Mango malformation: etiology, symptoms, distribution and cultivar susceptibility in the Dominican Republic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mango malformation disease (MMD) caused by Fusarium species has become an important disease of mango ( Mangifera indica L.) orchards worldwide. In the Dominican Republic, MMD was first observed in 2008 in orchards of Azua and Peravia provinces, with incidence of up to 50%. This study aimed to estimate the malformation prevalence and distribution in the main mango growing areas of the Dominican Republic and to assess the susceptibility of six commercial cultivars commonly grown in this country. Mango malformation was found in 18 out of 58 orchards, all located in Peravia and Azua. Peravia showed the highest incidence, with values of up to 75% (2013) and 87.5% (2014), and the interpolative analysis made with ArcGIS showed this province as being more inductive for Fusarium spp. occurrence. Pathogenicity tests were conducted in 2013 and 2014 on 10-month-old healthy mango plants per cultivar. Inoculation was done by infiltration of Fusarium pseudocircinatum and Fusarium decemcellulare conidial suspensions into the vegetative apical buds, singly and in combination. In inoculated plants, symptoms such as loss of apical dominance, excessive proliferation of apical or axillary buds with thickened stems, and reduction of leaf lamina were associated with F. pseudocircinatum. In addition to these symptoms, leathery protuberant buds and eventual death of infiltrated plants were associated with F. decemcellulare, singly or coinoculated with F. pseudocircinatum. Based on a disease severity index (DSI), “Tommy Atkins” was tolerant (DSI = 7.8%) and “Puntica” and “Banilejo” were highly susceptible (DSI = 22% and 28.5%).
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".