MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414150123 · doi:10.1002/pld3.70105

Determination of the Mechanisms of MCPA Resistance in <scp> <i>Amaranthus powellii</i> </scp>

2025· article· en· W4414150123 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Isabelle K. Aicklen, Mithila Jugulam, Todd A. Gaines, W.B. Kramer, Martin Laforest, Darren E. Robinson, Peter H. Sikkema, François J. Tardif

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Direct · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWeed Control and Herbicide Applications
Canadian institutionsCégep Saint-Jean-sur-RichelieuAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Guelph
FundersOntario Agri-Food Innovation AllianceGrain Farmers of Ontario
KeywordsMCPAPopulationGeneMutationMechanism of actionAuxinMutant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Resistance to 2‐methyl‐4‐chloro‐phenoxyacetic acid (MCPA) was recently confirmed in a population of green pigweed ( Amaranthus powellii ) from Dresden, Ontario, Canada, with a resistance factor of 4.4. Resistance to synthetic auxin herbicides in Amaranthus species has previously been linked to non‐target site resistance mechanisms with low‐level resistance factors (< 10). Based on this information, an investigation into the mechanism of resistance to MCPA was conducted in this population of green pigweed. No significant differences in absorption, translocation, and metabolism of 14 C‐MCPA existed between the resistant and a susceptible population of green pigweed. An RNA‐Sequencing experiment to identify differentially expressed genes also confirmed this result. Genes that were differentially expressed in the resistant population were linked to target site modifications. A single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) conferring a leucine to phenylalanine substitution was identified in auxin response factor (ARF) 9. This mutation may be in the Phox and Bem1p (PB1) domain in ARF9, which facilitates the interaction between ARFs and Aux/IAA repressor proteins. The results demonstrate that the mechanism of resistance to MCPA is not a non‐target site mechanism and may be linked to a target site modification. Specifically, a SNP in ARF9 could disrupt the interaction between ARF9 and other Aux/IAAs, which could prevent ubiquitination of Aux/IAAs and subsequent lethal action of MCPA.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant DirectSame topicWeed Control and Herbicide ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207