Evaluation of breeding tomato lines partially resistant to<i>Tomato yellow leaf curl Sardinia virus</i>and<i>Tomato yellow leaf curl virus</i>derived from<i>Lycopersicon chilense</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Twelve tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) advanced breeding lines derived from L. chilense and partially resistant to Tomato yellow leaf curl Sardinia virus (TYLCSV) were evaluated for their resistance to the species from Israel (Tomato yellow leaf curl virus, TYLCV). Two assays were carried out in two consecutive years, using agroinoculation and whitefly-mediated inoculation, respectively. Symptom severity, percentage of infection, and viral DNA accumulation (using molecular hybridization) were measured. In the first assay, the 12 breeding lines were agroinoculated with both virus species. Resistance to TYLCSV was confirmed for the 12 breeding lines, but only 6 of them showed resistance to TYLCV. During the second assay these six breeding lines were whitefly-inoculated with TYLCV. All lines showed high levels of partial resistance to TYLCV consisting in attenuation and delay in time of symptom development and reduction in virus accumulation when compared with the susceptible control. Three of these lines even accumulated significantly lower amounts of viral DNA than the resistant controls 'Anastasia' and 'Boludo' hybrids. These lines also display good horticultural traits, appropriate for the protected growing system and for the fresh market requirements. These advanced breeding lines are base material for developing commercial hybrids highly resistant to TYLCSV and TYLCV.
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".