MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1769571693 · doi:10.7202/1008541ar

The use of test tube plantlets for the assessment of Potato virus Y transmission by Myzus persicae and Aphis glycines

2012· article· en· W1769571693 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Xianzhou Nie, Marie‐Andrée Giguère, Yvan Pelletier

Bibliographic record

VenuePhytoprotection · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsMyzus persicaePotato virus YSoybean aphidBiologyAphidAphisHorticulturePotyvirusTransmission (telecommunications)AphididaeBotanyVirusVirologyPlant virusHomopteraPEST analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Test tube plantlets were used to assess the transmission efficiency of Potato virus Y (PVY) from and to potato plants by the potato colonizing species green peach aphid (Myzus persicae) and the non-potato colonizing species soybean aphid (Aphis glycines). Similar levels of transmission of PVY by M. persicae were observed in the test tube plantlets and potted plants, demonstrating the reliability of this test for PVY transmission efficiency assay for aphids. The assay was then used to assess the transmission of PVYO and PVYN:O by M. persicae and A. glycines with two virus acquisition regimes, one with 5-min continuous probing and the other with 1-h acquisition access. The M. persicae mediated-transmission rate was 24.1% and 51.7% for PVYO and PVYN:O, respectively, under the 5-min acquisition regime; under the same acquisition regime, A. glycines led to 0.0% and 1.7% infection rates for PVYO and PVYN:O, respectively. Under the 1-h acquisition regime, no infection was observed except for PVYN:O by M. persicae, which exhibited an infection rate of 3.4%.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhytoprotectionSame topicPlant Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207