Isolation and characterization of the grain mold fungi<i>Cochliobolus</i>and<i>Alternaria</i>spp. from sorghum using semiselective media and DNA sequence analyses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mold diseases, caused by fungal complexes including Alternaria, Cochliobolus, and Fusarium species, limit sorghum grain production. Media were tested by plating Fusarium thapsinum, Alternaria sp., and Curvularia lunata, individually and competitively. Dichloran chloramphenicol rose bengal (DRBC) and modified V8 juice (ModV8) agars, found to be useful, were compared with commonly used agar media, dichloran chloramphenicol peptone (DCPA) and pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB). Radial growth, starting with mycelia or single-conidia and hyphal tips, demonstrated an effect of media. For isolation of grain fungi, DRBC and ModV8 were similar or superior to DCPA and PCNB. When seedlings were inoculated with conidia of C. lunata, Alternaria sp., F. thapsinum, or mixtures, the percentage of root infection ranged from 28% to 77%. For mixed inoculations, shoot weights, lesion lengths, and percentage of root infections were similar to F. thapsinum inoculations; most colonies recovered from roots were F. thapsinum. For Alternaria grain isolates, 5 morphological types, including Alternaria alternata, were distinguished by colony morphologies and conidial dimensions. Sequence analysis using a portion of the endo-polygalacturonase gene was able to further distinguish isolates. Cochliobolus isolates were identified morphologically as C. lunata, Curvularia sorghina, and Bipolaris sorghicola. Multiple molecular genotypes were apparent from rRNA internal transcribed spacer region sequences from Cochliobolus grain isolates.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".