MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3165990218 · doi:10.1094/pdis-04-21-0863-pdn

First Report of Grapevine Yellow Speckle Viroid 1 Infecting Grapevine (<i>Vitis vinifera</i>) in Canada

2021· article· en· W3165990218 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Dong Xu, Charith Raj Adkar‐Purushothama, Pierre Lemoyne, Jean‐Pierre Perreault, Mamadou L. Fall

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Disease · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsBiologyVitis viniferaBotanyViroidPlant virusVirologyVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quebec is the third largest wine grape producer in Canada in acreage, tonnage, and wine grape sales (Carisse et al. 2017; Ben Moussa et al. 2019). To evaluate the diversity of viruses infecting grapevine in Quebec, a total of 77 leaf tissue samples (cv. Vidal) were collected from July to October in 2020 in three different vineyards located in Frelighsburg, Hemmingford and Saint-Jacques-le-Mineur in Quebec, Canada. Double-stranded RNA was extracted from each sample and used for cDNA library preparation with the Nextera XT DNA Library Preparation Kit (Illumina) as described previously (Kesanakurti et al. 2016). High-throughput sequencing (HTS, 2x300 bp) was conducted on dual-indexed libraries in a v3 flow cell using the Illumina MiSeq platform (Adkar-Purushothama et al. 2020). The obtained raw FASTQ data was de-multiplexed into 154 separate sequence files, and the adapters and barcode sequences were trimmed. The quality of the sequences was verified using Trimmomatic V.0.32 and the "clean" sequences were analyzed using Virtool and VirFind virus detection pipelines described elsewhere (Ho and Tzanetakis 2014; Rott et al. 2017) to screen for all possible viruses in the databases. Over 100,000 reads per sample were obtained with a percentage of mapped viral reads ranging from 1.47 to 19.43% of total number of reads. Out of 77 samples, 16 revealed the sequence of grapevine yellow speckle viroid 1 (GYSVd-1), for which the length coverage ranged from 98.5 to 99.1%; the depth ranged from 2X to 856X. The GYSVd-1 positive sequence files were subjected to whole genome assembly on CLC genomics Workbench v20.0.4 with the isolate SY-BR from Brazil (KU880715) used as reference. Seven complete genomes of GYSVd-1 of 366-368 nucleotides (nt) in size were deposited (GenBank Acc. MW732682 to MW732688). BLASTN analysis of the sequences showed 98-100% nt identities with isolate SY-BR. Other viruses and viroids such as Grapevine fleck virus, Grapevine rupestris stem pitting-associated virus, Grapevine rupestris vein feathering virus and Hop stunt viroid were also detected. To confirm GYSVd-1 presence in Quebec vineyards, seven of the 16 HTS-positive grapevine leaf tissue samples were subjected to total RNA extraction, followed by RT-PCR assay as before (Adkar-Purushothama et al. 2015; Sahana et al. 2013); all were positive by RT-PCR. The PCR products were directly Sanger-sequenced, and they showed 100% nt identity to the HTS derived sequences. Three of the seven GYSVd-1 positive grapevines exhibited yellow leaf spots and flecks and tiny yellow leaves, but their mixed infection status makes definitive symptoms association difficult to determine. Previously, Hop stunt viroid was reported from grapevines in Canada (Xiao et al. 2019; Fall et al. 2020) but to the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of GYSVd-1 infecting grapevines in Canada, specifically in the province of Quebec. Further research is required to assess the GYSVd-1 related yield loss. Monitoring and testing for GYSVd-1 infection is necessary to prevent propagation of infected materials, spread, and potential negative impact for the Canadian grapevine industry.

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: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 designCase report
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
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant DiseaseSame topicPlant Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207