Introduction to the <scp>QBOL</scp>‐<scp>EPPO</scp> Conference on <scp>DNA</scp> barcoding and diagnostic methods for plant pests
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
EPPO, the QBOL partners, and the National Plant Protection Organization of the Netherlands, organized a joint Conference on DNA barcoding and diagnostic methods for plant pests. This Conference followed in the sequence of EPPO Conferences on new methods of diagnosis in plant protection, previously held in the Netherlands, in 1985, 1994, 2000 and 2004 as well as in the United Kingdom in 2009. This Conference was attended by more than 180 participants from 29 countries (including non EPPO countries: Brazil, Canada, China, New Zealand, Pakistan, Peru, Puerto Rico, Saudi Arabia and USA). Most participants were national experts in the field of diagnosis of plant pests, but representatives of EU organizations and private companies were also present. The Conference was opened by Mr van Eck, Dutch Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority (NVWA) who welcomed the participants to the Netherlands. During the opening session the history and progress made within the QBOL11 www.qbol.org. project were presented as well as the EPPO's activities to better serve the needs of plant pest diagnostic laboratories. A full list of the presentations provided is available on the EPPO Website22 http://archives.eppo.int/MEETINGS/2012_conferences/qbol_eppo_barcoding.htm. and many of the presentations lead to articles which are provided in this issue. A poster session was also organized. In a plenary session the participants of the conference agreed on several QBOL-EPPO Conference Recommendations which are listed in the text box. To all those who are concerned about phytosanitary security in particular NPPOs, policy makers, research funders and providers etc. The rate of introduction of plant pests has increased steadily during recent decades mainly as a result of the globalization of the trade in agricultural and horticultural plants and products. These introductions threaten food security and some pests have resulted in huge economic, environmental or social impacts in the EPPO countries. The capability to quickly and reliably detect and identify these organisms is critical for effective phytosanitary measures to be taken and for ensure safe movement of plants and plant products in the context of increasing trade and travel. Laboratories are increasingly working under quality assurance systems (including accreditation) and need to have access to validated tests. In order to ensure proper development, validation and effective and reliable use of tests, the Conference considered it is essential that the infrastructure in Plant Health is strengthened in particular that: The Conference highlighted that sampling methodology prior to testing was also critical and recommended that this should be given more attention. The Conference considered that it is essential that the development of harmonized diagnostic protocols continues. The Conference welcomed the achievements of the EU project QBOL and recommended that further validation should be organized to ensure that an EPPO protocol on barcoding can be adopted as soon as possible. The consequences of continuing evolution in diagnostic techniques and taxonomy on phytosanitary regulations should be considered further. The EPPO Secretariat would like to thank the local organizers in particular to Ms Kox, and Mr Bonants for the organization of the Conference, and the session leaders: A Bertaccini (Univ. Bologna, Italy), M Ravnikar (NIB, Slovenia), N Boonham (FERA, United Kingdom), E Meekes (Naktuinbouw, the Netherlands), A Roques (INRA, France), A Loomans (NRC-NPPO, the Netherlands), J Frey (ACW, Switzerland), G Anthoine (Anses, France), J Hallmann (JKI, Germany), A–M Pérez Sierra (Univ. Valencia, Spain), H de Gruyter (NRC-NPPO, the Netherlands), P Bonants (PRI, the Netherlands), E Regouin (EUPHRESCO) and A Inman (EUPHRESCO).
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it