MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091959664 · doi:10.1094/pdis-92-5-0832a

Occurrence of a Clover Proliferation (16SrVI) Group Phytoplasma Associated with Little Leaf Disease of <i>Portulaca grandiflora</i> in India

2008· article· en· W2091959664 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Abdul Samad, P. V. Ajayakumar, Ajit Kumar Shasany, Mahesh Gupta, M. Alam, Shantanu Rastogi

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Disease · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPhytoplasmas and Hemiptera pathogens
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhytoplasmaBiologyPortulacaOrnamental plantShootBotanyPhyllodySieve tube elementWeedBroomSpotsHorticulturePolymerase chain reactionRestriction fragment length polymorphism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Portulaca grandiflora (family Portulacaceae), commonly known as moss rose purslane, is a popular ornamental plant widely grown in temperate climates because it blooms all summer. Portulaca is also used for medicinal purposes since it is rich in vitamins A, B1, and C and has antimicrobial and cytotoxic activity. Since March 2005, 30 to 50% of P. grandiflora plants in the ornamental gardens as well as in pots at the Central Institute of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants, Lucknow, India have displayed symptoms resembling phytoplasma infection. Disease symptoms start as a typical bud proliferation, downward curling, and diminishing size of leaves, followed by overall stunted growth and yellowing of the whole plant from April to June. Some plants also formed rosettes and a proliferation of axillary shoots resulting in a witches'-broom appearance. Typical pleomorphic bodies, mostly spherical to oval, ranging from 340 to 1,100 nm were observed only in sieve elements of infected plants by transmission electron microscopy (TEM). On the basis of symptoms, TEM observations, PCR, and response to antibiotic treatment, the causal organism was identified as phytoplasma (1). Total genomic DNA from healthy and infected plants was extracted with the CTAB buffer method (2). Of 27 suspected samples screened by PCR, 23 were phytoplasma positive. Presence of phytoplasmas in plants was demonstrated by a nested PCR assay employing primer pair P1/P6 followed by R16F2n/R16R2 that generated rDNA products of 1.5 and 1.2 kb, respectively, only from symptomatic plants. No differences among phytoplasmas in Portulaca plants were detected by restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis of nested rDNA (1.2 kb) products using endonucleases BamHI, RsaI, AluI, HpaII, and EcoRI. Comparative analysis of RFLP patterns with those derived from reference phytoplasmas tentatively identified the Portulaca little leaf (PLL) phytoplasma as a member of 16S rDNA RFLP group 16SrVI (3). A nested PCR product (1.25 kb) was cloned with a TOPO TA cloning kit (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA) and sequenced. The sequence was deposited in the GenBank database (Accession No. EF651786). Sequence analysis revealed the PLL phytoplasma to be most similar (98%) to Indian brinjal little leaf (Accession No. EF186820) and 'Candidatus Phytoplasma trifolii' (Accession No. AY390261), two 16SrVI group phytoplasmas previously reported from India and Canada, respectively. The status of PLL (EF651786) was also verified by in silico RFLP analysis (4) of the F2n/R2 sequence of six closely related strains (Accession Nos. AF228052, AY390261, AY270156, AY409070, AY409069, and EF186820) of the 16SrVI group using 17 restriction enzymes (AluI, BamHI, BfaI, BsfUI, DraI, EcoRI, HaeIII, HhaI, HinfI, HpaI, HpaII, KpnI, MseI, Sau3AI, RsaI, SspI, and TaqI). In silico restriction digestion and virtual gel plotting showed similar patterns for all enzymes. To our knowledge, this is the first report of a 16SrVI group phytoplasma infecting Portulaca plants in India. References: (1) P. V. Ajayakumar et al. Aust. Plant Dis. Notes 2:67, 2007. (2) S. P. S. Khanuja et al. Plant Mol. Biol. Rep. 17:74, 1999. (3) I.-M. Lee et al. Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol. 48:1153, 1998. (4) W. Wei et al. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Mic. 57:1855, 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.273

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.170 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations24
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant DiseaseSame topicPhytoplasmas and Hemiptera pathogensFrench-language works237,207