MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3181414231 · doi:10.3897/bdj.9.e68860

Occurrence data for the two cryptic species of Cacopsylla pruni (Hemiptera: Psylloidea)

2021· article· en· W3181414231 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nicolas Sauvion, Jean Peccoud, Christine N. Meynard, David Ouvrard

Bibliographic record

VenueBiodiversity Data Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPhytoplasmas and Hemiptera pathogens
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgroscopeCentre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le DéveloppementInstitut National de la Recherche AgronomiqueAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsPsylloideaBiologyHemipteraPrunusSpecies complexTaxonomy (biology)Prunus armeniacaPhytoplasmaGeographyBotanyZoologyHomopteraPEST analysisCultivarPhylogenetic tree

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cacopsylla pruni is a psyllid that has been known since 1998 as the vector of the bacterium ‘ Candidatus Phytoplasma prunorum’, responsible for the European stone fruit yellows (ESFY), a disease that affects species of Prunus . This disease is one of the major limiting factors for the production of stone fruits, most notably apricot ( Prunus armeniaca ) and Japanese plum ( P. salicina ), in all EU stone fruit-growing areas. The psyllid vector is widespread in the Western Palearctic and evidence for the presence of the phytoplasma that it transmits to species of Prunus has been found in 15 of the 27 EU countries. Recent studies showed that C. pruni is actually composed of two cryptic species that can be differentiated by molecular markers. A literature review on the distribution of C. pruni was published in 2012, but it only provided presence or absence information at the country level and without distinction between the two cryptic species. Since 2012, numerous new records of the vector in several European countries have been published. We ourselves have acquired a large amount of data from sampling in France and other European countries. We have also carried out a thorough systematic literature review to find additional records, including all the original sources mentioning C. pruni (or its synonyms) since the first description by Scopoli in 1763. Our aim was to create an exhaustive georeferenced occurrence catalogue, in particular in countries that are occasionally mentioned in literature with little detail. Finally, for countries that seem suitable for the proliferation of C. pruni (USA, Canada, Japan, China etc.), we dug deeper into literature and reliable sources (e.g. published checklists) to better substantiate its current absence from those regions. Information on the distribution ranges of these vector psyllids is of crucial interest in order to best predict the vulnerability of stone fruit producing countries to the ESFY threat in the foreseeable future. We give free access to a unique file of 1975 records of all occurrence data in our possession concerning C. pruni , that we have gathered through more than twenty years of sampling efforts in Europe or through intensive text mining. We have made every effort to retrieve the source information for the records extracted from literature (1201 records). Thus, we always give the title of the original reference, together with the page(s) citing C. pruni and, if possible, the year of sampling. To make the results of this survey publicly available, we give a URL to access the literature sources. In most cases, this link allows free downloads of a PDF file. We also give access to information extracted from GBIF (162 exploitable data points on 245 occurrences found in the database), which we thoroughly checked and often supplemented to make the information more easily exploitable. We give access to our own unpublished georeferenced and genotyped records from 612 samples taken over the last 20 years in several European countries (Switzerland, Belgium, Netherlands, Spain etc.). These include two countries (Portugal and North Macedonia), for which the presence of C. pruni had not been reported before. As our specimens have been genotyped (74 sites with species A solely, 202 with species B solely and 310 with species A+B), our new data enable a better overview of the geographical distribution of the two cryptic species at the Palaearctic scale.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.137 · 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
GenreDataset

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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiodiversity Data JournalSame topicPhytoplasmas and Hemiptera pathogensFrench-language works237,207