Comparative Susceptibility of Two Banana Cultivars to Banana Bunchy Top Virus Under Laboratory and Field Environments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Field and laboratory experiments were carried out on the island of Oahu, HI, to compare the susceptibility of the two most commonly grown banana (Musa sp.) cultivars in the state ('Dwarf Brazilian' or Santa Catarina [locally known as dwarf apple] and 'Williams') to the aphid-borne Banana bunchy top virus (genus Babuvirus, family Nanoviridae, BBTV). Several morphological and physiological features of the two cultivars were monitored to determine whether the banana aphid, Pentalonia nigronervosa Coquerel (Hemiptera: Aphididae), transmits BBTV to both cultivars at a similar rate; and whether after successful inoculation, does each cultivar respond similarly to viral infection. Results from the laboratory experiment showed that a similar percentage of both cultivars were infected with BBTV by aphid vectors (> 90% for both cultivars). However, field results showed a significantly lower percentage of dwarf apple (39%) infected with BBTV compared with Williams (79%). We also found that all physiological and morphological features measured (i.e., plant height, leaf area, canopy, chlorophyll level, and moisture content) for both cultivars were impacted similarly by BBTV. The incubation period, or the time between plant infection and initial appearance of disease symptoms, was similar for both cultivars. Results also showed that BBTV transmission efficiency was lower in the field than in the laboratory, despite that more aphids per plant were used for field than laboratory inoculation tests. The results highlight the potential use of less susceptible cultivars to help manage BBTV and the importance of screening banana varieties in the field to determine their response to vectors and associated diseases.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".