A new method for studying population genetics of cyst nematodes based on Pool‐Seq and genomewide allele frequency analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cyst nematodes are important agricultural pests responsible for billions of dollars of losses each year. Plant resistance is the most effective management tool, but it requires a close monitoring of population genetics. Current technologies for pathotyping and genotyping cyst nematodes are time-consuming, expensive and imprecise. In this study, we capitalized on the reproduction mode of cyst nematodes to develop a simple population genetic analysis pipeline based on genotyping-by-sequencing and Pool-Seq. This method yielded thousands of SNPs and allowed us to study the relationships between populations of different origins or pathotypes. Validation of the method on well-characterized populations also demonstrated that it was a powerful and accurate tool for population genetics. The genomewide allele frequencies of 23 populations of golden nematode, from nine countries and representing the five known pathotypes, were compared. A clear separation of the pathotypes and fine genetic relationships between and among global populations were obtained using this method. In addition to being powerful, this tool has proven to be very time- and cost-efficient and could be applied to other cyst nematode species.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".