Differential expression of proteins in response to the interaction between the pathogen <b> <i>Fusarium graminearum</i> </b> and its host, <b> <i>Hordeum vulgare</i> </b>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using proteomic techniques, a study aimed at isolating and identifying proteins associated with resistance to fusarium head blight (FHB) was conducted on six barley genotypes of varying resistance. At anthesis, barley spikelets were point inoculated with Fusarium graminearum macroconidial suspensions or mock inoculum. In total, 43 acidic protein spots out of 600 were detected 3 days postinoculation to be differentially expressed due to FHB and were identified. Identification of proteins responsive to FHB included those associated with oxidative burst and oxidative stress response, such as malate dehydrogenase and peroxidases, and pathogenesis-related (PR). An increase in abundance of PR-3 or PR-5 could be associated with the resistant genotypes CI4196, Svansota, and Harbin, as well as the intermediate resistant genotype CDC Bold. On the contrary, the susceptible genotype Stander showed a decrease in abundance of these acidic PR-proteins. In the susceptible and intermediate resistant genotypes Stander and CDC Bold, as well as CI4196, the increased abundance of proteins associated with an oxidative response might have prepared the terrain for saprophytic fungal invasion. On the contrary, in the resistant sources Harbin and Svansota we did not observed change in abundance of these proteins. Not a single significant change in acidic protein abundance could be detected in Chevron. Three distinct response patterns are reported from these six barley genotypes.
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".