Epidemiology of <i>Phytophthora ramorum</i> in Oregon tanoak forests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We followed the local intensification and dispersal of Phytophthora ramorum Werres, De Cock, & Man In’t Veld in Oregon tanoak ( Lithocarpus densiflorus (Hook & Arn.) Rehd.) forests from its initial detection in 2001 through 2006, coincident with a continuing eradication effort. The initial infested area included nine scattered sites below 400 m elevation, close to the Pacific Ocean near Brookings, Oregon. In subsequent years, one-half of new infections were within 122 m of a previous infection, and 79% of the newly detected trees occurred within 300 m of a previously identified tree. Dispersal up to 4 km was occasionally recorded. Initial infection occurred in the upper crowns of tanoak trees. The pathogen was recovered in rainwater collected beneath diseased tanoak trees in every month from November 2006 through October 2007. Twenty-four multilocus microsatellite genotypes were identified among 272 P. ramorum isolates collected from Curry County. Genotypic analysis provided independent estimates of time of origin of the Oregon infestation, its clustered distribution, and dispersal distances. In all sampling years, 60%–71% of the isolates belonged to the same multilocus genotype. In 2001, 12 genotypes were detected and new genotypes were identified in each of the subsequent years, but all isolates belonged to the same clonal lineage. Knowledge of local intensification of the disease and long-distance dispersal should inform both Oregon eradication efforts and national quarantine regulations.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".