Variation in susceptibility to Phytophthora cinnamomi infection within the genus Lambertia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Variation in susceptibility to Phytophthora cinnamomi Rands infection within the genus Lambertia Sm. was evaluated by soil and stem inoculation. Disease-progress curves following soil inoculation were analysed with the three logistic-model parameters of upper asymptote (Kmax), lag time (t1/2K) and intrinsic rate of increase (r), which were combined into a mortality score. Resistant Lambertia taxa had the lowest Kmax, longest t1/2K and slowest r. These parameters change to greatest Kmax, shortest t1/2K and fastest r for susceptible Lambertia taxa. Mortality score following soil inoculation was significantly positively correlated with lesion score determined by stem inoculation. The plot of the scores ranked the Lambertia taxa in relation to P. cinnamomi susceptibility on the resistance–susceptibility continuum and prioritised taxa in relation to the threat posed by the pathogen. The highest mortality and lesion scores for the threatened rare and endangered taxa L. orbifolia subsp. orbifolia, L. fairallii and L. rariflora subsp. lutea suggest a high risk of extinction from P. cinnamomi infestation. Furthermore, rare and endangered taxa L. orbifolia subsp. Scott River Plains, L. echinata subsp. occidentalis and L. echinata subsp. echinata that have high mortality and moderate lesion scores are also likely to be at high risk of extinction from P. cinnamomi infestation. Among common taxa with restricted geographic distribution, L. ericifolia has high mortality and lesion scores, suggesting a high risk of localised extinction and loss of genetic diversity in P. cinnamomi disease centres. Positioning taxa on the P. cinnamomi resistance–susceptibility continuum needs to be incorporated into extinction-risk methodology so as to prioritise flora for conservation actions according to hazard from the pathogen.
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 | 0.000 | 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".