Potential to breed for mycorrhizal association in durum wheat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The selection of genotypes under high soil fertility may alter the effectiveness of mycorrhizal symbioses naturally forming between crop plants and the mycorrhizal fungi residing in cultivated fields. We tested the hypothesis that the mycorrhizal symbiosis of 5 landraces functions better than the mycorrhizal symbiosis of 27 cultivars of durum wheat that were bred after the development of the fertilizer industry. We examined the development of mycorrhiza and the response of these genotypes to mycorrhiza formation after 4 weeks of growth under high and low soil fertility levels in the greenhouse. The durum wheat genotypes were seeded in an established extraradical hyphal network of Rhizophagus irregularis and in a control soil free of mycorrhizal fungi. The percentage of root length colonized by mycorrhizal fungi was lower in landraces (21%) than in cultivars (27%; P = 0.04) and in the most recent releases (29%; P = 0.02), which were selected under high soil fertility levels. Plant growth response to mycorrhiza varied from -36% to +19%. Overall, durum wheat plant breeding in Canada has increased the mycorrhizal development in wheat grown at a low soil fertility level. However, breeding had inconsistent effects on mycorrhizal development and has led to the production of cultivars with patterns of regulation ranging from unimproved to inefficient.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".