Genetic control of aggressiveness in <i>Phytophthora infestans</i> to tomato
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The genetic control of aggressiveness in Phytophthora infestans to tomato was investigated by analyzing hybrid progeny from five different crosses (four F1 crosses and one F2 cross). The parental isolates were all highly aggressive to potatoes, but some had low and others had high aggressiveness to tomato. Of 225 single-oospore progenies tested, 198 were demonstrated to be recombinants on the basis of mating type, allozyme genotype, and (in some cases) nuclear-DNA fingerprint. Trisomy for some parental and progeny isolates was suggested from analysis of allozyme data. The recombinants were evaluated for aggressiveness using detached leaflets of both tomato and potato. From these assays, we suggest that there is a locus with strong influence on P. infestans aggressiveness to tomato, with low aggressiveness being dominant. Other loci of less influence may also be involved, but were not detectable. Some progenies were not aggressive to potatoes, which was consistent with the hypothesis that aggressiveness to potato is dominant. However, because sib crosses and backcrosses are very difficult to achieve, and because even F1 progenies are generally less fit than either parent, conclusions about the genetic control of aggressiveness to potato remain tentative.Key words: late blight, oomycete, genetics.
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".