MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4225645269 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.6463252

Validation of molecular tests for the detection of tomato brown rugose fruit virus (ToBRFV) in seeds of tomato and pepper

2021· report· en· W4225645269 sur OpenAlexaff
Anne Giesbers, Annelien Roenhorst, Martijn Schenk, Ruud Barnhoorn, L. Tomassoli, Marta Luigi, Kris De Jonghe, Laëtitia Porcher, Pascal Gentit, Heiko Zeibell, Mouhammad Zeidan, Dorit Shargil, Sabine Grausgruber Groeger, Yury Shneyder, Nataša Mehle, Christopher Wattier, Thomas Baldwin, Hila Danino, Salvatore Davino, Stefano Panno, Jojanne Peters, Anke Camp, Gerbert A. Hiddink, Catia Delmiglio, Leandro de León Guerra, Jasna Milanović, Marcos Amato, A. Skelton, A. Fowkes, Esmeraldina Sousa, Eugénia de Andrade, Huimin Xu, Clemente de Jesús García-Ávila, Atalya Keshet-Sitton, Yael Mishan, I. Assouline, Efrat Salomon, Nira Bikson, Ortal Shimon

Notice bibliographique

RevueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2021
Typereport
Langueen
DomaineAgricultural and Biological Sciences
ThématiquePlant Virus Research Studies
Établissements canadiensCanadian Food Inspection Agency
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPepperHorticultureCapsicum annuumBiologyBotany

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Tomato brown rugose fruit virus (ToBRFV) is a relatively recently described tobamovirus (Salem et al., 2016) causing problems in tomato and pepper cultivation worldwide (Luria et al., 2017, Salem et al., 2019). ToBRFV has been reported to cause yellow spots, green spots, necrotic lesions and occasional rugose symptoms on tomato fruits, chlorosis and mosaic symptoms on leaves and occasional leaf narrowing (Cambrón-Crisantos et al., 2018; Luria et al., 2017; Menzel et al., 2019). For pepper, stunting of young plants, puckering and yellow mottling of leaves, and misshapen fruits have been reported (Salem et al., 2019). These symptoms render affected fruits non-marketable. Tobamoviruses are very stable and will remain infectious for long periods of time when present in crop debris, soil and on surfaces. Infectivity on seeds is preserved for up to several years (Dombrovsky and Smith, 2017). ToBRFV is easily transmitted mechanically (via contaminated tools, hands, clothing, direct plant-to-plant contact, and bumble bees) and seed-to-seedling transmission is expected to play a role in the spread of the virus (Levitzky et al., 2019, Salem et al., 2021). As of November 1, 2019, emergency measures (EU) 2019/1615 are in place in the EU to prevent introduction and further spread of ToBRFV. The initial measures have been replaced by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/1809. These measures include an obligatory annual survey, and specific requirements for movement and introduction of plants for planting, including seeds, of Solanum lycopersicum and its hybrids and Capsicum spp. In addition, there is a requirement for testing of at least 20% of the consignments of seeds and plants for planting of Solanum lycopersicum and Capsicum spp. upon entry into the EU. For consignments from Israel, the required testing rate is even 50% and for seeds from China 100%. Therefore, reliable and harmonised protocols for the detection of ToBRFV in tomato and pepper plants and seeds are needed. In the framework of the EU H2020 research project VALITEST (www.valitest.eu) a test performance study (TPS) has been conducted on leaf and fruit material of tomato and pepper. In addition, however, there is a need for reliable and harmonised test protocols for the detection of ToBRFV in tomato and pepper seeds. A TPS was organised in the framework of this Euphresco project to compare the suitability of different available methods and tests for the detection of ToBRFV in tomato and pepper seeds. Since the number of tests that can be included in a TPS is limited, comparative experiments were conducted in order to select the most suitable tests for the TPS. The main results of these comparative experiments were that DAS-ELISA was not sensitive enough to reliably detect ToBRFV in tomato seeds with a medium level of the virus. In addition, for molecular tests using guanidine hydrochloride (GH+) buffer for grinding and RNA extraction resulted in a more sensitive detection of ToBRFV in tomato compared to phosphate buffer. Based on the results of the comparative experiments, the TPS included two real-time RT-PCR tests (ISHI-Veg, 2019; Menzel & Winter, 2021), two end-point RT-PCR tests (Loewe kit, adapted from Rodriguez-Mendoza et al., 2019; Alkowni et al., 2019) and two isothermal amplification tests (Sarkes et al., 2020; Agdia AmplifyRP® kit). GH+ buffer was chosen as the extraction buffer to be used. Twenty-six laboratories worldwide, but mostly from Europe and the Mediterranean region, participated in this study. The project results showed that the real-time RT-PCR tests (ISHI-Veg, 2019 and Menzel & Winter, 2021) allowed to diagnose ToBRFV in all samples with only a few percent false negative and false positive results. In contrast, end-point RT-PCR and isothermal amplification tests appeared unsuitable for the reliable detection of ToBRFV in tomato and pepper seeds, because they were not sensitive enough. The real-time RT-PCR tests (ISHI-Veg, 2019 and Menzel & Winter, 2021) have been recommended for the detection of ToBRFV in seeds by the European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organisation (EPPO, 2021) and are currently required for testing of tomato and pepper seeds under EU emergency measures. The TPS results confirm the suitability of the real-time RT-PCR tests for the detection of ToBRFV in tomato and pepper seeds.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: Expérimental (laboratoire)
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,003
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,015

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0020,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,002

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,059
Tête enseignante GPT0,273
Écart entre enseignants0,214 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2021
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Même sujetPlant Virus Research StudiesTravaux en français237 207