MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976714987 · doi:10.1094/pdis-92-1-0173c

First Report of a Leaf Spot Caused by <i>Alternaria compacta</i> on <i>Hydrangea anomala</i> subsp. <i>petiolaris</i> in Italy

2007· article· en· W1976714987 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
A. Garibaldi, D. Bertetti, M. L. Gullino

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Disease · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFungal Plant Pathogen Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologySpotsLeaf spotBotanyOrnamental plantPotato dextrose agarConidiumAlternariaHorticultureAgar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hydrangea anomala subsp. petiolaris (synonym H. petiolaris and H. scandens), also known as climbing hydrangea, is cultivated as an ornamental for landscaping in parks and gardens. This species, belonging to the Hydrangeaceae and native to the woodlands of Japan and coastal China, is widely appreciated for its abundant, creamy white flowers with a sweet aroma, particularly in shade gardens. During the summer of 2006, extensive necroses were observed on leaves and young stems of 3-year-old plants grown outdoors in several gardens of Piedmont of northern Italy. In many cases, on the upper side of the leaves, necrotic spots (4 to 10 mm in diameter) turned progressively black. Lesions often coalesced, generating larger (2 to 6 cm in diameter) necrotic areas. Necroses initially developed mainly at leaf margins and near petioles, and severely affected plants were defoliated. Infected plants rarely died, but the presence of lesions reduced the aesthetic quality and subsequently the commercial value. The disease occurred on 50 of 100 plants. A fungus was consistently isolated from infected leaves on potato dextrose agar (PDA) and identified on the basis of its morphological characteristics as an Alternaria sp. Conidia were dark gray, multicellular, clavate to pear shaped, measuring 23 to 54 × 10 to 13 μm (average 38 × 12 μm), with five longitudinal crosswalls and a relatively short apical beak. DNA was extracted with a Nucleospin Plant Kit (Macherey Nagel, Brockville, ON, Canada) and PCR was carried out with ITS 6/ITS 4 primer (2). A 557-bp PCR product was sequenced, and a BLASTn search (1) confirmed that the sequence corresponded to Alternaria compacta (99% homology). The nucleotide sequence has been assigned GenBank Accession No. EU 128529. Pathogenicity tests were performed by spraying leaves of healthy 1-year-old potted H. anomala plants with an aqueous 10 5 CFU/ml spore suspension. The inoculum was obtained from cultures of the fungus grown on sterilized host leaves placed on PDA for 20 days in light/dark at 23 ± 1°C. Plants sprayed only with water served as controls. Five plants were used for each treatment. Plants were covered with plastic bags for 3 days after inoculation and maintained between 12 and 22°C. Lesions developed on leaves 8 days after inoculation with the spore suspension, whereas control plants remained healthy. A. compacta was consistently reisolated from these lesions. The pathogenicity test was repeated twice. The presence of an Alternaria sp. on H. macrophylla was reported in the United States (3), whereas A. hortensiae was observed in Spain on H. hortensis. Recently, A. alternata belonging to the alternata group was reported on H. macrophylla in Italy (4). This is, to our knowledge, the first report of A. compacta on H anomala subsp. petiolaris in Italy. References: (1) S. F. Altschud et al. Nucleic Acids Res. 25:3389, 1997. (2) D. E. L. Cooke and J. M. Duncan. Mycol. Res. 101:667, 1997. (3) M. L. Daughtrey et al. Page 9 in: Compendium of Flowering Potted Plant Diseases. American Phytopathological Society. St. Paul, MN, 1995. (4) A. Garibaldi et al. Plant Dis. 91:767, 2007.

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: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations4
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant DiseaseSame topicFungal Plant Pathogen ControlFrench-language works237,207