Molecular, Ultrastructural, and Biological Characterization of Pennsylvania Isolates of <i>Plum pox virus</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plum pox virus (PPV) was identified in Pennsylvania in 1999. The outbreak was limited to a four-county region in southern Pennsylvania. Initial serological and molecular characterization indicated that the isolates in Pennsylvania belong to the D strain of PPV. The Pennsylvania isolates were characterized by sequence analysis, electron microscopy, host range, and vector transmission to determine how these isolates related to their previously studied European counterparts. Genetically, Pennsylvania (PPV-Penn) isolates were more closely related to each other than to any other PPV-D strains, and isolates from the United States, Canada, and Chile were more closely related to each other than to European isolates. The PPV-Penn isolates exist as two clades, suggesting the possibility of multiple introductions. Electron microscopy analysis of PPV-Penn isolates, including cytopathological studies, indicated that the virions were similar to other Potyvirus spp. PPV-Penn isolates had a herbaceous host range similar to that of European D isolates. There were distinct differences in the transmission efficiencies of the two PPV-Penn isolates using Myzus persicae and Aphis spiraecola as vectors; however, both PPV-Penn isolates were transmitted by M. persicae more efficiently than a European D isolate but less efficiently than a European M isolate.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".