Introgression of clubroot resistance from <i>Brassica oleracea</i> into <i>B. napus</i> by interspecific cross
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cultivation of resistant cultivars is an efficient way of managing clubroot disease in Brassica napus (AACC, 2 n = 38) canola. All available clubroot-resistant cultivars carry resistance in the A genome and some of the resistance genes have become ineffective when used singly after a few years due to the evolution of new Plasmodiophora brassicae pathotypes. This highlighted the need for introducing quantitative resistance from Brassica oleracea (CC, 2 n = 18) into canola . In this study, interspecific crosses between clubroot-susceptible B. napus canola and clubroot-resistant B. oleracea were carried out to develop a canola quality B. napus genotype carrying resistance in the C genome. Selection of progeny from this cross resulted in a gradual increase in resistance over several generations suggesting that multiple loci are involved in its control. Several B. napus genotypes with nuclear DNA content similar to the B. napus parent and showing resistance to P. brassicae were obtained from this cross. A relatively simpler genetic control of the canola quality traits enabled the identification of low erucic acid and low glucosinolate plants among the progeny from this interspecific cross. Thus, the results from this study demonstrated the feasibility of developing clubroot-resistant, spring growth habit B. napus genotype carrying resistance in the C genome. The knowledge and the plant materials from this research will be useful for the development of clubroot resistant canola cultivars and to understand the C genome resistance of B. oleracea in the AC genome background of B. napus.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".