MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998766022 · doi:10.1094/pdis.2001.85.10.1121b

First Report of <i>Pepino mosaic virus</i> in Canada and the United States

2001· article· en· W1998766022 on OpenAlexaffabout
Christopher J. French, M. Bouthillier, M. G. Bernardy, G. Ferguson, Melanie Sabourin, R. Johnson, C. Masters, Sharon E. Godkin, R. A. Mumford

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Disease · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsCanadian Food Inspection AgencyAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLycopersiconBiologyPotexvirusPlant virusAntiserumInoculationPolyclonal antibodiesVirologyPolymerase chain reactionHorticultureVirusAntibodyCoat proteinGeneRNAGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the winter of 2000, tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum) with a bright yellow leaf mosaic were observed in a commercial greenhouse in southern Ontario, Canada. Examination of leaf extracts, using leaf dips and immunosorbent absorption electron microscopy (ISEM), showed flexuous rods consistent with the potexvirus group. Polyclonal antibodies raised against the original Peruvian Pepino mosaic virus (PepMV) isolate (1) and commercial antibodies obtained from Deutsche Sammlung von Mikro-organismen und Zellkulturen (DSMZ), GmbH, Braunsweig, Germany, and Plant Research International (PRI), Wageningen, the Netherlands, were used in ISEM. Leaves tested positive in double-antibody sandwich-enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) with antibodies from DSMZ and PRI. A triple-antibody sandwich-ELISA obtained from Adgen Ltd. (Nellies Gate, UK) gave similar results. Potato virus X did not react with PepMV antiserum in ELISA. Positive PepMV ELISA controls were a U.K. and a Dutch isolate supplied by R. Mumford and R. A. A. van Vlugt, respectively, and DSMZ. Using primers generated from a sequence of the RNA polymerase region of a U.K. PepMV isolate (R. Mumford, unpublished data), a reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction test showed the expected 312-bp amplicon for the Canadian, Dutch, and U.K. isolates. The primer sequences used were forward 5' CTA TTA CAA CTC CGG AAG CCA 3' and reverse 5' TGG TCT GGC CAG GCT TTG AC 3'. The three isolates were maintained in tomato cv. Bush Beefsteak. When mechanically inoculated on L. esculentum cv. Rapsodie, the Canadian isolate caused a bright yellow mosaic in 1 to 2 weeks, while the two European isolates caused a faint yellow mosaic and mild puckering of the leaves. When mechanically inoculated on 17 indicator plants, the Canadian isolate had a host range similar to the U.K. isolate. The most striking difference in symptoms occurred in L. pimpinellifolium, in which the Canadian isolate caused a yellow mosaic, the Dutch isolate caused no symptoms, and the U.K. isolate caused a marked puckering of the leaves, suggesting virus strain differences among the isolates. Tomato fruits originating from the United States were collected during border inspections by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and tested for PepMV by ELISA with antisera from DSMZ. PepMV was not detected in 7 samples from California, but was detected in 6 of 12 samples from Colorado, 6 of 7 samples from Arizona, and 1 of 5 samples from Texas. PepMV was originally isolated from pepino (Solanum muricatum) in Peru in 1980 (1) and subsequently from tomato in the Netherlands in 1999 (2). To our knowledge, this is the first report of PepMV in North America. References: (1) R. Jones et al. Ann. Appl. Biol. 94:61, 1980. (2) R. A. A. van Vlugt et al. Plant Dis. 84:103, 2000.

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)0.001
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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations75
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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