MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122940306 · doi:10.1094/phyto.2001.91.7.659

Germination and Sporulation of<i>Colletotrichum acutatum</i>on Symptomless Strawberry Leaves

2001· article· en· W2122940306 on OpenAlexfundno aff
L. F. S. Leandro, Mark L. Gleason, Forrest W. Nutter, Stephen N. Wegulo, Philip M. Dixon

Bibliographic record

VenuePhytopathology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Pathogens and Fungal Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgricultural Research ServiceNorth American Strawberry Grower's AssociationIowa State UniversityU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsAppressoriumConidiumColletotrichum acutatumBiologyInoculationSporeGerminationHyphaBotanyFungi imperfectiConidiationHorticultureVirulence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The germination and sporulation of Colletotrichum acutatum were characterized over time on strawberry leaves (cv. Tristar) and plastic coverslips incubated at 26 degrees C under continuous wetness. Conidia germinated within 3 h after inoculation and formed melanized appressoria with pores by 9 h after inoculation. Host penetration was not observed up to 7 days after inoculation. Production of secondary conidia on conidial and hyphal phialides began within 6 h after inoculation. Secondary conidiation was responsible for up to a threefold increase in the total number of conidia within 7 days after inoculation. Primary conidia and hyphae began to collapse 48 h after inoculation, whereas melanized appressoria remained intact. These findings suggest that appressoria and secondary conidia of C. acutatum produced on symptomless strawberry foliage may be significant sources of inoculum for fruit infections.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations125
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhytopathologySame topicPlant Pathogens and Fungal DiseasesFrench-language works237,207