Characterization of pathogenic variants of <i>Elsinoë fawcettii</i> of citrus implies the presence of new pathotypes and cryptic species in Florida
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Elsinoé fawcettii causes scab disease in citrus worldwide. Many E. fawcettii isolates produce the phytotoxin elsinochrome that is required for fungal pathogenesis. We previously observed that most of the field-collected E. fawcettii isolates from Florida produced scab on rough lemon (Citrus jambhiri), grapefruit (Citrus paradisi), and sour orange (Citrus aurantium), belonging to the “Florida Broad Host Range” pathotype. A small portion of the isolates failed to induce scab on sour orange, resembling the “Florida Narrow Host Range” pathotype. Of 71 isolates examined, 5 did not belong to either pathotype. In this study, we further investigated the pathological and genetic diversity of these isolates using three index hosts and molecular analyses. Isolate Ef10 was weakly virulent to grapefruit yet nonpathogenic to others; isolate Ef17 induced strong necrosis on grapefruit and sour orange but not on rough lemon; isolates Ef29 and Ef49 were weakly virulent on rough lemon and grapefruit but nonpathogenic to sour orange. Isolate Ef41 failed to produce detectable levels of elsinochrome and did not affect leaves of any species. This isolate produces smaller hyaline conidia compared with other isolates and is a genotypically distinct strain or subspecies as deduced from restriction fragment length polymorphisms and sequence analysis of both the internal transcribed spacer (ITS) of ribosomal DNA and β-tubulin gene fragments and from random amplified polymorphic DNA fragments. Phylogenetic analysis based on the ITS1 region clearly differentiated isolate Ef41 from the other E. fawcettii isolates. Ef41 also displays very distinct extracellular activities of cell wall degrading enzymes and proteases. The results imply the presence of novel pathogenic variant or cryptic subspecies of E. fawcettii that were not previously described in Florida.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".