MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106531892 · doi:10.1139/g06-024

Identification and chromosomal location of major genes for resistance to<i>Pyrenophora</i><i>teres</i>in a doubled-haploid barley population

2006· article· en· W2106531892 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Timothy L. Friesen, Justin D. Faris, Zhibing Lai, Brian J. Steffenson

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgricultural Research ServiceAmerican Malting Barley AssociationU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsBiologyDoubled haploidyQuantitative trait locusLocus (genetics)GeneticsAmplified fragment length polymorphismPopulationHordeum vulgarePloidyGenetic linkageChromosomeGenePoaceaeBotanyGenetic diversity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Net blotch, caused by Pyrenophora teres, is one of the most economically important diseases of barley worldwide. Here, we used a barley doubled-haploid population derived from the lines SM89010 and Q21861 to identify major quantitative trait loci (QTLs) associated with seedling resistance to P. teres f. teres (net-type net blotch (NTNB)) and P. teres f. maculata (spot-type net blotch (STNB)). A map consisting of simple sequence repeat (SSR) and amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) markers was used to identify chromosome locations of resistance loci. Major QTLs for NTNB and STNB resistance were located on chromosomes 6H and 4H, respectively. The 6H locus (NTNB) accounted for as much as 89% of the disease variation, whereas the 4H locus (STNB resistance) accounted for 64%. The markers closely linked to the resistance gene loci will be useful for marker-assisted selection.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations95
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicWheat and Barley Genetics and PathologyFrench-language works237,207