MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321749683 · doi:10.1094/pdis-05-22-1139-pdn

First Report of Bacterial Leaf Spot on Spinach (<i>Spinacia oleracea</i>) Caused by <i>Pseudomonas</i> sp. in South Carolina

2023· article· en· W4321749683 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Patrick Wechter, Hehe Wang, Sandra E. Branham

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Disease · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Pathogens and Fungal Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpinaciaSpinachBiologyBrassica oleraceaHorticultureSouth carolinaBotanyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A large grower of Brassica leafy greens and spinach in South Carolina observed a severe outbreak of leaf spot on 150 hectares of spinach (Spinacia oleracea) in Orangeburg County, SC in 2013. The entire field was lost due to the outbreak. Symptoms appeared on 8-week old plants as tan to white necrotic spots with black centers, water-soaking and no discernable chlorotic borders. Lesions varied from 2 mm to 1 cm in diameter and often coalesced to cover >50% of the leaves. Symptomatic spinach plants cv. Vancouver were collected in 2013 from the field. Bacterial streaming was evident from the border of necrotic lesions under magnification. Lesion border regions were excised, surface-disinfested with 0.5% NaOCl, macerated in sterilized distilled water and streaked onto nutrient agar (NA) and Pseudomonas Agar F (PAF). Bacterial growth was observed on NA and PAF; several single colonies were selected and re-streaked onto PAF. Colonies fluoresced blue under UV light after 48 h at 28oC. Two of the strains were subjected to 16S rRNA sequencing (GenBank accessions OM983506 and OM983507) and Fatty Acid Methyl Ester (FAME) analysis (MIDI LABS, Newark, DE). FAME results had a best similarity index (0.788) to Pseudomonas cichorii/viridiflava. The 16S sequences were queried to Pseudomonas type-strains in GenBank resulting in best matches: P. ovata (99.23% identity with 99% coverage) and P. maditerranea (99.04% identity with 100% coverage). Additionally, sequences had 97.33% identity with 100% coverage as a P. cichorii type strain, and only 96.86% identity with 97% coverage as a P. viridiflava type strain. These two strains were tested for pathogenicity on the spinach cv. Vancouver. Bacteria were grown on PAF for 48 h, and a bacterial suspension was prepared with sterile distilled water with the addition of 0.001% Latron (Plant Health Technologies, Boise, ID) and adjusted to an optical density of 0.4 at OD600. Six-week-old plants (eight plants) were sprayed with the bacterial suspension to runoff, placed at 100% relative humidity for 72 h, and then put in a growth chamber at 25oC with a 12 h diurnal light cycle for 10 days. Eight plants of 'Vancouver' were sprayed with water and 0.001% Latron as controls. Both strains were pathogenic on 'Vancouver' and caused symptoms similar to those observed in the field. Symptoms were not observed on negative controls. The same bacterial colonies were recovered from the lesions on inoculated plants, fulfilling Koch's postulates. Comparative rep-PCR analysis using the BOXA1R primer (Versalovic et al. 1994) showed both strains had identical DNA-banding profiles. All identification methods used indicate that this is a different Pseudomonas species from the one reported on spinach in California by Koike et al (2002). The top producers of spinach in SC stopped large-scale production in 2014 as a result of this pathogen. In 2020, due to inability of processors to obtain sufficient quantities of spinach, SC growers again planted the crop. Growers experienced yield losses due to similar symptoms on the crop. BOX-PCR of isolated strains of bacteria from these plants showed a DNA banding pattern similar to the 2013 strains.

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: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.189

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designCase report
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant DiseaseSame topicPlant Pathogens and Fungal DiseasesFrench-language works237,207