MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224240036 · doi:10.1094/pdis-03-22-0574-re

Detection of <i>Xanthomonas translucens</i> pv. <i>undulosa</i>, pv. <i>translucens</i>, and pv. <i>secalis</i> by Quantitative PCR

2022· article· en· W4224240036 on OpenAlexaff
Alian Sarkes, Yalong Yang, Snezana Dijanovic, Heting Fu, Kher Zahr, Michael W. Harding, David Feindel, Jie Feng

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Disease · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Pathogenic Bacteria Studies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture Food and Rural Development
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyPathovarSerial dilutionBacteriaLoop-mediated isothermal amplificationPolymerase chain reactionReal-time polymerase chain reactionDNAMicrobiologyPseudomonadaceaePseudomonasGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A probe-based quantitative PCR (qPCR) protocol was developed for detection and evaluation of the wheat bacterial leaf streak pathogen Xanthomonas translucens pathovar (pv.) undulosa. The protocol can also detect X. translucens pv. translucens and X. translucens pv. secalis but can’t differentiate the three pathovars. When tested on nontarget DNA (i.e., from plant; bacteria other than X. translucens pv. undulosa, X. translucens pv. translucens, and X. translucens pv. secalis; and culture of microorganisms from wheat grains), the qPCR showed a high specificity. On purified X. translucens pv. undulosa DNA, the qPCR was more sensitive than a loop-mediated isothermal amplification assay. When DNA samples from a set of serial dilutions of X. translucens pv. undulosa cells were tested, the qPCR method could repeatedly generate quantification cycle (Cq) values from the dilutions containing ≥1,000 cells. Since 2 µl of the total 50 µl of DNA was used in one reaction, one qPCR reaction could detect the presence of the bacteria in samples containing as few as 40 bacterial cells. The qPCR could detect the bacteria from both infected grain and leaf tissues. For seed testing, a protocol for template preparation was standardized, which allowed one qPCR reaction to test DNA from the surface of one wheat grain. Thus, the qPCR system could detect X. translucens pv. undulosa, X. translucens pv. translucens, and/or X. translucens pv. secalis in samples where the bacteria had an average concentration of ≥40 cells per grain.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 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

Citations16
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant DiseaseSame topicPlant Pathogenic Bacteria StudiesFrench-language works237,207