Genetic Resistance to Fusiform Rust in Southern Pines and White Pine Blister Rust in White Pines—A Contrasting Tale of Two Rust Pathosystems—Current Status and Future Prospects
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Damage or mortality from pathogens can reduce productivity of forest plantations, as well as significantly harm natural forest ecosystems. Genetic resistance within the host species is the first line of defense for tree species. Resistance breeding programs for the native fusiform rust and exotic (to North America) white pine blister rust diseases are two of the longest concerted efforts in forest trees, spanning more than 50 years. Advances in developing greater genetic resistance have been made in both pathosystems, but unique challenges and opportunities in each system translate to different approaches. Fusiform rust resistance programs have mainly emphasized complete resistance, while partial resistance plays a prominent role in white pine blister rust resistance programs. Advances in the development of molecular genetic tools now permit investigations in conifers and their associated rust pathogens. Good progress has been made in identifying resistant populations and understanding resistance in these pathosystems, and resistant stock is now being used extensively for reforestation and restoration. These programs represent great success stories brought to fruition by the long-term efforts. However, continued support will be needed to enhance the level and fully realize the potential of durable genetic resistance in these invaluable North American conifer species.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it