MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2465024401 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2016-0128

Genetic resistance to white pine blister rust in limber pine (<i>Pinus flexilis</i>): major gene resistance in a northern population

2016· article· en· W2465024401 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Richard A. Sniezko, Robert Danchok, Douglas P. Savin, Jun‐Jun Liu, Angelia Kegley

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicYeasts and Rust Fungi Studies
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyCankerResistance (ecology)PopulationEndangered speciesTree breedingWoody plantBotanyEcologyHabitatDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Limber pine, Pinus flexilis E. James, a wide-ranging tree species in western North America, is highly susceptible to white pine blister rust (WPBR), caused by the non-native fungal pathogen Cronartium ribicola J.C. Fisch. The Canadian populations in particular have been heavily impacted, and in 2014, limber pine was designated endangered in Canada by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). Little is known about genetic resistance to WPBR in limber pine, but major gene resistance (MGR) has been characterized in some populations in the United States. This study examines resistance in seedling families from 13 parent trees from British Columbia, Alberta, and Oregon, representing the northern- and northwestern-most populations. Most families were susceptible, with 100% of the seedlings cankered, but one family from Alberta segregated 1:1 for cankered and canker free. This is the first report of (a) MGR in Canada of any of the four species of five-needle pines native to Canada and (b) any resistance in limber pine in Canadian populations and is the northernmost known incidence of putative R-gene resistance in a natural stand of any five-needle pine species. Many of the Canadian selections were from stands with high incidence of WPBR infection, and their high susceptibility in this trial suggests that further infection and mortality is likely in the Canadian populations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.461
Threshold uncertainty score0.917

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicYeasts and Rust Fungi StudiesFrench-language works237,207