MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3128632698 · doi:10.1080/07060661.2021.1888156

Physiologic specialization of <i>Puccinia triticina</i>, the causal agent of wheat leaf rust, in Canada in 2015–2019

2021· article· en· W3128632698 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Brent McCallum, Elsa Reimer, Winnie McNabb, Adam Foster, Sílvia Barcellos Rosa, Allen Xue

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Pathology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology
Canadian institutionsHealth PEIGrain Research CentreAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirulencePhenotypeRust (programming language)BiologyWheat leaf rustGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wheat leaves infected with Puccinia triticina, the causal agent of wheat leaf rust, were collected annually throughout Canada from 2015 to 2019. There were 47, 75, 44, 38 and 54 different virulence phenotypes, respectively, found annually, representing 154 unique virulence phenotypes. From Alberta, there were three virulence phenotypes, MBDS, TDBJ, and TDBS, found in 2015 and eight in 2019, the most common being MBDS and TNBJ (both 20%). The most common virulence phenotypes found in Manitoba and Saskatchewan were MBDS (17.8%) and TNBG (16.3%) in 2015, MNPS (17.2%) and MBDS (15.9%) in 2016, MNPS (41.9%) and TBBG (17.2%) in 2017, MNPS (35.3%) and TBBG (34.8%) in 2018, and MNPS (54.7%) and MBDS (10.7%) in 2019. In Ontario, the most common virulence phenotypes found were MBTN (25%) and MBDS (16.7%) in 2015, MCQQ (13.6%) in 2016, MBTN (33.3%) and PBDG (19.0%) in 2017, TFPJ (13.6%) in 2018, and MCTN (14.5%) and MBTN (10.9%) in 2019. In Quebec the most common virulence phenotypes found were TBBG (66.7%) and MLDS (33.3%) in 2015, TCGJ (23.1%) and MBTN (15.4%) in 2017, MCQH (26.3%) and FCPT (21.1%) in 2018, and MBTN and MCRS (both 18.2%) in 2019. The frequencies of virulence varied on all resistance genes over these years. Within Canada, virulence on Lr21 peaked in 2018 at 39.9% and then declined in 2019, with a similar trend noticed for virulence on Lr2a and Lr2c. There was no virulence detected on Lr19, Lr29, Lr32, Lr52, and Lr22a, while virulence on Lr25 was rare.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.694
Threshold uncertainty score0.566

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations43
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant PathologySame topicWheat and Barley Genetics and PathologyFrench-language works237,207