MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407725079 · doi:10.1139/cjb-2024-0073

Distribution and pathogenicity of <i>Cicer arietinum</i> infecting fungi in Tunisian agricultural lands

2025· article· en· W4407725079 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Samir Ben Romdhane, Markus Weinmann, Olubukola Oluranti Babalola, Moncef Mrabet

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Pathogens and Fungal Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyPathogenicityBotanyDistribution (mathematics)AgricultureMycologyAgronomyEcologyMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chickpea ( Cicer arietinum L.) ranks as one of the world’s leading legume crops, valued for its protein-packed edible seeds and contribution to soil fertility. However, chickpea cultivation encounters various biotic stresses, particularly fungal diseases, significantly impacting its productivity. In this study, a collection of 178 fungi, belonging to six geographical locations, was isolated from root and aerial tissues showing signs of fungal infection. The pathogenicity tests revealed that 75% of these fungi exhibited varying degrees of pathogenicity, with very pathogenic fungi representing the largest fraction (39%). Among these, 20 highly pathogenic fungal isolates were identified, representing eight different morphological types. Using rDNA ITS-sequencing, we classified these isolates into three genera and five distinct species, including four newly identified pathogens of chickpea: Fusarium foetens, Fusarium boothii, Macrophomina pseudophaseolina, and Aspergillus alliaceus. Molecular characterization and morphological analysis highlighted the prevalence of the genus Fusarium and the species F. foetens across all investigated sites. These results provide key insights into chickpea fungal pathogens, aiding crop management.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanySame topicPlant Pathogens and Fungal DiseasesFrench-language works237,207