Combining resistance to common bacterial blight, anthracnose, and bean common mosaic virus into Manitoba-adapted dry bean (<i>Phaseolus vulgaris</i> L.) cultivars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Boersma, J. G., Conner, R. L., Balasubramanian, P. M., Navabi, A., Yu, K. and Hou, A. 2014. Combining resistance to common bacterial blight, anthracnose, and bean common mosaic virus into Manitoba-adapted dry bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cultivars. Can. J. Plant Sci. 94: 405–415. Resistance to common bacterial blight (CBB) is generally absent in dry bean cultivars. In order to transfer CBB resistance into dry bean cultivars grown in Manitoba, crosses were made between CBB-resistant navy bean OAC Rex and susceptible cultivars Black Violet (black bean), AC Pintoba (pinto bean) and Morden003 (an anthracnose-resistant navy bean). The F1 progeny were back-crossed to the recurrent susceptible parents for four generations and selections were made based on inoculation tests and molecular markers. The BC4F3 populations were evaluated in CBB field disease nurseries for 3 yr at Morden, MB, and Harrow, ON. Three of the 114 BC4F3 navy bean lines were shown to have improved resistance to both CBB and anthracnose, whereas approximately 50% of the lines exhibited strong resistance to anthracnose. Meanwhile, 11 black bean and 7 pinto bean lines were selected with resistance to CBB and four of the seven pinto beans were also putatively resistant to bean common mosaic virus (BCMV). There was good agreement between the presence of molecular markers and field resistance to CBB and anthracnose. The resistant lines recovered in this research possess desirable yield potential and seed characteristics, and can be used in crossing for future dry bean improvement.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".