MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091857049 · doi:10.2135/cropsci2011.08.0445

Direct and Marker‐Assisted Selection for Resistance to Common Bacterial Blight in Common Bean

2012· article· en· W2091857049 on OpenAlexaff
Robert W. Duncan, R. L. Gilbertson, Shree P. Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueCrop Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant pathogens and resistance mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersDuPont Pioneer
KeywordsBiologyPhaseolusXanthomonas campestrisPlant disease resistanceBacterial blightSelection (genetic algorithm)CultivarMarker-assisted selectionDisease managementPopulationAgronomyBiotechnologyHorticultureGeneticsGenetic markerBacteriaGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Common bacterial blight (CBB) caused by Xanthomonas campestris pv. phaseoli and X. campestris pv. phaseoli var. fuscans is a seed‐borne disease that can significantly reduce yield and seed quality of common bean ( Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Disease resistance is the most effective management strategy, but most common bean cultivars have no CBB resistance. Marker‐assisted selection (MAS) shows promise as a method to facilitate pyramiding CBB resistance between common bean gene pools. This study compared the efficiency of direct disease resistance selection (DDS) and MAS for the pyramiding and transfer of CBB resistance into dark red kidney bean. Direct disease resistance selection and MAS were applied independently, from the F 1 through the F 5 , in an inter‐gene pool double‐cross population, Wilkinson 2/dark red kidney (DRK) 2//DRK 1/VAX 3. Replicated trials were performed in the greenhouse and field in 2006 and 2007 to assess levels of CBB resistance in 15 breeding lines independently developed with each method. Under high disease pressure, in two greenhouse environments, 12 resistant breeding lines were obtained with DDS compared with six using MAS, and the overall CBB mean disease severity index was 3.3 for DDS and 4.2 for MAS. Under moderate disease pressure in the field, there was no significant difference ( p > 0.05) between the responses of breeding lines developed by the two selection methods. The cost of DDS was US$1.55 per plant compared to $2.03 for MAS.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.762
Threshold uncertainty score0.493

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations20
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCrop ScienceSame topicPlant pathogens and resistance mechanismsFrench-language works237,207