MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157433773 · doi:10.1094/pdis-91-10-1271

A Specific and Sensitive Method for the Detection of <i>Colletotrichum lindemuthianum</i> in Dry Bean Tissue

2007· article· en· W2157433773 on OpenAlexafffund
Yongyan Chen, R. L. Conner, Chris L. Gillard, G. J. Boland, C. E. Babcock, K. F. Chang, Sheau‐Fang Hwang, Parthiba Balasubramanian

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Disease · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Pathogens and Fungal Diseases
Canadian institutionsNational Association of Friendship CentresUniversity of GuelphAgriculture Food and Rural DevelopmentAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaAgricultural Adaptation CouncilMichigan State University
KeywordsColletotrichum lindemuthianumBiologyPhaseolusGenBankgenomic DNAPrimer (cosmetics)Polymerase chain reactionInternal transcribed spacerColletotrichumGeneBotanyGeneticsRibosomal RNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To facilitate early diagnosis and improve control of bean anthracnose, a rapid, specific, and sensitive polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based method was developed to detect the causal agent, Colletotrichum lindemuthianum, in bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) seed. Based on sequence data of the rDNA region consisting of the 5.8S gene and internal transcribed spacers (ITS) 1 and 2 of four C. lindemuthianum races and 17 Colletotrichum species downloaded from GenBank, five forward primers were designed and evaluated for their specificity. Among them, one forward primer was selected for use in combination with ITS4 to specifically detect C. lindemuthianum. A 461-bp specific band was amplified from the genomic DNA template of 16 representative isolates of C. lindemuthianum, but not from 58 representative isolates of 17 other Colletotrichum species or 10 bean pathogens. Moreover, to enhance the sensitivity of detection, nested PCR was applied, which allowed the detection of as little as 10 fg of C. lindemuthianum genomic DNA and 1% infected seed powder, which was mixed with 99% healthy seed powder. The diagnostic analysis can be completed within 24 h, compared with about 2 weeks required for culturing. Furthermore, this method can be performed and interpreted by personnel with no specialized taxonomic expertise.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.413
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.252
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations24
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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