The effect of flowering stage in wheat on the infection efficiency of Ustilago tritici
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In general, in western Canada, the inoculation of wheat ( Triticum aestivum ) lines to determine the level of resistance to Ustiiago tritici occurs when the plants are at the mid-anthesis stage of spike development. However, it is not always possible to inoculate at this stage so occasionally inoculations are done a few days before or after mid-anthesis. The objective of this study was to determine if inoculation of wheat spikes with U. tritici at different stages of spike development using the partial-vacuum method affected the number of viable seed per spike and subsequent percentage of smutted plants grown from inoculated seed. Four lines of wheat were inoculated at three different stages of spike development in the field each year for 5 years. The stages of spike development studied were preanthesis, mid-anthesis (anthers at either end of the spike were dehisced while those in the middle of the spike were yellow), and post-anthesis (all anthers dehisced). There were significant differences among the four wheat lines and the 5 years of the study for the number of viable seed per spike and the percent of smutted plants. Inoculation at post-anthesis resulted in a significantly greater number of viable seed per spike and lower percentage of smutted plants. We conclude that the partial-vacuum method of inoculation with Ustiiago tritici should be done at the pre- or midanthesis stage of wheat head development to minimize the negative effect of maturity on infection efficiency.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".