RT-PCR Based Detection of<i>Rupestris stem pitting associated virus</i>Within Field-Grown Grapevines Throughout the Year
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The presence of Rupestris stem pitting associated virus (RSPaV) can go unnoticed since symptoms appear only if additional viruses are present. Detection by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is possible; however, this assay could be unreliable if the tissue that is being tested has detection-interfering compounds, or if the virus has a low titer. This paper reports on (i) use of a recently developed extraction method and internal control to determine which tissues from field-grown grapevines yield extracts that are reliable for virus detection by RT-PCR, and (ii) a survey for RSPaV of different tissues from the Vitis vinifera varieties Riesling, Chardonnay, Cabernet Franc, Merlot, Sauvignon Blanc, Pinot Noir, and Gamay, as well as from the rootstocks 3309 and Riparia, which were harvested in Ontario, Canada, at different times of the year. Amplifiable extracts were obtained from virtually all bud, shoot tip, seed, and cane samples tested. Detectable amounts of RSPaV were generally found in all tissues of infected plants except young buds collected in the summer. A combination of three single buds from dormant canes, less time-consuming than the preparation of cane shavings, was a reliable source for RSPaV detection.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".