Occurrence and genetic diversity of<i>Raspberry leaf blotch virus</i>(RLBV) infecting cultivated and wild<i>Rubus</i>species in Finland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Raspberry leaf blotch virus (RLBV) is a recently described (−)ssRNA virus (genus Emaravirus) associated with the long-known, severe raspberry leaf blotch disorder (RLBD). The virus is presumably transmitted by the raspberry leaf and bud mite (Phyllocoptes gracilis; Eriophyidae). Cultivated and wild raspberries (Rubus idaeus) displaying RLBD or yellowing symptoms were sampled in 14 districts in Finland and tested for RNA3 and RNA5 of RLBV by reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) and dot blot hybridization. A total of 59 samples were tested for RLBV, including 36 plants of cultivated raspberry, 20 wild raspberry plants, one ornamental purple flowering raspberry plant (Rubus odoratus), and two samples of P. gracilis (20 mites pooled per sample) collected from RLBD-affected Glen Ample. Fifty-three (93%) of the 57 plants tested were RLBV-positive, including seven raspberry cultivars (Balder, Glen Ample, Jenkka, Malling Minerva, Maurin Makea, Muskoka, Ottawa) and purple flowering raspberry, which is a new host for RLBV. RLBV was also detected by RT-PCR in mites (P. gracilis) collected from buds of RLBV-positive raspberry plants. The partial nucleotide (nt) sequence of the RLBV NP gene (nt 835–1284 of RNA3) was determined for 21 isolates obtained from 10 districts in Finland. Identical isolates were detected in distant districts, and distinctly different isolates were found in the same raspberry cultivation. Furthermore, eight different NP sequence variants were detected in the nine plants of a single raspberry cultivar (Glen Ample) tested from two districts. The nt and deduced amino acid sequences of the 21 isolates were 92.0–100% and 89.3–100% identical, respectively. Phylogenetic analysis revealed two main clusters. One cluster included three isolates, of which two isolates were from one farm in Finland and one isolate was previously characterised in Scotland. The other cluster contained the remaining 19 isolates characterised in this study. The results indicate that RLBV is widely distributed in cultivated and wild raspberries in Finland and shows considerable genetic variability.
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 | 0.000 |
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.
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".