Comparative transcriptome analysis of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum revealed its response mechanisms to the biological control agent, Bacillus amyloliquefaciens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biological control mechanisms of plant diseases have been intensively studied. However, how plant pathogens respond to and resist or alleviate biocontrol agents remains largely unknown. In this study, a comparative transcriptome analysis was performed to elucidate how the pathogen of sclerotinia stem rot, Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, responds and resists to the biocontrol agent, Bacillus amyloliquefaciens. Results revealed that a total of 2,373 genes were differentially expressed in S. sclerotiorum samples treated with B. amyloliquefaciens fermentation broth (TS) when compared to control samples (CS). Among these genes, 2,017 were upregulated and 356 were downregulated. Further analyses indicated that various genes related to fungal cell wall and cell membrane synthesis, antioxidants, and the autophagy pathway were significantly upregulated, including glucan synthesis, ergosterol biosynthesis pathway, fatty acid synthase, heme-binding peroxidase related to oxidative stress, glutathione S-transferase, ABC transporter, and autophagy-related genes. These results suggest that S. sclerotiorum recruits numerous genes to respond to or resist the biocontrol of B. amyloliquefaciens. Thus, this study serves as a valuable resource regarding the mechanisms of fungal pathogen resistance to biocontrol agents.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".