Molecular and cellular aspects of Dutch elm disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The folio wing review gives an overview of current research in the area of molecular and cellular interactions in Dutch elm disease. This vascular wilt disease is caused by the fungus Ophiostoma ulmi and is transmitted from diseased to healthy trees by the elm bark beetles. Fungal toxins are described which are associated with pathogenesis, one of which, ceratoulmin, is under investigation at the molecular level, particularly regarding its mode of action and localization. The fungus has also been examined at the molecular level to differentiate between aggressive and non-aggressive isolates on the basis of protein and nucleic acid profiles. Genetic linkage maps are being developed to correlate disruption of certain genes with the loss of pathogenicity. Viral and bacterial antagonists of the fungus, which may serve as biological control mechanisms for Dutch elm disease, have been characterized, as have several of the active molecules responsible for control. Host responses are also discussed at the molecular and biochemical level, including phytoalexins and defense mechanism elicitors. Several Unes of investigation are discussed to provide an overview of molecular approaches to understanding and manipulating the organisms involved with the ultimate goal of controlling Dutch elm disease.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".