MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136612270 · doi:10.1002/tcr.20140

The chemical ecology of crucifers and their fungal pathogens: Boosting plant defenses and inhibiting pathogen invasion

2008· review· en· W2136612270 on OpenAlexaff
M. Soledade C. Pedras

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Chemical Record · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Pathogens and Resistance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFungal pathogenBiologyPathogenEcologyMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fungal plant diseases can cause very substantial yield losses in crucifer crops such as rapeseed and canola, or vegetables such as cabbage and broccoli. To devise sustainable methods to prevent and deter crucifer pathogens, the chemical interaction between crucifers and their fungi is under intense investigation. Crucifers produce complex blends of secondary metabolites with diverse ecological roles that include protection against microbial pathogens and other pests. The secondary metabolites involved in crucifer defense, namely phytoalexins and phytoanticipins, and their metabolism by fungal pathogens indicate that some fungi produce different enzymes to detoxify these metabolites and that some fungal detoxifying enzymes are rather specific. Chemical synthesis and screening of phytoalexin analogue libraries using cultures of fungal pathogens, as well as protein extracts, have shown that such detoxification reactions can be inhibited and that some inhibitors are strongly antifungal. Overall results of current work show the feasibility of using selective inhibitors of fungal detoxifying enzymes, i.e., paldoxins, to protect plants by boosting their chemical defenses.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations27
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Chemical RecordSame topicPlant Pathogens and ResistanceFrench-language works237,207