Mapping of QTL for Fusarium head blight resistance and morphological and developmental traits in three backcross populations derived from Triticum dicoccum × Triticum durum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Breeding for resistance to Fusarium head blight (FHB) in durum wheat continues to be hindered by the lack of effective resistance sources. Only limited information is available on resistance QTL for FHB in tetraploid wheat. In this study, resistance to FHB of a Triticum dicoccum line in the background of three Austrian T. durum cultivars was genetically characterized. Three populations of BC(1)F(4)-derived RILs were developed from crosses between the resistant donor line T. dicoccum-161 and the Austrian T. durum recipient varieties DS-131621, Floradur and Helidur. About 130 BC(1)F(4)-derived lines per population were evaluated for FHB response using artificial spray inoculation in four field experiments during two seasons. Lines were genetically fingerprinted using SSR and AFLP markers. Genomic regions on chromosomes 3B, 4B, 6A, 6B and 7B were significantly associated with FHB severity. FHB resistance QTL on 6B and 7B were identified in two populations and a resistance QTL on 4B appeared in three populations. The alleles that enhanced FHB resistance were derived from the T. dicoccum parent, except for the QTL on chromosome 3B. All QTL except the QTL on 6A mapped to genomic regions where QTL for FHB have previously been reported in hexaploid wheat. QTL on 3B and 6B coincided with Fhb1 and Fhb2, respectively. This implies that tetraploid and hexaploid wheat share common genomic regions associated with FHB resistance. QTL for FHB resistance on 4B co-located with a major QTL for plant height and mapped at the position of the Rht-B1 gene, while QTL on 7B overlapped with QTL for flowering time.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".