Inheritance and interaction of spring wheat (<i>Triticum aestivum</i> L.) resistance to Race 2 and Race 3 of <i>Pyrenophora tritici-repentis</i> (Died.) Drechs.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tan spot is a residue-borne leaf spotting disease caused by the fungal pathogen Pyrenophora tritici-repentis. An understanding of the inheritance of resistance is required to build a strategy for incorporating tan spot resistance into commercial cultivars of wheat. The objectives of this study were to determine the inheritance of host resistance to isolates of races 2 (a necrosis-inducing race) and 3 (a chlorosis-inducing race) of P. tritici-repentis. Crosses were made between seven wheat (Triticum aestivum) genotypes (Katepwa, BH1146, ST15, ST6, Erik, 6B1043, 6B367). Parents, F1, F2and F2-derived F3 populations were inoculated with isolates 86-124 and D308 (races 2 and 3, respectively) of P. tritici-repentis and infiltrated with Ptr ToxA. Resistance to 86-124 and insensitivity to Ptr ToxA was controlled by a single recessive nuclear gene in all of the resistant/susceptible crosses. In contrast, resistance to D308 was controlled by a single dominant nuclear gene in five crosses and two genes in two crosses. In the BH1146/ST15 cross two dominant genes controlled resistance to D308, while in the Katepwa/ST15 cross two recessive genes controlled resistance. Reactions to race 2 were independent of reactions to race 3 and controlled by independent genetic systems. Key words: Triticum aestivum L., Pyrenophora tritici-repentis (Died.) Drechs., disease resistance, inheritance, Ptr necrosis toxin, tan spot
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".