MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069927528 · doi:10.4161/psb.4.10.9640

A dual resistance gene system prevents infection by three distinct pathogens

2009· letter· en· W2069927528 on OpenAlexaff
Mari Narusaka, Yasuyuki Kubo, Tomonori Shiraishi, Masaki Iwabuchi, Yoshihiro Narusaka

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Signaling & Behavior · 2009
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant-Microbe Interactions and Immunity
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Biological Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGeneResistance (ecology)Dual (grammatical number)GeneticsComputational biologyMicrobiologyVirologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Colletotrichum higginsianum causes typical anthracnose lesions on the leaves, petioles, and stems of cruciferous plants. Inoculation of Arabidopsis thaliana ecotype Columbia leaves with C. higginsianum results in fungal growth and disease symptoms reminiscent of those induced in other cruciferous plants. We performed map-based cloning and natural variation analysis of 19 A. thaliana ecotypes to identify a dominant resistance locus against C. higginsianum. We found that the A. thaliana RCH2 (for recognition of C. higginsianum) locus encodes two NB-LRR proteins, both of which are required for resistance to C. higginsianum in the A. thaliana ecotype Ws-0. Both proteins are well-characterized R proteins involved in resistance against bacterial pathogens; RRS1 (resistance to Ralstonia solanacearum 1) confers resistance to strain Rs1000 of R. solanacearum and RPS4 to Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato strain DC3000 expressing avrRps4 (Pst-avrRps4). Furthermore, we found that both RRS1-Ws and RPS4-Ws genes are required for resistance to Pst-avrRps4 and to Rs1002 R. solanacearum. We therefore demonstrate that a pair of neighboring genes, RRS1-Ws and RPS4-Ws, function cooperatively as a dual R-gene system against at least three distinct pathogens.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.594
Threshold uncertainty score0.814

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.195 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant Signaling & BehaviorSame topicPlant-Microbe Interactions and ImmunityFrench-language works237,207