First Report of <i>Pseudomonas syringae</i> pv. <i>tomato</i> Race 1 on Tomato in California
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Symptoms of bacterial speck have occurred sporadically in California since 1993 on tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) cultivars that possess the PTO gene for resistance to Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato race 0. In 1998, the disease was found on numerous cultivars resistant to race 0 in fields throughout the Sacramento Valley. In several fields, it caused severe defoliation of tomato seedlings. Symptoms included dark brown to black leaf and stem lesions surrounded by yellow halos. Seven isolates were identified as P. syringae pv. tomato based on analysis of whole cell fatty acids (MIDI, Newark, DE; similarity indices of 0.746 to 0.710), carbon utilization profile (Biolog, Hayward, CA; similarity indices of 0.556 to 0.840), and LOPAT results: levan production (+), oxidase reaction (-), potato soft rot (-), arginine dihydrolase production (-), and tobacco hypersensitivity (+) (2). The isolates were identified as race 1 by inoculating greenhouse-grown tomato plants of cv. Ontario 7710, which possesses the PTO gene, and cv. H1916, which is susceptible to both known races of P. syringae pv. tomato. At least eight plants of each cultivar were inoculated with each isolate. Plants were inoculated by spraying leaves with a bacterial suspension mixed with Carborundum or puncturing leaves with needles dipped in the bacterial suspension (107 cells per ml). Controls were inoculated with water. All plants inoculated with the bacteria developed speck symptoms in 6 days. The bacteria were reisolated from all inoculated plants and confirmed as strains of P. syringae pv. tomato. This is the first documentation of P. syringae pv. tomato race 1 in California. This race was previously reported in Canada in 1986 (1). References: (1) M. B. Lawton and B. H. MacNeill. Can. J. Plant Pathol. 8:85, 1986. (2) R. A. Lelliott et al. J. Appl. Bacteriol. 29:470, 1966.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".