MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167764174 · doi:10.1094/pdis-94-7-0916c

First Report of ‘<i>Candidatus</i> Phytoplasma asteris’-Related Strain Associated with Peach Rosette in Canada

2010· article· en· W2167764174 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sara Zunnoon-Khan, R. Michelutti, Yaima Arocha Rosete, James A. Scott, William L. Crosby, Assunta Bertaccini

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Disease · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPhytoplasmas and Hemiptera pathogens
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyPhytoplasmaPrunusRosette (schizont appearance)RosaceaeShootPlant stemHorticultureBotanyInoculationPolymerase chain reactionRestriction fragment length polymorphism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prunus persica (L.) Bastch (family Rosaceae) is currently represented by 83 accessions at the Canadian Clonal Genebank. Approximately 3,200 ha are devoted to peach cultivation in Canada where Ontario Province accounts for 82% of the national production. The clonal peach accessions, also located in Ontario, are monitored routinely for symptoms of phytoplasma infection, including rosette-like symptoms (3) that are characterized by new shoots with very short internodes, loss of older shoot leaves leaving only bunches of young leaves on the tips of naked shoots, and flowers that rarely set fruit. From June to August 2009, peach accessions PRU0382 and PRU0445 showed typical peach rosette symptoms, while another 14 accessions exhibited either short internodes or no symptoms. Leaf midrib samples were collected from 16 peach accessions, including 17 symptomatic (from which 8 corresponded to accession PRU0382, 6 for PRU0445, 1 for PRU0335, 1 for PRU0179, and 1 for PRU0451) and 16 asymptomatic (from which 5 corresponded to a representative of each accession PRU0382, PRU0445, PRU0335, PRU0179, and PRU0451 and 11 to other peach accessions). Total DNA was extracted (DNeasy Plant Extraction Mini Kit, QIAGEN, Valencia, CA) from 100 mg of each sample and used as a template in a nested PCR with phytoplasma universal primers R16mF2/R1 (1) and fU5/rU3 (2). Nested PCR products of the expected size (~880 bp) were obtained from all symptomatic samples (14 of 14) of accessions PRU0382 (peach-almond cv. Kando from the Czech Republic) and PRU0445 (peach cv. HW271 from Canada) only. All other plants with or without symptoms yielded no PCR products. Amplicons were purified (Wizard PCR Clean-up, Promega, Madison, WI), cloned in pGEM-T Easy Vector (Promega), and sequenced (Robarts Institute, London, Canada). The resulting 16S rDNA sequences were identical; one of each was archived in GenBank as Accession No. GU223904. BLAST analysis determined that the P. persica phytoplasma sequence shared 99% identity with 16S rDNA sequences of 'Candidatus Phytoplasma asteris'-related strains. This relationship was also supported by restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis (RFLP) of rDNA amplicons using AluI, RsaI, and MseI endonucleases that yielded fragment profiles indicative of phytoplasmas belonging to group 16SrI (Aster Yellows), subgroup B (16SrI-B). Among phytoplasma diseases, those attributed to group 16SrI strains are most numerous and affect the widest plant host range. They include peach rosette in the United States and Europe (3) as well as diseases of various horticultural crops in Canada, including grapevine (4). To our knowledge, this is the first report of a subgroup 16SrI-B phytoplasma affecting peach in Canada. Early detection of phytoplasmas by PCR in accessions with both European and Canadian origins underscores the importance of prompt identification of infected plants for subsequent thermotherapy treatment to maintain the health of the collection and prevent further disease spread. References: (1) D. E Gundersen and I.-M. Lee. Phytopathol. Mediterr. 35:1441, 1996. (2) K. H. Lorenz et al. Phytopathology 85:771, 1995. (3) C. Marcone et al. Acta Hortic. 386:471, 1995. (4) C. Y. Olivier et al. Plant Dis. 93:669, 2009.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score0.947

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.163
Teacher spread0.156 · 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 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

Citations10
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant DiseaseSame topicPhytoplasmas and Hemiptera pathogensFrench-language works237,207