MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008358118 · doi:10.2135/cropsci2004.2043

Genetics of Resistance to Stagonospora Nodorum Blotch of Hexaploid Wheat

2004· article· en· W2008358118 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jie Feng, Hong Ma, G. R. Hughes

Bibliographic record

VenueCrop Science · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyPlant disease resistancePloidyGenotypeDoubled haploidyChromosomeCultivarGeneCommon wheatBotanyHorticultureGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The genetic control of resistance to Stagonospora nodorum blotch (SNB), caused by Stagonospora nodorum (Berk.) E. Castell. and E.G. Germano, an important foliar and head disease of wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) in many parts of the world, was investigated in five hexaploid winter wheat and one hexaploid spring wheat genotypes. F 1 plant reaction and segregation data for resistance to a single Saskatchewan isolate of S. nodorum from various combinations of F 2 , random inbred line and doubled haploid (DH) populations of each resistant × susceptible cross indicated that single recessive genes controlled resistance in winter wheat genotypes ‘Red Chief’, ‘Hadden’, ‘Missouri Queen’, ‘Coker 76‐35’ and 81IWWMN 2095, and in spring wheat line 86ISMN 2137. All disease tests were performed on plants at the three‐leaf stage under controlled environmental conditions. Tests of F 1 , F 2 , F 2:3 , and DH populations from resistant × resistant crosses indicated that these six genotypes carried the same gene. The chromosomal location of this gene was determined by cytogenetic analysis with ‘Chinese Spring’ monosomic and ditelosomic lines. Tests of F 1 and F 2 plants from crosses between Red Chief and Chinese Spring monosomic and ditelosomic lines indicated that the gene shared by these hexaploid wheat genotypes is located on the long arm of chromosome 3A.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.206

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations40
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCrop ScienceSame topicWheat and Barley Genetics and PathologyFrench-language works237,207