MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119762280 · doi:10.1094/pdis-03-13-0320-pdn

First Report of Sphaeropsis Rot of Apple Caused by <i>Sphaeropsis pyriputrescens</i> in New York

2013· article· en· W2119762280 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Y. K. Kim, R. Caiazzo, P. Sikdar, C. L. Xiao

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Disease · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Pathogens and Fungal Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPycnidiumBiologyMalusHorticulturePotato dextrose agarConidiumBotanyMyceliumFungusAgarBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In March 2012, decayed 'Empire' apple fruit (Malus × domestica Borkh.) were sampled from apples grown in Albion (Orleans County) in New York State and stored in bins for 6 months under controlled atmosphere at a commercial packinghouse. At the packinghouse following storage prior to be packed, the fruit were completely rotten, spongy to firm, and light brown without pycnidia. All fruit rots originated from either stem-end or calyx-end infections but no wound infections were observed. The incidence of fruit with these symptoms in the total decay was relatively low (0.1%). To isolate the causal agent, small fragments of fruit flesh from 12 decayed fruit were cut and placed on potato dextrose agar (PDA) acidified with 0.1% lactic acid. The plates were incubated at 20°C for 4 days and sub-cultured on PDA to obtain a pure culture. The colonies initially appeared with dense hyaline mycelium and later turned light yellow to yellow, and black pycnidia formed after about 2 weeks of incubation under a 24-h fluorescent light at 20°C. Conidia were light brown to brown, clavate to subglobose to irregular, and 15 × 8 μm on average. The fungus was identified as Sphaeropsis pyriputrescens Xiao & J.D. Rogers based on the morphology of the fungus (3). The identity of a representative isolate was further confirmed by analysis of nucleotide sequences of the internal transcribed spacer (ITS) regions amplified using the primers ITS1/ITS4. A BLAST search in GenBank showed that the sequence had 99% homology to an S. pyriputrescens sequence (Accession No. GQ374241). One representative isolate was tested for pathogenicity on apple fruit. Organic 'Red Delicious' apple fruit were surface-disinfected in 0.6% sodium hypochlorite solution for 5 min, rinsed twice with deionized water, and air-dried. Each fruit was wounded with a sterilized finish-nail head (3 mm in depth and 4 mm in diameter) and inoculated by placing a 4-mm-diameter plug from the leading edge of a 4-day-old PDA culture on the wound. Control fruit were treated with sterile PDA plugs. The inoculation site was covered with two layers of moist cheesecloth to avoid dehydration. There were four 10-fruit replicates for each treatment, and fruit were placed in plastic crispers and stored at 4°C for 4 weeks. The experiments were conducted twice. Sphaeropsis rot developed on all inoculated fruit, while no decays appeared on the control fruit. Koch's postulates were fulfilled by reisolating the fungus from the decayed fruit. Sphaeropsis rot is a recently reported postharvest fruit rot disease of apple and pear (1,3). The disease was first observed on 'd'Anjou' pears, and later more serious economic losses were observed in apples in Washington State (1). The disease has also since been reported in British Columbia, Canada (2). To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of the occurrence of Sphaeropsis rot caused by S. pyriputrescens on apple in New York or in any region outside of the Pacific Northwest in North America. References: (1) Y. K. Kim and C. L. Xiao. Plant Dis. 92:940, 2008. (2) P. L. Sholberg et al. Plant Dis. 93:843, 2009. (3) C. L. Xiao et al. Plant Dis. 88:223, 2004.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant DiseaseSame topicPlant Pathogens and Fungal DiseasesFrench-language works237,207