Inheritance of Resistance to Stem Rust in Medea Durum Wheat and the Role of Suppressors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The durum wheat (Triticum turgidum L.) cultivar Medea Ap9d has been used as a supplementary differential in the identification of isolates of stem rust (Puccinia graminis f. sp. tritici Eriks. & Henn.). Genes for stem rust resistance from Medea were transferred to a susceptible hexaploid wheat (T. aestivum L.), LMPG, so that they could be used more efficiently in race identification and wheat breeding. Medea was backcrossed five times to LMPG with selection for resistance to stem rust races LBB and MCC. Ten near‐isogenic lines (NILS) were produced and tested with isolates of 10 stem rust races. The NILs fell into four types. Three of the four types had resistance to races to which Medea was susceptible. Apparently, Medea possesses suppressors for some of its genes for resistance and the suppressors were lost during the backcrossing to LMPG. This was confirmed when the cross, Medea/Glossy Hugenot, and the backcross, Medea/2 × Glossy Hugenot, segregated for resistance to races RCH and TMH(15B‐4), to which both parents are susceptible. The segregations could not be explained on the basis of complementary genes. Medea was also crossed and backcrossed to a susceptible durum, Glossy Hugenot, for a genetic study using races MCC and TMB. The genetic analysis showed that Medea has four genes that condition resistance to races MCC, two of which also condition resistance to race TMB. None of the four types of NILs are resistant to both. Apparently, neither of the latter genes was transferred to LMPG. The presence of suppressors in Medea suggests that they may confer a selective advantage on plants that carry them.
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) | 0.000 | 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".