MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7148219167

Investigation of Immunity-Enhancing Bacterial Strains from the Canadian Soilborne Bacterial Library with Respect to their Plant Growth-Promoting Effects

2024· dissertation· W7148219167 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Matthew Alexander Toffoli

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2024
Typedissertation
Language
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant-Microbe Interactions and Immunity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRhizobacteriaBacteriaCompetition (biology)Host (biology)Resistance (ecology)Systemic acquired resistanceDefence mechanismsMicroorganism
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability of soil microorganisms to protect plants against stressors has been known for a century, yet practical applications for this phenomenon are limited by incomplete understanding of the complex nature of rhizospheric plant-microbe interactions. Certain beneficial rhizospheric bacteria defend against pathogens via direct competition and/or a phenomenon known as Induced Systemic Resistance (ISR). ISR, induced by non-pathogenic soil microorganisms, confers broad-spectrum pathogenic resistance. Studies show that ISR-inducing bacteria often also promote host plant growth, classifying them as both ISR inducers and PlantGrowth-Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPRs). This project characterizes pre-identified, immunity-enhancing, Canadian Soilborne Bacteria Library (CSBL) strains from a PGPR viewpoint, reveals insights on the hormonal pathways involved in PGPR effect establishment, and examines interplay between the immune and growth signals that occur when plants encounter bacteria. Ultimately, this study aims to answer whether these strains both enhance immunity and promoteplant growth, thereby expanding the biopesticide/biofertilizer repertoire.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

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)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicPlant-Microbe Interactions and Immunity→French-language works237,207→