Whole-cell protein and ITS rDNA profiles as diagnostic tools to discriminate<i>Fusarium avenaceum</i>intraspecific variability and associated virulence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A total of 91 isolates of Fusarium avenaceum were regrouped into 15 phenotypes and 10 vegetative compatibility groups showing specific one-dimensional sodium dodecyl sulphate polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (1-D SDS-PAGE) protein profiles and less-specific internal transcribed spacer rDNA profiles. Each isolate possessed reproducible signature protein bands. Indeed, the unweighted pair group method with arithmetic averages clustering revealed that the protein profile of each group of isolates correlated with fungus virulence. The use of SDS-PAGE offers a simple and sensitive technique for routine differentiation between pathogenic and nonpathogenic isolates within unknown F. avenaceum populations. The discovery has significant implications for risk assessment of cereal yield to ensure food and feed safety. This low-cost approach has the potential to be optimized and extended to a broad spectrum of Fusarium head blight 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".