Highly effective mlo-based powdery mildew resistance in hexaploid wheat without pleiotropic effects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Application of the mlo-based resistance in barley against powdery mildew attacks is a major success in crop breeding, since it confers durable disease resistance. Resistance caused by mutations in the Mlo gene seems to be ubiquitous across a range of species. This work addresses the introduction of mlo-based resistance into hexaploid wheat, which is complicated by the occurrence of three homoeologous genes: Mlo-A1, Mlo-B1 and Mlo-D1. EMS-generated mutant plants were screened for mutations in the three homoeologues. We selected and combined 6, 8, and 4 mutations, respectively, to obtain triple homozygous mlo mutant lines. Twenty-four mutant lines showed highly effective resistance towards attack by the powdery mildew pathogen under field conditions. All 18 mutations appeared to contribute to resistance; however, they had different effects on the occurrence of symptoms such as chlorotic and necrotic spots, which are pleiotropic to the mlo-based powdery mildew resistance. We conclude that to obtain highly effective powdery mildew resistance in wheat and to avoid detrimental pleiotropic effects, all three Mlo homoeologues should be mutated; however, at least one of the mutations should be of the weaker type in order to alleviate strong pleiotropic effects from the other mutations.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".