MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794685416 · doi:10.1139/cjps-2017-0364

Exploiting intra-cultivar variation to select for <i>Barley yellow dwarf virus-PAV</i> (BYDV-PAV) resistance in barley

2018· article· en· W2794685416 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
H. Ben Ghanem, Asma Najar, Sripada M. Udupa, Safaa G. Kumari, Ahmed Amri, S. Rezgui, Mouldi El Felah, Athanasios Tsivelikas

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCultivarBarley yellow dwarfBiologyAgronomyInoculationHorticulturePlant virusVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Selection within elite barley cultivars is assumed to be ineffective due to the belief that inbred cultivars are highly homogeneous. The objective of the present work was to evaluate a selection procedure (Honeycomb design) applied within five barley cultivars (Manel, Rihane, Kounouz, Lemsi, and Imen) and two Tunisian landraces (Ardhaoui and Djebali) under ultra-low plant density (1.2 plants m−2) towards selecting high-performance lines with resistance to Barley yellow dwarf virus-PAV (BYDV-PAV). Lines selected through this process were further field-evaluated in hill plots under artificial BYDV-PAV inoculation and uninoculated control conditions during the 2016–2017 cropping season. Artificial inoculation in the field caused a severe reduction in agronomic performance traits, with yield loss reaching around 60%. However, two lines (IH16-H1 and IH4-L0) originating from cultivar Imen were significantly superior over the mother variety in the control field, showing at the same time minimum yield loss after BYDV-PAV inoculation not exceeding 10%, similar to the resistant check. Genotyping of the lines for the Ryd2 and Ryd3 resistance genes and assessment of visual symptoms in the field associated with reduction in yield revealed an additive effect of the genes conferring resistance to BYDV-PAV. However, there were lines with genotypic patterns that did not match the patterns of the source material, providing insights for exploitable intra-cultivar diversity within the barley cultivars and landraces assessed.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicPlant Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207