MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073677826 · doi:10.1080/07060661.2012.752763

Detection of<i>Switchgrass mosaic virus</i>in<i>Miscanthus</i>and other grasses

2012· article· en· W2073677826 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bright Agindotan, Ngozi Okanu, Adebosola Oladeinde, Thomas Voigt, Stephen P. Long, Michael E. Gray, Carl A. Bradley

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Pathology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBioenergy crop production and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEnergy Biosciences Institute
KeywordsPanicum virgatumMiscanthusBiologyAndropogonAgronomyPanicumMiscanthus sinensisSaccharumBioenergyBiofuelBiotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new marafivirus tentatively named Switchgrass mosaic virus (SwMV) was recently detected in Panicum virgatum L. (switchgrass). The virus is related to Maize rayado fino virus (MRFV). As Miscanthus and other grass species are grown alongside switchgrass in our experimental fields, there has been concern that the virus could be transmitted to these plants. To investigate this possibility, leaf samples from Miscanthus spp. and other grasses rotated with switchgrass in a field planting were tested for SwMV by reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Switchgrass mosaic virus was detected in leaf samples of Miscanthus × giganteus, M. sinensis, M. transmorrisonensis, Saccharum ravennae, Andropogon virginicus and Sorghastrum nutans. The nucleotide sequences of the amplicons from these samples were 99% identical to SwMV in switchgrass. This is the first report of SwMV detection in Miscanthus spp. and the other grasses, apart from switchgrass.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.177 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant PathologySame topicBioenergy crop production and managementFrench-language works237,207