Evidence of Coevolution Between <i>Cronartium harknessii</i> Lineages and Their Corresponding Hosts, Lodgepole Pine and Jack Pine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Variation in rate of infection and susceptibility of Pinus spp. to the fungus Cronartium harknessii (syn. Endocronartium harknessii), the causative agent of western gall rust, has been well documented. To test the hypothesis that there is a coevolutionary relationship between C. harknessii and its hosts, we examined genetic structure and virulence of C. harknessii associated with lodgepole pine (P. contorta var. latifolia), jack pine (P. banksiana), and their hybrids. A secondary objective was to improve assessment and diagnosis of infection in hosts. Using 18 microsatellites, we assessed genetic structure of C. harknessii from 90 sites within the ranges of lodgepole pine and jack pine. We identified two lineages (East and West, F ST = 0.677) associated with host genetic structure (r = 0.81, P = 0.001), with East comprising three sublineages. In parallel, we conducted a factorial experiment in which lodgepole pine, jack pine, and hybrid seedlings were inoculated with spores from the two primary genetic lineages. With this experiment, we refined the phenotypic categories associated with infection and demonstrated that stem width can be used as a quantitative measure of host response to infection. Overall, each host responded differentially to the fungal lineages, with jack pine exhibiting more resiliency to infection than lodgepole pine and hybrids exhibiting intermediate resiliency. Taken together, the shared genetic structure between fungus and host species, and the differential interaction of the fungal species with the hosts, supports a coevolutionary relationship between host and pathogen. [Formula: see text] Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".