MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4256462542 · doi:10.1094/pdis-10-11-0870

First Report of “<i>Candidatus</i> Liberibacter solanacearum” Associated with Psyllid-Affected Carrots in Norway

2011· article· en· W4256462542 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joseph E. Munyaneza, Venkatesan G. Sengoda, Leif Sundheim, Richard Meadow

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Disease · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPhytoplasmas and Hemiptera pathogens
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyDaucus carota16S ribosomal RNACultivarBotanyStolonPhytoplasmaCropHorticultureBacteriaRestriction fragment length polymorphismPolymerase chain reactionAgronomyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Carrot (Daucus carota) plants with symptoms resembling those associated with the carrot psyllid Trioza apicalis and the bacterium "Candidatus Liberibacter solanacearum" (1-4) were observed in 70 to 80% of commercial fields and experimental plots in southeastern Norway from late July to mid-September of 2011; all cultivars grown were affected with approximately 10 to 100% symptomatic plants per field. T. apicalis, a pest of carrot in northern and central Europe, including Norway, can cause as much as 100% crop loss and is associated with "Ca. L. solanacearum" (1-4). Symptoms on affected plants include leaf curling, yellow and purple discoloration of leaves, stunted growth of shoots and roots, and proliferation of secondary roots. Carrot plant samples were collected from five T. apicalis-infested fields in Ostfold, Vestfold, Oppland, and Hedmark counties. Total DNA was extracted from petiole and root tissues of 54 plants, including 27 symptomatic plants and 27 asymptomatic plants from four cultivars (Namdal, Panther, Romance, and Yukon) with the cetyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB) buffer extraction method (2,3). DNA samples were tested by PCR assay using primer pairs OA2/OI2c and CL514F/R to amplify a portion of 16S rDNA and rplJ/rplL ribosomal protein genes, respectively, of "Ca. L. solanacearum" (2,3). A 1,168-bp 16S rDNA fragment was detected in the DNA from 22 (81.5%) symptomatic plants and a 668-bp rplJ/rplL fragment was amplified from the DNA of 26 (96.3%) symptomatic and 5 (18.5%) asymptomatic plants, indicating the presence of liberibacter. No liberibacter was detected in the asymptomatic carrot plants with the primer pair OA2/OI2c. Amplicons from the DNA of four carrot root samples with each primer pair were cloned (pCR2.1-TOPO; Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA) and three clones of each of the eight amplicons were sequenced (MCLAB, San Francisco, CA). BLAST analysis of the 16S rDNA consensus sequence from the carrot root tissues (GenBank Accession No. JN863097) showed 100% identity to those of "Ca. L. solanacearum" previously amplified from carrot (GU373048 and GU373049) and T. apicalis (GU477254 and GU477255) in Finland (2,3). The rplJ/rplL consensus sequence from the carrots (GenBank Accession No. JN863098) was 99% identical to the sequences of rplJ/rplL "Ca. L. solanacearum" ribosomal protein gene from carrots in Finland (GU373050 and GU373051). To our knowledge, this is the first report of "Ca. L. solanacearum" associated with carrot in Norway. This bacterial species has caused millions of dollars in losses to potato and several other solanaceous crops in North and Central America and New Zealand (1). This plant pathogen has also been reported from carrots and T. apicalis in Finland, where it has caused significant economic damage to carrot crops (2-4). References: (1) J. E. Munyaneza. Southwest. Entomol. 35:471, 2010. (2) J. E. Munyaneza et al. Plant Dis. 94:639, 2010. (3) J. E. Munyaneza et al. J. Econ. Entomol. 103:1060, 2010. (4) A. Nissinen et al. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 125:277, 2007.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.160 · 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

Citations38
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant DiseaseSame topicPhytoplasmas and Hemiptera pathogensFrench-language works237,207