Inheritance of multiple herbicide resistance in wild oat (<i>Avena fatua</i> L.)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To gain some insight into the surprisingly frequent occurrence of multiple herbicide resistant wild oat in western Canada, the inheritance of multiple herbicide resistance was studied in two wild oat (Avena fatua L.) populations, UMWO12-01 and UMWO12-03, from Manitoba, Canada. Both populations are resistant to each of three distinct herbicides, imazametha benz-methyl, flamprop-methyl, and fenoxaprop-p-ethyl (hereafter referred to as imazamethabenz, flamprop, and fenoxaprop-P, respectively). Crosses were made between each resistant (R) population and a susceptible (S) wild oat population (UM5) (R/S crosses), and between the two resistant populations (R/R crosses). Subsets of parental, F2 plants, and F2-derived F3 (F2:3) families were treated separately with each of the three herbicides and classified as R or S for individual plants, and homozygous R, segregating, or homozygous S for F2:3 families. F2 plants and F2:3 families from R/S crosses segregated in 3R:1S and 1 homozygous R:2 segregating:1 homozygous S ratios, respectively. These ratios indicate that a single dominant or semi-dominant nuclear gene controls resistance to each of these herbicides in each population. F2 plants and F2:3 families from R/R crosses segregated for resistance/susceptibility when treated with either imazamethabenz or flamprop. Therefore, the genes for resistance to these two herbicides are different in each R population. Individual F2:3 family response demonstrated that the genes were not independent of each other, indicating possible linkage between the genes for resistance to each herbicide. Genetic linkage could explain how the wild oat populations developed multiple resistance in the absence of selection by two of the herbicides, imazamethabenz and flamprop. Key words: Wild oat, Avena fatua, herbicide resistance, genetics of resistance, multiple 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".