MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2912868541 · doi:10.1080/07060661.2019.1584588

Characterization of <i>Ralstonia solanacearum</i> species complex strains causing bacterial wilt of tomato in Louisiana, USA

2019· article· en· W2912868541 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Alejandra M. Jimenez Madrid, Vinson P. Doyle, Melanie L. Lewis Ivey

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Pathology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Pathogenic Bacteria Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison
KeywordsRalstonia solanacearumBacterial wiltBiologyBotanyMicrobiologyPathogen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A baseline for genetic diversity of Ralstonia solanacearum species complex (RSSC) causing bacterial wilt of field and greenhouse grown Solanum lycopersicum (tomato) in Louisiana was established based on biovar, phylotype and phylogenetic analysis of the egl gene sequence. RSCC strains were characterized as Biovars 1, 3 and 6 and belonged to phylotypes I and II. Phylotypes were subdivided into sequevars based on differences in the nucleotide sequence of the egl gene. Phylotype II strains clustered with closely related North American strains in sequevar 7 and phylotype I strains clustered with Asian strains in sequevar 14. All three RSCC strains isolated from greenhouse grown tomato were phylotype II sequevar 7 and were identical to strain AW1 from tomato in Alabama (AL). While all RSCC strains were pathogenic on tomato ‘Roma’, only six induced a hypersensitive reponse (HR) on Nicotiana tabacum. Four of the HR positive strains were also pathogenic on pepper ‘Yolo Wonder’. This is the first study to characterize RSSC strains causing bacterial wilt of tomato in Louisiana and confirms that strains originating from Asia are present in North America. Genetic characterization of RSCC strains currently present in Louisiana is the first step towards the development of strain-specific management practices, including the identification of strain-specific host resistance.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score0.909

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.168 · 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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant PathologySame topicPlant Pathogenic Bacteria StudiesFrench-language works237,207