MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951311136 · doi:10.5423/ppj.oa.09.2018.0173

A Duplex PCR Assay for Rapid Detection of Phytophthora nicotianae and Thielaviopsis basicola

2019· article· en· W2951311136 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Na Liu, Shijun Jiang, Songli Feng, Wenyan Shang, Guozhen Xing, Rui Qiu, Chengjun Li, Shujun Li, Wenming Zheng

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Plant Pathology Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Pathogens and Resistance
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsPhytophthora nicotianaeBiologyRoot rotPolymerase chain reactionInternal transcribed spacerNicotiana tabacumPhytophthoraGeneRibosomal DNAMicrobiologyBotanyRibosomal RNAGeneticsPhylogenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A duplex PCR method was developed for simultaneous detection and identification of tobacco root rot pathogens Phytophthora nicotianae and Thielaviopsis basicola. The specific primers for P. nicotianae were developed based on its internal transcribed spacer (ITS) regions of ribosomal gene, ras gene and hgd gene, while the specific primers for T. basicola were designed based on its ITS regions and -tubulin gene. The specificity of the primers was determined using isolates of P. nicotianae, T. basicola and control samples. The results showed that the target pathogens could be detected from diseased tobacco plants by a combination of the specific primers. The sensitivity limitation was 100 fg/l of pure genomic DNA of the pathogens. This new assay can be applied to screen out target pathogens rapidly and reliably in one PCR and will be an important tool for the identification and precise early prediction of these two destructive diseases of tobacco.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Plant Pathology JournalSame topicPlant Pathogens and ResistanceFrench-language works237,207