Infection process of <i>Entomosporium mespili</i> on leaves of saskatoon, <i>Amelanchier alnifolia</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The infection process for Entomosporium leaf spot of saskatoon (Amelanchier alnifolia) was evaluated with scanning electron microscopy. Following treatment with a conidiospore suspension of Entomosporium mespili, detached leaves of saskatoon cultivars were fixed at various times during disease development (2, 5, 8, and 12 days postinoculation). Scanning electron microscopy showed that conidiospore germination occurred rapidly, usually by the extrusion of a single major germ tube from the larger of two body cells. Fungal penetration of the host cuticle involved appressoria, produced directly below the germinating spore or at germ tube termini. Subspore appressoria were most common and resulted in the earliest formation of leaf acervuli. Conidiospore germination and penetration occurred more rapidly on leaves of the susceptible cv. Buffalo, than on leaves of resistant cv. Success. At 2 days postinoculation, 43% of germinating conidiospores had penetrated the leaf surface of cv. Buffalo, compared with 12% on leaves of cv. Success. Acervuli bearing large quantities of conidiospores, were produced as the result of conidiogenesis from a subcuticular stroma of hyphae. Acervuli formed on leaves of all saskatoon cultivars, but cultivars differed in acervulus surface area and number of acervuli per leaf.
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 | 0.000 | 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".