Identification and pathogenicity of <i>Fusarium lactis</i> , causal agent of internal fruit rot of greenhouse sweet pepper in Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Internal fruit rot of sweet pepper was found in Alberta greenhouses in 2003. White fungal mycelium covered the interior of pepper fruits and caused internal fruit rot. Research was undertaken to study the etiology of this new disease. Samples were collected from nine greenhouses in Alberta in 2004. Fungi from symptomatic fruits and stems were isolated, identified, and the pathogenicity of representative isolates was confirmed following Koch's postulates. Identification of Fusarium isolates was based on cultural characteristics as well as DNA analysis of the partial sequences of translation elongation factor 1-α, mitochondrial small subunit ribosomal DNA, and β-tubulin genes. Fifty-six Fusarium isolates were collected from infected pepper fruits and stems from Alberta greenhouses in 2004 and were classified into two principal species: 32 Fusarium lactis and 18 Fusarium solani. Three isolates of Fusarium proliferatum and three isolates of Fusarium oxysporum were also identified. In pathogenicity tests, two isolates of F. lactis predominately caused internal infection of fruits when flowers were inoculated with the fungus, and such infection developed slowly. An isolate of F. solani caused external infection that developed rapidly on fruits. Eleven sweet pepper cultivars were evaluated for their susceptibility to F. lactis, and although all were susceptible, the degree of susceptibility varied. Fusarium lactis was subsequently isolated and identified from infected sweet pepper fruits from greenhouses in Saskatchewan and Ontario in 2006 and 2007.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".