MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Molecular Mechanisms of Nematode-Nematophagous Microbe Interactions: Basis for Biological Control of Plant-Parasitic Nematodes

2015· review· en· W2168833584 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Phytopathology · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicNematode management and characterization studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBiologyNematodeBiological pest controlMicroorganismEcologyBiotechnologyBacteriaGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plant-parasitic nematodes cause significant damage to a broad range of vegetables and agricultural crops throughout the world. As the natural enemies of nematodes, nematophagous microorganisms offer a promising approach to control the nematode pests. Some of these microorganisms produce traps to capture and kill the worms from the outside. Others act as internal parasites to produce toxins and virulence factors to kill the nematodes from within. Understanding the molecular basis of microbe-nematode interactions provides crucial insights for developing effective biological control agents against plant-parasitic nematodes. Here, we review recent advances in our understanding of the interactions between nematodes and nematophagous microorganisms, with a focus on the molecular mechanisms by which nematophagous microorganisms infect nematodes and on the nematode defense against pathogenic attacks. We conclude by discussing several key areas for future research and development, including potential approaches to apply our recent understandings to develop effective biocontrol strategies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.905
Threshold uncertainty score0.776

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.282 · 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