Metabolic Changes in Roots of the Oilseed Canola Infected with the Biotroph Plasmodiophora brassicae: Phytoalexins and Phytoanticipins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analyses of metabolite production and accumulation in roots of canola ( Brassica napus L. spp. oleifera) infected with the phytopathogen Plasmodiophora brassicae (clubroot) allowed the identification of 45 metabolites. HPLC analysis corroborated by metabolite isolation and NMR spectroscopic data demonstrated for the first time that phytoalexins and phytoanticipins were produced in roots of canola infected with a soilborne biotroph. In addition, six new indolyl metabolites were identified, synthesized, and tested against three fungal pathogens of canola. Multivariate data analysis using principal component analysis (PCA) revealed distinct metabolic responses of canola to P. brassicae infection during a six-week period. At late harvest days (five and six weeks), a clear clustering was observed among samples of infected roots because of the higher concentration of phytoalexins, while higher concentration of phytoanticipins contributed to the differentiation between three and four weeks samples of infected and control roots. Altogether, the data shows that canola roots under biotrophic attack are able to produce a complex blend of phytoalexins and other antimicrobial metabolites as a defensive response and that the metabolic regulation of phytoanticipins and phytoalexins appeared to correlate with the infection period.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".