Molecular comparisons of alphabaculovirus-based products: Gypchek with Disparvirus (<i>Lymantria dispar</i>) and TM BioControl-1 with Virtuss (<i>Orgyia pseudotsugata</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Gypsy moth, Lymantria dispar (L.) (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae), multicapsid nucleopolyhedrovirus (LdMNPV) has been registered as a microbial pest-control product in the United States (Gypchek®) and Canada (Disparvirus®). Similarly, Douglas-fir tussock moth, Orgyia pseudotsugata (McDunnough) (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae), multicapsid nucleopolyhedrovirus (OpMNPV) is registered in the United States and Canada as TM BioControl-1® and a product derived from TM BioControl-1 (Virtuss®) is also registered in Canada. To determine changes that may have occurred in these products over time, we compared DNA from Gypchek with Disparvirus and DNA from TM BioControl-1 with Virtuss using restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis. Gypchek and Disparvirus showed the same RFLP banding patterns when viral genomic DNA was digested with BamH I, EcoR V, and Hind III and only a single band difference at approximately 1.6 kilobase (kb) when digested with Bgl II. TM BioControl-1 and Virtuss showed no differences in genomic DNA when digested with Bgl II, Sam I or Hind III. Twelve viral open reading frames (ORFs) were amplified from Gypchek and Disparvirus and nine from TM BioControl-1 and Virtuss by polymerase chain reactions (PCR). The amplified ORFs ranged from highly conserved (polyhedrin) to least conserved (vp91 capsid associated protein). The products were sequenced and the deduced protein products compared. Amino acid sequences deduced from the sequenced PCR products indicated that 8 of the 12 proteins were identical in the two LdMNPV products. The four proteins showing minor sequence variations were DNA polymerase, LEF-8, P74 envelope protein, and VP 91 capsid associated protein. No differences were detected in the protein products deduced from the nine sequenced ORFs from TM BioControl-1 and Virtuss. Comparative RFLP and protein phylogenetic analyses of Gypchek with Disparvirus and TM BioControl-1 with Virtuss revealed little difference between the respective LdMNPV and OpMNPV populations that make up these product pairs.
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 | 0.000 | 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".