Resistance to <i>Puccinia graminis</i> f. sp. <i>avenae</i> in Barley Is Associated with the <i>Rpg5</i> Locus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In barley, gene Rpg5 was first identified for providing resistance to the rye stem rust pathogen (Puccinia graminis f. sp. secalis). A subsequent study determined that Rpg5 is required for rpg4-mediated resistance to the wheat stem rust pathogen (P. graminis f. sp. tritici) including pathotype TTKSK ("Ug99"), which poses a major threat to global wheat and barley production. Based on the effectiveness of Rpg5 against P. graminis f. sp. tritici and P. graminis f. sp. secalis, we assessed whether it also conferred resistance to the oat stem rust pathogen (P. graminis f. sp. avenae). A barley F8 recombinant inbred line (RIL) population was produced by crossing 'Q21861' (Rpg1 and Rpg5) with '73-G1' (Rpg1), which is susceptible to P. graminis f. sp. avenae, P. graminis f. sp. secalis, and some pathotypes of P. graminis f. sp. tritici. Seedling tests were performed on the F8 RIL population using Australian pathotypes of P. graminis f. sp. tritici, P. graminis f. sp. secalis, P. graminis f. sp. avenae, and a putative somatic hybrid between P. graminis f. sp. tritici and P. graminis f. sp. secalis known as the 'Scabrum' rust. Segregation in the responses to all rust isolates for the RILs was identical (50 resistant: 52 susceptible), and fitted a 1:1 ratio (X2=0.039, P=0.843), indicating that resistance to all isolates was monogenetically inherited. Screening of the RILs and the parental lines with perfect markers for the functional Rpg1 and Rpg5 resistance alleles indicated that Rpg1 was fixed, while Rpg5 was positive in all resistant lines and negative in all susceptible lines. This suggests that different formae speciales of P. graminis may share common effectors, and that the Rpg5 locus confers resistance to both P. graminis f. sp. tritici and P. graminis f. sp. secalis and the heterologous formae speciales of P. graminis, P. graminis f. sp. avenae.
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 | 0.000 | 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".