Sources of spring barley resistance to helminthosporium and its use in breeding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Results of 2007-2015 immunological studies on search of sources of barley's non-specific resistance to helminthosporium diseases (root rot, leaf spots: bacterial stripe, halo blight, etc) under conditions of Kirov region are presented in the article. Immunologic status of 380 spring barley samples from VIR's world collection and of 140 varieties and perspective lines bred in North-East Agricultural Research Institute are analyzed. Studies were conducted under conditions of natural and artificial epiphytoses of local infectious populations. As a whole, low frequency of obtaining of immunologically value samples is reported: in VIR's collection, it is equal to 9.5% average for all diseases and in collection of North-East Agricultural Research Institute - 11.4%. Much less samples had combination of resistance with productivity at standard level or higher - about 5.6%. At 3-7 year study of barley genofund under hard infectious backgrounds sources were revealed of resistance to one, two, or more diseases. Following varieties had complex resistance to three types of leaf spot: Medicum 336 (Russia), Mironovsky 86 and Surpriz (Ukraine), Margret (Germany), Korona Lashego (Poland), ^dac (Canada), and perspective lines of authors' breeding: 917-01, 138-09, and 247-09. Line 917-01 (Forward) created by a method of agricultural biotechnology passes State Tests. Variety Medicum 336 bred in Samara Agricultural Research Institute has resistance to all types of helminthosporioses. All samples were tested on yield structure elements and potential productivity. It is revealed that variety Medicum 336 has high level of 1000 grain mass and high amount of fruit-bearing shoots; varieties Mironovsky 86 and Natali have high level of 1000 grain mass; variety Surpriz - high level of 1000 grain mass and productivity; varieties Edem and ^dac - early ripening and productivity and so on. Perspective lines of spring bar- ley are created using of some sources which pass competitive tests now. Among them there are such lines as 43-05, 457-08, and 341 -08 that exceed standard varieties on productivity by 0.16- 0.63 t/ha or by 4-17%.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".