An Improved Evans Blue Staining Method for Consistent, Accurate Assessment of <i>Plasmodiophora brassicae</i> Resting Spore Viability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clubroot caused by Plasmodiophora brassicae is an important disease of brassica crops. The use of vital stains to determine the viability of P. brassicae resting spores can provide useful information regarding spore longevity, inoculum potential, or the efficacy of antimicrobial treatments. Evans blue is one example of a vital stain that has been reported to differentially stain viable and nonviable resting spores. Some previously published protocols using Evans blue to stain P. brassicae resting spores have not provided accurate or consistent results. In this study, we modified the Evans blue method by increasing the staining time to 8 h or more and evaluated P. brassicae resting spores after heat treatment at various combinations of temperature and time. Extending staining times significantly increased the numbers of stained resting spores up to 7 h, after which the numbers of stained spores did not change significantly (R2 = 96.88; P ≤ 0.001). The accuracy of the modified method to discriminate viable and nonviable spores was evaluated in repeated experiments and by comparing the staining data with those derived from inoculation assays and propidium monoazide quantitative PCR (qPCR). The results demonstrated that the modified Evans blue staining method improved the accuracy and consistency of measurement of P. brassicae resting spore viability. Additionally, it was equivalent to the qPCR method for differentiating viable and nonviable spores (R2 = 99.84; P ≤ 0.001) and confirmed in canola infection bioassays.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".