Ultrastructure of the fungus <i>Ophiodothella vaccinii</i> in infected leaves of <i>Vaccinium arboreum</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Light and electron microscopy were used to study the fungus Ophiodothella vaccinii E.S. Boyd in infected leaves of Vaccinium arboreum Marsh. This pathogen produces large lesions on leaves in which host cells are surrounded by intercellular hyphae and penetrated by intracellular hyphae. In this study, we examined details of acervuli that are produced on these lesions, the process of conidiogenesis that took place within acervuli, and the relationships between hyphae and host cells within lesions. Most acervuli developed on the adaxial leaf surface just beneath the epidermis, which also was permeated by fungal hyphae. The epidermis covering an acervulus separated from the underlying host cells as numerous conidia embedded in extracellular material accumulated within an acervulus. The raised portion of the epidermis formed a shield-like clypeus over the acervulus. Mature conidia coated with extracellular material were released through a small pore in the clypeus. A columnar mass of sterile hyphae was present in each acervulus near the pore region. This mass was surrounded by conidia embedded in extracellular material. Conidia arose from a layer of phialides present at the base of an acervulus. Phialides arose from both intercellular hyphae and intracellular hyphae that emerged from host cells and also were surrounded by extracellular material. In older lesions, O. vaccinii clearly functioned as a necrotroph. However, in young lesions, we found evidence indicating that some cells were alive when penetrated by hyphae. Hyphae were highly constricted at host cell wall penetration sites and intracellular hyphae commonly grew completely through infected host cells and directly into adjacent cells. Hyphae in older lesions became extremely thick walled and were packed with large lipid bodies.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".