Paper · 2015 · Guizhou nongye kexue

Identification and Evaluation of Stripe Rust Resistance of Wheat Varieties(Lines)in Tibet

Peng Yueli

10
claims
19
verbatim quotes
0
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

The stripe rust resistance of 48 wheat productive varieties,preserved varieties and lines was studied by field survey and molecular marker for resistance gene under natural infection of stripe rust in fields to know stripe rust performance of wheat varieties and screen disease resistant varieties in Tibet.19varieties(lines),24varieties(lines)and 5varieties(lines)are of resistance to stripe rust,non-resistance to stripe rust and unstable resistance to stripe rust after two-year test respectively.The molecular detection results showed that 8varieties(lines)and 15varieties(lines)are of Yr15 positive sign and Yr26 positive sign separately but Yr10 positive sign is not detected in 48 tested varieties(lines).The results from field identification and molecular detection showed that 3varieties(lines)and 2varieties(lines)may carry Yr15 and Yr26 respectively and the occurrence frequency of Yr15 and Yr26 is 10.42%.In conclusion,introduction,breeding and extension of wheat varieties with good resistance to stripe rust should be further strengthened because the resistance to stripe rust of wheat varieties(lines)is poor and the resistance genes with strong resistance to stripe rust is relatively less in Tibet.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 10

Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nineteen wheat varieties or lines were resistant to stripe rust after two years.

Outcome
resistance to stripe ruste0
Value
19e0
Qualifier
two-year teste0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–64 · show in text ↑
e0

“19varieties(lines),24varieties(lines)and 5varieties(lines)are of resistance to stripe rust,non-resistance to stripe rust and unstable resistance to stripe rust after two-year test respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 307–499 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Twenty-four wheat varieties or lines were non-resistant to stripe rust.

Outcome
non-resistance to stripe ruste0
Value
24e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–64 · show in text ↑
e0

“19varieties(lines),24varieties(lines)and 5varieties(lines)are of resistance to stripe rust,non-resistance to stripe rust and unstable resistance to stripe rust after two-year test respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 307–499 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmixedmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Five wheat varieties or lines had unstable stripe rust resistance.

Outcome
unstable resistance to stripe ruste0
Value
5e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–64 · show in text ↑
e0

“19varieties(lines),24varieties(lines)and 5varieties(lines)are of resistance to stripe rust,non-resistance to stripe rust and unstable resistance to stripe rust after two-year test respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 307–499 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Eight wheat varieties or lines showed Yr15-positive molecular detection.

Gene
Yr15e0
Outcome
Yr15 positive signe0
Value
8e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–64 · show in text ↑
e0

“8varieties(lines)and 15varieties(lines)are of Yr15 positive sign and Yr26 positive sign separately”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 544–642 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fifteen wheat varieties or lines showed Yr26-positive molecular detection.

Gene
Yr26e0
Outcome
Yr26 positive signe0
Value
15e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–64 · show in text ↑
e0

“8varieties(lines)and 15varieties(lines)are of Yr15 positive sign and Yr26 positive sign separately”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 544–642 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yr10 was not detected among 48 tested wheat varieties or lines.

Gene
Yr10e0
Outcome
Yr10 positive sign is not detectede0
Qualifier
48 tested varieties(lines)e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–64 · show in text ↑
e0

“Yr10 positive sign is not detected in 48 tested varieties(lines)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 647–711 · show in text ↑
Observationauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined field and molecular evidence suggested three wheat varieties or lines may carry Yr15.

Gene
Yr15e0
Outcome
may carry Yr15e0
Value
3e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–64 · show in text ↑
e0

“3varieties(lines)and 2varieties(lines)may carry Yr15 and Yr26 respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 786–860 · show in text ↑
Observationauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined field and molecular evidence suggested two wheat varieties or lines may carry Yr26.

Gene
Yr26e0
Outcome
may carrye0
Value
2e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–64 · show in text ↑
e0

“3varieties(lines)and 2varieties(lines)may carry Yr15 and Yr26 respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 786–860 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The reported occurrence frequency of Yr15 and Yr26 was 10.42%.

Gene
Yr15 and Yr26e0
Outcome
occurrence frequencye0
Value
10.42%e0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–64 · show in text ↑
e0

“the occurrence frequency of Yr15 and Yr26 is 10.42%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 865–916 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend strengthening introduction, breeding and extension of stripe-rust-resistant wheat in Tibet because resistance is poor and strong resistance genes are scarce.

Outcome
introduction,breeding and extension of wheat varieties with good resistance to stripe rust should be further strengthenede0
Qualifier
the resistance to stripe rust of wheat varieties(lines)is poor and the resistance genes with strong resistance to stripe rust is relatively lesse0
Setting
Tibete0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“introduction,breeding and extension of wheat varieties with good resistance to stripe rust should be further strengthened because the resistance to stripe rust of wheat varieties(lines)is poor and the resistance genes with strong resistance to stripe rust is relatively less in Tibet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 931–1214 · show in text ↑