MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Next-generation sequencing based identification of novel resistance genes in wild tomato species

2025· article· W7155177636 on OpenAlexaffabout
Brigitte Marquis, Isabelle Plourde, Veronique Dufresne

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Agriculture and Nutrition · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Pathogens and Resistance
Canadian institutionsGenome PrairieColumbia Bible College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntrogressionPhytophthora infestansGeneGenomePlant disease resistanceSolanumIdentification (biology)Cloning (programming)R gene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wild relatives of tomato harbour a wealth of disease resistance genes that have been largely untapped by modern breeding, mainly because the traditional map-based cloning approach is too slow and expensive for systematic gene discovery across multiple species. This research applied whole-genome sequencing on the Illumina NovaSeq platform to 36 accessions from four wild Solanum species (S. pimpinellifolium, S. habrochaites, S. pennellii, and S. chilense) and four cultivated tomato references at British Columbia Agricultural University and Prairie Agricultural University, Canada, during 2022-2023. A total of 1,490 NBS-LRR (nucleotide-binding site leucine-rich repeat) resistance gene candidates were identified, of which 137 were novel sequences absent from the cultivated tomato reference genome SL4.0. S. pimpinellifolium contributed the largest number of novel candidates (42), concentrated in five gene clusters on chromosomes 2, 4, 6, 9, and 11. Expression analysis by RT-qPCR confirmed that 28 of the 137 novel genes were upregulated in response to Phytophthora infestans challenge. Functional markers were developed for the five largest gene clusters to enable marker-assisted introgression into cultivated backgrounds. These results expand the catalogue of available resistance genes for tomato improvement and demonstrate the efficiency of NGS-based approaches for mining wild germplasm.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.304
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 teacher head, 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Agriculture and NutritionSame topicPlant Pathogens and ResistanceFrench-language works237,207