The Effect of <i>Fhb1</i> and <i>Fhb5</i> Quantitative Trait Loci in Hard Red Spring Wheat Does Not Depend on Fungicide Use for Managing Fusarium Head Blight in Wheat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fusarium head blight (FHB), caused by Fusarium graminearum, is one of the most damaging diseases that affect wheat in Canada. The disease is best managed by integrating host resistance and fungicides, mainly demethylation inhibitors. Research has shown that the effect of fungicides may be dependent on the level of resistance of the cultivar. However, whether the performance of genotypes carrying specific Sumai 3-derived major FHB quantitative trait loci is dependent on fungicide application has not been explored. In our study, the performance of near-isogenic lines (NILs; <1.0% genome/alleles from the resistance donor), carrying Fhb1 and Fhb5 in a hard red spring wheat cultivar CDC Go background compared with a moderately susceptible (MS) genotype, was evaluated with and without one application of metconazole during full flowering. Field experiments were conducted at five site-years in Saskatchewan, Canada, between 2016 and 2017. In both the individual and combined analysis (all trials), we found that the effect of NILs and metconazole in suppressing FHB symptoms and deoxynivalenol (DON) accumulation in the grain was additive. FHB severity was generally low and fungicide efficacy levels, relative to the untreated control, were increased in the MS cultivar than in the NILs carrying Fhb1 and Fhb5, which were least affected by the disease. The results confirm the importance of integrating fungicides with cultivar resistance to reduce FHB and DON, regardless of the presence of those well-characterized resistant genes.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".