MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4244272003 · doi:10.1079/isc.43926.20210198942

Pear blister canker viroid.

2021· preprint· en· W4244272003 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rosemarie W. Hammond

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPEARCankerBiologyPyrus communisViroidBotanyHorticulturePlant virusVirologyVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Pear blister canker disease, first reported in France in the 1960's, is caused by pear blister canker viroid (PBCVd). Diseases can occur in several cultivars of pear (Pyrus communis), its major host, but most pear cultivars are tolerant and do not produce symptoms of infection. PBCVd was initially reported in pear and quince, followed by wild pear and nashi and can experimentally infect species in other genera (Chaenomeles, Cydonia, Sorbus, Malus). Transmission through mechanical inoculation from pruning tools and grafting to infective propagative materials is a potential pathway for spread; no animal vector is known and it is not known to be seed transmitted. PBCVd has been reported in several European countries, Malta, Tunisia, Turkey, Australia, Japan, China, and the Americas; the geographic distribution may be underestimated because of symptomless infections in certain hosts. PBCVd was placed on the A1 list in Canada in 1995, listed as a quarantine pest in the United States in 1989, is regarded as quarantine pathogen for Australia, and is listed in a certification scheme to produce clean Pyrus and Cydonia sp. planting material in an OEPP/EPPO Bulletin in 1999 (OEPP/EPPO, 1999).

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.014

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.208 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPlant Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207