Underlying mechanisms of FHB susceptibility and resistance in wheat: Insights from a transcriptome‐based analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Over the last two decades, several quantitative trait loci (QTLs) involved in Fusarium head blight (FHB) resistance have been identified and, in a few cases, resolved to the underlying genes. These results have not consistently translated into better FHB‐resistant wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars, nor have they necessarily extended our understanding of how resistance to FHB can be achieved. Despite considerable efforts, FHB remains a serious disease in many wheat‐growing regions. To gain insights into the underlying biology, we examined the wheat transcriptome at a key FHB developmental time point—the switch from the biotrophic to the necrotrophic phase—in both highly resistant (AAC Tenacious) and highly susceptible (Wilkin) spring wheat cultivars. Sequestering of deoxynivalenol (DON) does not appear to differentiate the resistant from the susceptible response. Instead, our findings suggest that true resistance to FHB requires the plant to downregulate or limit two pathways that are normally associated with disease resistance responses: programmed cell death (PCD) and the generation/accumulation of reactive oxygen species (ROS). Using a stringent RNA‐Seq analysis targeting the transition period of the pathogen from its biotrophic phase to its necrotrophic phase, we show that susceptibility to FHB relies on the pathogen's ability to highjack the PCD response, consistent with other necrotrophs. In contrast, the resistance response to FHB relies on the plant's ability to suppress its PCD response and limit the ROS accumulation/production that is necessary for production of DON by the pathogen.
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 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".