Antixenosis phloem‐based resistance to aphids: is it the rule?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. The concept of plant defence syndrome states that plant species growing in similar biotic or abiotic constraints should have convergent defensive traits. This article is a first step to test the prediction of this concept, by conducting experiments on wild Solanum species (or accessions) that originated from the Andes. The nature and the tissue localisation of the resistance of five wild Solanum species known to be resistant against the aphids Myzus persicae and Macrosiphum euphorbiae were determined by olfactometry and electrical penetration graph experiments. 2. Volatile organic compounds may contribute to wild Solanum resistance, depending on Solanum accessions and aphid species. Volatiles of S. bukasovii and S. stoloniferum PI 275248 were not attractive to M. persicae , whereas S. bukasovii was repulsive to M. euphorbiae . In contrast, volatiles of S. stoloniferum PI 275248 were attractive for M. euphorbiae . 3. Some wild Solanum species presented a generalised resistance in all plant tissues, so as for S. bukasovii and S. stoloniferum PI 275248 against M. persicae . However, except for S. bukasovii which was susceptible to M. euphorbiae , all tested Solanum species presented a phloem‐based antixenosis resistance against the two aphid species. 4. A review of articles focused on the nature of resistance of wild Solanum species against aphids corroborated with our results, i.e. a phloem‐based antixenosis resistance against aphids is the rule concerning the system aphids–wild Solanum 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".