Molecular sampling of hop stunt viroid (HSVd) from grapevines in hop production areas in the Czech Republic and hop protection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Molecular sampling of HSVd in grapevines in the environs of hop gardens was performed. Specific RT PCR primers were designed to unambiguously distinguish between HLVd and HSVd infections. These primers were used for detection and analysis of HSVd cDNAs from individual samples by thermodynamic methods, TGGE and cDNA heteroduplex analysis. We found that at least 70% of grapevine samples from locations close to hop gardens inNorthern Bohemia(Žatec and Úštěk hop production areas) were infected with HSVd forming populations containing quasispecies. Particular sequence variants, dominant in grapevines from wine-growing areas like Znojmo, were also found in minor private vineyards. HSVd was experimentally transmissible (80% success) from these samples to Osvald's clone 72 of Czech hop, where according to the cDNA library screening, one of the dominant HSVdg variants corresponding to AC E01844 was detected in early populations three weeks p.i. HSVd was detected neither in reproduction materials nor in examined hop gardens. However a potential danger for hop cultivation, consisting in the high biological potential of HSVd spread is discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".