Inheritance of Resistance to <i>Bacillus thuringiensis</i> subsp. <i>kurstaki</i> in <i>Trichoplusia ni</i>
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
The genetic inheritance of resistance to a commercial formulation of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki was examined in a Trichoplusia ni colony initiated from a resistant population present in a commercial vegetable greenhouse in British Columbia, Canada. Progeny of F(1) reciprocal crosses and backcrosses between F(1) larvae and resistant (P(R)) and susceptible (P(S)) populations were assayed at different B. thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki concentrations. The responses of progeny of reciprocal F(1) crosses were identical, indicating that the resistant trait was autosomal. The 50% lethal concentration for the F(1) larvae was slightly higher than that for P(S), suggesting that resistance is partially recessive. The responses of both backcross progeny (F(1) x P(R), F(1) x P(S)) did not correspond to predictions from a single-locus model. The inclusion of a nonhomozygous resistant parental line in the monogenic model significantly increased the correspondence between the expected and observed results for the F(1) x P(R) backcross but decreased the correspondence with the F(1) x P(S) backcross results. This finding suggests that resistance to B. thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki in this T. ni population is due to more than one gene.
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