MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3093772757 · doi:10.1094/pdis-09-20-1863-pdn

First Report of Leaf Spot Caused by <i>Colletotrichum fructicola</i> and <i>C. siamense</i> on <i>Ziziphus mauritiana</i> in Guangxi, China

2020· article· en· W3093772757 on OpenAlexaff
Juan Shu, Tangxun Guo, Qili Li, Lihua Tang, Suiping Huang, Jianyou Mo, Zhihe Yu, Vivian Forte-Perri

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Disease · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Pathogens and Fungal Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Guangxi Province
KeywordsMauritianaBiologyZiziphusBotanyHorticultureLeaf spot

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Zizyphus mauritiana Lam. is an important tropical fruit tree and has significant economic value. It is widely planted in Hainan, Guangdong, Guangxi and Fujian provinces in China (Yang et al. 2017). In March 2019, leaf spot was observed on leaves of Z. mauritiana at Bagui fields in Nanning, Guangxi, China, with incidence exceeding 50%. Symptomatic leaves developed a yellow to tan-brown sunken lesion and finally abscised. To isolate the pathogen causing the symptoms, small pieces (5 × 5 mm) of infected leaves were surface sterilized by exposure to 75% ethanol for 10 sec, 1% sodium hypochlorite for 1 min and rinsed three times in sterile water. Fifty pieces were isolated, surface sterilized, and pieces were plated onto potato dextrose agar (PDA) and grown at 28°C for 7 days. The isolation rate of Colletotrichum species was 100%. Three representative isolates (DQZ3-1, DQZ3-2 and DQZ3-3) were selected for further study. Mycelia were greyish-white for all three isolates, with isolate DQZ3-1 also appearing dark green in the center of the colony. Conidia were elliptical, aseptate and hyaline, with sizes of 13.4 ± 0.12 µm × 5.7 ± 0.1 µm, 14.8 ± 0.1 µm × 5.8 ± 0.1 µm and 15.1 ± 0.1 µm × 5.5 ± 0.1 µm for DQZ3-1, DQZ3-2 and DQZ3-3, respectively. Genomic DNA was extracted using the DNAsecure Plant Kit [Tiangen Biotech (Beijing) Co., Ltd] and the internal transcribed spacer (ITS), partial actin (ACT), calmodulin (CAL), chitin synthase (CHS-1), beta-tubulin (TUB2), and glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) genes were sequenced (Weir et al. 2012). Phylogenetic analysis of the three isolates was performed with MEGA-X (Version 10.0) based on sequences of multiple loci (ITS, ACT, CAL, CHS-1, TUB2 and GAPDH) using Maximum Likelihood analysis. Isolate DQZ3-1 was identified as C. fructicola, and the other two isolates, DQZ3-2 and DQZ3-3, were identified as C. siamense (accessions MT039396 to MT039410, for ACT, CAL, CHS-1, GAPDH and TUB2 of DQZ3-1, DQZ3-2 and DQZ3-3; MT041651 to MT041653 for ITS of DQZ3-1, DQZ3-2 and DQZ3-3). Pathogenicity tests were conducted on 1-year-old plants. Young, healthy leaves were artificially wounded by gently scratching with a sterile needle and 10 µl droplets of conidial suspension (106 spores/ml) applied per wound site for each isolate. Some wounded leaves were inoculated with 10 µl droplets of water as controls. Each isolate was inoculated onto three plants, with 15 leaves at least for each plant, same as controls. All inoculated plants were sprayed with water and covered with plastic bags to maintain high humidity. Symptomatic lesions were observed on the inoculated leaves after 7 days at 28°C, whereas no symptoms were observed on the control leaves. To fulfill Koch's postulates, fungi were re-isolated from 50 symptomatic leaf pieces and fungi re-isolated from each leaf piece were morphologically identical to the inoculated isolates, for a 100% isolation frequency. To our knowledge, this is the first report of leaf spot caused by C. fructicola and C. siamense on Z. mauritiana worldwide. This research may accelerate the development of future epidemiological studies and management strategies for anthracnose caused by C. fructicola and C. siamense on Z. mauritiana.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score0.968

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant DiseaseSame topicPlant Pathogens and Fungal DiseasesFrench-language works237,207