MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

First report of the association of a ‘<i>Candidatus</i> Phytoplasma asteris‘‐ related strain with <i>Plumbago auriculata</i> leaf yellowing in India

2019· article· en· W2982319680 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pradeep Kumar Panda, Tasou Rihne, Madem Gurivi Reddy, G. P. Rao

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Disease Reports · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPhytoplasmas and Hemiptera pathogens
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIndian Agricultural Research Institute
KeywordsPhytoplasmaBiologyPhyllody16S ribosomal RNARestriction fragment length polymorphismNested polymerase chain reactionAster yellowsBotanyPhylogenetic treeOrnamental plantVeterinary medicineHorticulturePolymerase chain reactionGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plumbago auriculata (Plumbaginaceae) is a perennial ornamental shrub with many therapeutic values and native to South Africa (Saji & Antony, 5). Several groups of phytoplasma have been reported to infect ornamental and medicinal plants all over the world (Rao et al., 2). However, no phytoplasma has been found so far in P. auriculata. Leaf yellowing symptoms on P. auriculata plants (Fig. 1) were observed in Baramati, Pune, India in March 2016 with a disease incidence of 8-10%. To verify the presence of phytoplasma, three symptom-bearing and three asymptomatic P. auriculata samples were collected and DNA was extracted using the CTAB protocol. PCR was performed in a Mastercycler (Eppendorf, Germany) (Rao et al., 4) and DNA from the sesame phyllody phytoplasma (16SrI group) (GenBank Accession No. KC920747) was used as a positive control. The 16S rRNA gene was amplified from all the symptomatic P. auriculata leaf yellowing (PaLY) samples but not from the asymptomatic samples using P1/P7 (Schneider et al., 6) followed by R16F2n/R2 primer pairs (Gundersen & Lee, 1) in nested PCR. Amplicons of the expected size (c. 1.25 kb) were purified and directly sequenced (MN239503 and MN239504). BLAST analysis showed that these 16Sr RNA gene sequences shared 100% identity with phytoplasmas in the16SrI group (MG252367, MK440284, MK440282, KX15181 & KT957205). A phylogenetic tree was constructed using the neighbour-joining method with MEGA 7.0 (Fig.2). The R16F2n/R2 sequence of the PaLY phytoplasma was subjected to in silico RFLP using the iPhyClassifier online tool (https://plantpathology.ba.ars.usda.gov). The iPhyClassifier analysis indicated that the virtual RFLP patterns derived from the 16S rDNA F2n/R2 fragment of the PaLY phytoplasma strain with restriction enzymes were similar to those of a phytoplasma strain from group 16SrI, ‘Candidatus Phytoplasma asteris’ (M30790), formerly Aster Yellows Group, subgroup B, with a similarity coefficient of 1.0. Based on sequence and RFLP results, the PaLY phytoplasma is classified as a member of the phytoplasma subgroup 16SrI-B. Phytoplasmas have been recorded from plant species in the Plumbaginaceae such as Limonium sinuatum in Canada, Europe and Israel (Rao et al., 2). In India, the ‘Ca. P. asteris’ group is the most widespread group and has been found in 64 plant species (Rao et al., 3). Phytoplasmas in subgroup 16SrI-B have been associated particularly with diseases in pineapple, sesame, sugarcane, squash, rose and fennel. The present study reports P. auriculata as a new host for the 16Sr I-B phytoplasma subgroup worldwide. The authors wish to express sincere thanks to Head, Division of Plant Pathology and Director, Indian Agricultural Research Institute for providing laboratory facilities.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew Disease ReportsSame topicPhytoplasmas and Hemiptera pathogensFrench-language works237,207