MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114907329 · doi:10.1094/phyto.2004.94.12.1323

Genetic Variability and Structure of Canadian Populations of the Sapstain Fungus <i>Ceratocystis resinifera</i>

2004· article· en· W2114907329 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Chantal Morin, Colette Breuil, Louis Bernier

Bibliographic record

VenuePhytopathology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyGenetic diversityGene flowAnalysis of molecular varianceGenetic structurePhylogenetic treePopulationGenetic variationGenetic distanceSelfingEvolutionary biologyBotanyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Genomic DNA was extracted from 129 isolates of Ceratocystis resinifera, a species belonging to the C. coerulescens complex, and 19 polymorphic random amplified polymorphic DNA markers were used to study the population genetic structure of this fungus. The analysis suggested a moderate value for genetic diversity (H(S) = 0.209). However, when monomorphic markers and rare alleles, representing 89 markers, also were included in the calculation, the genetic diversity of Canadian populations of C. resinifera appeared to be much lower (H(S) = 0.045). This could be explained by two hypotheses: (i) recent introduction of this species into North America and (ii) clonal reproduction (by selfing). No specialization by C. resinifera for coniferous tree species was observed based on genetic differentiation index between isolates sampled from Pinus and Picea spp. and on phylogenetic analysis using Dice coefficient of association. In spite of a low genetic diversity, a very high genetic differentiation was observed among the nine geographical populations studied (F(ST) = 20.8%). The genetic differences were especially striking when populations from Eastern Canada were compared with populations from Western Canada (phiST = 0.27%; P < 0.001), suggesting that a geographic reproductive barrier occurs in Central Canada. This barrier may be the consequence of a weak migration of insect vectors of C. resinifera due to reduced presence of hosts in the Canadian Great Plains, where extensive agriculture occurs. However, results from pairwise F(ST) matrix and phylogeny of haplotypes suggest that the barrier is not totally impenetrable because some gene flow occurred from the west and from the east in the Big River (Saskatchewan) population located in the middle of the Great Plains.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.351
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations16
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhytopathologySame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207