Systemic induction of phytoalexins in cucumber in response to treatments with fluorescent pseudomonads
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Pseudomonas putida isolate BTP1 and its sid − mutant M3 were recently reported to protect cucumber against Pythium aphanidermatum root rot. This protection was mainly associated with an accumulation of antifungal phenolics in the treated roots. In this study, analyses of root extracts from split‐root experiments showed that these phytoalexins were produced systemically. Indeed, several antifungal molecules accumulated similarly in both treated and nontreated root parts of plants protected against P. aphanidermatum with BTP1 or M3. In addition, analyses of leaf samples also revealed increased amounts of fungitoxic molecules in PGPR‐treated plants, although the nature of these molecules appeared to be different from those detected in roots. The antifungal compounds isolated both from roots and leaves were mainly detected in acid‐hydrolyzed extracts containing aglycones. These results suggest that PGPR can elicit phytoalexins systemically in cucumber and that the overall defence response is not based on a single phytoalexin but is chemically complex and organ‐specific.
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) | 0.001 | 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".