Metagenomic Analysis of Riesling Grapevine Reveals a Complex Virome Including Two New and Divergent Variants of <i>Grapevine leafroll-associated virus 3</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The virome of a major white wine grape of cultivar Riesling showing decline and leafroll disease symptoms was analyzed through high-throughput sequencing (HTS) using total RNAs as templates and the Illumina HiSeq 2500 platform. Analysis of HTS data revealed the presence of five viruses and three viroids in the infected vine. These viruses are Grapevine leafroll-associated virus 1 (GLRaV-1) and GLRaV-3 (genus Ampelovirus, family Closteroviridae) and three viruses of the family Betaflexiviridae (namely, Grapevine virus A [GVA], Grapevine virus B, and Grapevine rupestris stem pitting-associated virus [GRSPaV]). We also show that multiple distinct strains of three viruses (GLRaV-3, GVA, and GRSPaV) were present in this diseased grapevine. The complete genomes of two novel and highly divergent isolates of GLRaV-3 were determined using the draft genomes derived from HTS data and two independent rapid amplification of cDNA ends (RACE) strategies to obtain sequences at both the 5′ and the 3′ termini of the viral genomes. Questionable genome regions of both isolates were also verified through cloning of reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction products and Sanger sequencing. These two isolates are vastly divergent from all other isolates of GLRaV-3 whose genome sequences are available in GenBank. Isolate ON8415A has up to 76% nucleotide sequence identities to other isolates representing existing variant groups. We also revealed high degrees of variation in both length and sequence in the terminal untranslated regions (UTRs) of GLRaV-3 variants. The 5′-UTR of most GLRaV-3 isolates whose complete genomes have been sequenced contain tandem repeats of 65 nucleotides, a highly unusual feature rarely observed in (+)single-stranded RNA viruses. Mechanisms for the biogenesis of these tandem repeats and their function in virus replication and pathogenesis require investigation. Findings of this research add to the genetic diversity, evolutionary biology, and diagnostics of GLRaV-3 that afflicts the global grape wine industry.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".