment of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyResistance (ecology)White (mutation)Host (biology)Rust (programming language)CankerHost resistancePlant disease resistanceTree breedingGeneBotanyGeneticsWoody plantEcologyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Since introduced a century ago, Cronartium ribicola has devastated many populations of North American white pines. However, significant genetic resistance to white pine blister rust occurs naturally and can be exploited. In this review, we discuss the progress and different approaches to breeding for resistance in North American white pines. Three broad categories of resistance are: (1) ontogenetic resistance, (2) R‐gene resistance and (3) partial resistance. Ontogenetic resistance is associated with increased host age and indicated by higher susceptibility to infection in primary needles and young seedlings then in grafts and older trees. R‐gene resistance (major gene resistance) is an example of the classic gene‐for‐gene system common in many rust diseases. R‐gene resistance provides immunity but may not be durable. Host resistance and the corresponding rust virulence which defeats it are well described for sugar pine and western white pine. Host plants with partial resistance are able to retard or tolerate disease development without eliminating the pathogen. Partial resistance is also called slow‐rusting resistance or low‐level resistance and is revealed in seedlings by several responses, including slow‐canker‐growth, difficult‐to‐infect, needle‐shed and bark‐reaction. Most of these seedling responses are presumed to be multigenic; but needle‐shed may be controlled by recessive genes. Long‐term, field trials for verification of screening and selection results are sparse. Although 100% higher survival of selected material over unselected occurs in some trials, mortality is high under conditions of high hazard and heavy inoculum load. In several, long‐term trials, some full‐sib crosses expressed a strong phenotypic resistance that indicates specific combining ability between complimentary parents. These and other observations suggest that we might yet find strong and durable resistance. Study of Eurasian white pines infected by blister rust fungi could help us better understand endemic pathosystems. Different strategies are identified for deploying material selected for either R‐gene or partial resistance. Current research suggests that resistance is more complex than previously modelled, but new molecular techniques offer useful methods for investigating the white pine blister rust pathosystem.

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.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score0.633

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.229 · 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