MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992951586 · doi:10.1094/pdis.2003.87.2.201c

First Report of Rhizomania Disease of Sugar Beet Caused by <i>Beet necrotic yellow vein virus</i> in the Great Lakes Production Region

2003· article· en· W1992951586 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
William M. Wintermantel, Teresa M. Crook, Ralph Fogg

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Disease · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSugar beetBiologyInoculationChenopodium quinoaHorticultureCultivarSugarChenopodiaceaeIndicator plantPlant virusVirusBotanyAgronomyVirologyFood science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rhizomania, caused by Beet necrotic yellow vein virus (BNYVV) and vectored by the soilborne fungus Polymyxa betae Keskin, is one of the most economically damaging diseases affecting sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.). The virus likely originated in Europe and was first identified in California in 1983 (1). It has since spread among American sugar beet production regions in spite of vigorous sanitation efforts, quarantine, and disease monitoring (3). In the fall of 2002, mature sugar beet plants exhibiting typical rhizomania root symptoms, including proliferation of hairy roots, vascular discoloration, and some root constriction (2) were found in several fields scattered throughout central and eastern Michigan. Symptomatic beets were from numerous cultivars, all susceptible to rhizomania. Two to five sugar beet root samples were collected from each field and sent to the USDA-ARS in Salinas, CA for analysis. Hairy root tissue from symptomatic plants was used for mechanical inoculation of indicator plants. Mechanical inoculation produced necrotic lesions on Chenopodium quinoa and systemic infection of Beta vulgaris ssp. macrocarpa, both typical of BNYVV and identical to control inoculations with BNYVV. Symptomatic sugar beet roots were washed and tested using double antibody sandwich-enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (DAS-ELISA) for the presence of BNYVV using standard procedures and antiserum specific for BNYVV (3). Sugar beet roots were tested individually, and samples were considered positive when absorbance values were at least three times those of greenhouse-grown healthy sugar beet controls. Samples were tested from 16 fields, with 10 confirmed positive for BNYVV. Positive samples had mean absorbance values ranging from 0.341 to 1.631 (A405nm) after 30 min. The mean healthy control value was 0.097. Fields were considered positive if one beet tested positive for BNYVV, but in most cases, all beets tested from a field were uniformly positive or uniformly negative. In addition, soil-baiting experiments were conducted on seven of the fields. Sugar beet seedlings were grown in soil mixed with equal parts of sand for 6 weeks and were subsequently tested using DAS-ELISA for BNYVV. Results matched those of the root sampling. Fields testing positive for BNYVV were widely dispersed within a 100 square mile (160 km2) area including portions of Gratiot, Saginaw, Tuscola, and Sanilac counties in the central and eastern portions of the Lower Peninsula of Michigan. The confirmation of rhizomania in sugar beet from the Great Lakes Region marks the last major American sugar beet production region to be diagnosed with rhizomania disease, nearly 20 years after its discovery in California (1). In 2002, there were approximately 185,000 acres (approximately 75,00 ha) of sugar beet grown in the Great Lakes Region, (Michigan, Ohio, and southern Ontario, Canada). The wide geographic distribution of infested fields within the Michigan growing area suggests the entire region should monitor for symptoms, increase rotation to nonhost crops, and consider planting rhizomania resistant sugar beet cultivars to infested fields. References:(1) J. E. Duffus et al. Plant Dis. 68:251, 1984. (2) J. E. Duffus. Rhizomania. Pages 29–30 in: Compendium of Beet Diseases and Insects, E. D. Whitney and J. E. Duffus eds. The American Phytopathological Society, St. Paul, MN, 1986. (3) G. C. Wisler et al. Plant Dis. 83:864, 1999.

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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.200 · 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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant DiseaseSame topicPlant Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207