MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3034679304

A molecular marker for, and the organization of, a cluster of loose smut resistance genes in oat

2004· article· en· W3034679304 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Solomon Kibite, B. G. Rossnagel, Peter E. Eckstein, Donna Hay, Jim G. Menzies, Ruth Dill‐Macky, G. J. Scoles

Bibliographic record

VenueJukuri (Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke)) · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHome-Grown Cereals AuthorityDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, UK Government
KeywordsSmutGeneResistance (ecology)BiologyCluster (spacecraft)GeneticsGene clusterBiotechnologyComputational biologyBotanyAgronomyComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Loose smut (Ustilago avenae) resistance breeding is hampered by the many distinct smut races, and the different, poorly characterized resistance genes. Three pathotypes (A13, A60, A617) represent the most common races present in the prairie regions of western Canada (Kibite et al. 2000). Markers linked to a group of smut resistance genes located on linkage group 14 (Kanota/ Ogle) have been developed (Eckstein et al. 2002). One co-dominant SCAR marker was used to study the relationship between the marker and the three resistance genes. Molecular markers and plant populations used were described in Eckstein et al. (2002). Another population (OT369/89Ab4088) segregating for the three genes was also evaluated. All lines were inoculated with separate isolates of A13, A60, and A617 using a vacuum protocol, and grown over several locations and years in western Canada. SCAR marker Ua300co (co-dominant) was linked (~ 5 cM) to a resistance gene specific for pathotype A13. Two other pathotype specific genes clustered on the same side of the marker at genetic distances of 8 cM (A617) and 18 cM (A60). The genes are linked in coupling and are likely often inherited as a group. Attempts to find a flanking marker for the cluster are in progress. Eckstein et al. 2002. In: American Oat Workers Conference, Wilmington, NC, USA, May 5-7, 2002. pp33; Kibite et al. 2000. In: Cross, R.J. (ed). Proceedings of the 6th International Oat Conference, Lincoln, NZ. November 13-16 2000. pp298-301.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.592
Threshold uncertainty score0.176

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJukuri (Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke))Same topicWheat and Barley Genetics and PathologyFrench-language works237,207