Stability of resistance to <i>Phytophthora infestans</i> in potato: an international evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ten institutions in nine countries joined together to test the stability of resistance of 14 potato genotypes to the oomycete pathogen Phytophthora infestans in three separate trials. Seven of the genotypes were tested in one trial involving seven locations, and all 14 were tested in two subsequent trials, each involving eight locations. Stability of resistance was tested with nonparametric tests and with an additive main effects and multiplicative interaction (AMMI) model. Overall, resistance to P. infestans was robust; resistant genotypes were consistently resistant in all locations and trials. The nonparametric analysis indicated that specific genotypes were basically stable across sites for resistance. In trial 3, the Z statistic for overall stability was significant at 0·05%, indicating a significant level of interaction across the trial, but there were no significant interactions for specific genotypes in this trial. The genotype by environment (G × E) effect of the AMMI model was highly significant in both trials, but the mean square of G × E was less than 10% of the genotype effect in each trial. The first two principal components (PCA1 and PCA2) of the AMMI analyses together explained 75 and 80% of the interaction effects in trials 2 and 3, respectively. Based on both nonparametric and AMMI analyses, Ecuador and Argentina were locations of relatively high interaction effects for both trials 2 and 3, although in Ecuador this interaction was not associated with any particular potato genotype. Other locations also had high interaction effects, but these occurred in only one trial. The genotypes Chata Blanca and, to a lesser extent, Torridon were relatively unstable in trials 2 and 3, but in the case of Torridon, resistant, this did not represent a significant loss of resistance.
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 | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".