Natural Outbreak of a Bacterial Fruit Rot of Cantaloupe in Georgia Caused by <i>Acidovorax avenae</i> subsp. <i>citrulli</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In April and July 1999, cantaloupe plants (Cucumis melo) from commercial greenhouses and fields in Grady, Colquitt, Mitchell, and Tift counties, GA, exhibited severe foliar necrosis and a fruit rot. Foliar symptoms were V-shaped, necrotic lesions occurring at the margin of the leaf and extending inward toward the midrib. Symptoms on the fruit surface were observed after net development and occurred randomly as round, necrotic, sunken spots or cracks a few millimeters in diameter. A soft rot originating from lesions on the surface of the fruit expanded into the flesh. Approximately 5% of the fruits were affected. Bacteria recovered from cantaloupe fruit and leaf tissues produced nonfluorescent, smooth, off-white colonies on King's medium B. Characteristic of Acidovorax avenae subsp. citrulli, the bacteria produced pits in carboxymethyl cellulose media (WFB 44), and reduced Tween 80 to give a visible precipitate on WFB 68 media (1). Based on fatty acid analysis, all strains were identified as A. avenae subsp. citrulli by Microbial Identification System software, version 3.6 (MIDI, Newark, DE), and similarity indices of 0.06, 0.79, 0.21, and 0.43 were recorded for strains recovered form Grady, Tift, Colquitt, and Mitchell counties, respectively. Using specific oligonucleotide primers (WFB 1/2) (2), PCR conducted on DNA from each strain yielded a 390-bp DNA fragment, confirming similarity to A. avenae subsp. citrulli. Indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay with genus-specific antibodies also verified that the bacteria were Acidovorax spp. Pathogenicity of the A. avenae subsp. citrulli strains was confirmed by inoculating and observing symptom development on 2-week-old watermelon seedlings. Although all strains were identified and confirmed as A. avenae subsp. citrulli, restriction fragment length polymorphism data indicated that the Tift County strain was distinguishable from the others, suggesting that inoculum for these outbreaks may have originated from at least two different sources. References: (1) R. D. Gitaitis. 1993. Development of a seedborne assay for watermelon fruit botch. Pages 9-18 in: Proc. 1st Int. Seed Testing Assoc. Plant Dis. Commit., Ottawa, Canada. (2) R. R. Walcott and R. D. Gitaitis. (Abstr.) Phytopathology 88(suppl.):S92, 1998.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".