Degenerate ITS7 primer enhances oomycete community coverage and PCR sensitivity to <i>Aphanomyces</i> species, economically important plant pathogens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Metagenomic analysis of oomycetes through deep amplicon sequencing has been conducted primarily using the ITS6-ITS7 primer set that targets the ITS1 region. While this primer set shows a perfect match to most oomycete taxa, ITS7 contains 3 mismatches to the corresponding binding site of plant pathogens within the genus Aphanomyces. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) efficiency differs for taxa with uneven primer matching characteristics, which may explain why previous studies have detected this genus at low abundance. To overcome the impact of these mismatches on PCR sensitivity, the mismatched nucleotides were replaced with degenerate nucleotides. Oomycete communities from 35 soil samples collected from asymptomatic and root rot diseased sites in pea fields across Alberta were analyzed simultaneously using ITS6-ITS7 and ITS6-ITS7-a.e. (modified version of ITS7) primer sets on 1 Illumina MiSeq run. The number of high-quality reads obtained by ITS6-ITS7-a.e. was more than twice that of ITS6-ITS7. The relative abundance of Pythium spp. was reduced and Aphanomyces spp. increased. Aphanomyces cf. cladogamus and Aphanomyces euteiches were the second and third most abundant species, respectively, in the pea rhizosphere using the ITS7-a.e. primer, but were rare using the ITS7 primer. These results indicate that use of ITS7-a.e. provides a more accurate picture of oomycete communities than ITS7 by enhancing PCR sensitivity to Aphanomyces.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".