Characterization of Erwinia amylovora strains from different host plants using repetitive-sequences PCR analysis, and restriction fragment length polymorphism and short-sequence DNA repeats of plasmid pEA29
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: The three main aims of the study were the assessment of the genetic relationship between a deviating Erwinia amylovora strain isolated from Amelanchier sp. (Maloideae) grown in Canada and other strains from Maloideae and Rosoideae, the investigation of the variability of the PstI fragment of the pEA29 plasmid using restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis and the determination of the number of short-sequence DNA repeats (SSR) by DNA sequence analysis in representative strains. METHODS AND RESULTS: Ninety-three strains obtained from 12 plant genera and different geographical locations were examined by repetitive-sequences PCR using Enterobacterial Repetitive Intergenic Consensus, BOX and Repetitive Extragenic Palindromic primer sets. Upon the unweighted pair group method with arithmetic mean analysis, a deviating strain from Amelanchier sp. was analysed using amplified ribosomal DNA restriction analysis (ARDRA) analysis and the sequencing of the 16S rDNA gene. This strain showed 99% similarity to other E. amylovora strains in the 16S gene and the same banding pattern with ARDRA. The RFLP analysis of pEA29 plasmid using MspI and Sau3A restriction enzymes showed a higher variability than that previously observed and no clear-cut grouping of the strains was possible. The number of SSR units reiterated two to 12 times. The strains obtained from pear orchards showing for the first time symptoms of fire blight had a low number of SSR units. CONCLUSIONS: The strains from Maloideae exhibit a wider genetic variability than previously thought. The RFLP analysis of a fragment of the pEA29 plasmid would not seem a reliable method for typing E. amylovora strains. A low number of SSR units was observed with first epidemics of fire blight. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: The current detection techniques are mainly based on the genetic similarities observed within the strains from the cultivated tree-fruit crops. For a more reliable detection of the fire blight pathogen also in wild and ornamentals Rosaceous plants the genetic features of deviating E. amylovora strains have to be studied in detail.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".