First Report of Infection of Kiwifruit by <i>Pestalotiopsis</i> sp. in Turkey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Circular to irregular brown leaf spots, 0.2 to 1.5 cm in diameter, were commonly observed on kiwifruit (Actinidia deliciosa) cv. Hayward plants in the Artvin-Arhavi region of northeastern Turkey. Leaf spots sometimes covered large portions of infected leaves, giving them a blighted appearance. Fruit symptoms consisted of brown, sunken, shriveled areas that were 0.5 to 3 cm in diameter. A fungus, later identified as a Pestalotiopsis sp. (1), was consistently isolated from diseased tissues. Pathogenicity tests were performed on 2-year-old kiwifruit plants and mature fruits at 18/22°C (day/night). A spore suspension (1 × 106 conidia per ml) was sprayed on leaves of 2-year-old kiwifruit plants. Agar pieces, 3 mm in diameter, from 10-day-old cultures also were applied to the leaves. Controls were treated with water and agar alone. Plants were covered with plastic bags for 3 days to ensure high humidity. After 2 weeks, disease symptoms were observed on inoculated leaves. Pestalotiopsis sp. was consistently isolated from these regions. Agar pieces from 10-day-old cultures were placed in small wounds made on the surfaces of mature, surface-disinfested fruits. Controls were treated with agar pieces alone. Softening of tissues next to the wound was observed 1 week after inoculation. Pestalotiopsis sp. was isolated from these areas. No symptoms were observed on noninoculated leaves or fruits. It was concluded that this disease is caused by Pestalotiopsis sp. This is the first report of its occurrence in Turkey. Reference: (1) T. R. Nag Raj. Coelomycetous anamorphs with appendage bearing conidia. Mycologue Publications, Ontario, Canada, 1993.
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) | 0.001 | 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".