Sequence analysis of isolates of the Canadian<i>Plum pox virus</i>, and comparisons to isolates from Europe and the United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The complete genome sequences of seven isolates of Canadian Plum pox virus (PPV) obtained from infected peach, plum, and flowering almond have been determined. All sequences were most similar to PPV-D strain. Comparison of the sequences of nucleotides and amino acids of the seven isolates indicate that Canadian isolates fall into two main subgroups, I and II, with subgroup I isolates being most closely related to European PPV-D isolates. All isolates of subgroup I (two) were from plum, whereas for isolates of subgroup II, four were obtained from peach and one isolate from flowering almond. Comparisons of complete PPV-D isolates from Canada, Europe, and the United States show that these fall into distinct groupings based on geographic origin. Alignments of Canadian, European, and United States PPV-D isolates revealed that there were only 13 positions in the PPV polyprotein where a variant amino acid exists in more than one isolate. A diagnostic RsaI site, often used to assign strain-D status to an isolate, was found to be absent in several Canadian PPV-D isolates, suggesting that caution should be exerted when employing this restriction site polymorphism for strain identification
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 | 0.001 | 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".