First Report of <i>Puccinia lagenophorae</i> on <i>Senecio vulgaris</i> in Pennsylvania
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Common groundsel (Senecio vulgaris L.), is an aster native to Eurasia and is now a common weed in gardens, roadsides and vacant lots worldwide. In 2001, Scholler and Toike were first to report that common groundsel was a host for the rust fungus Puccinia lagenophorae Cooke in North America (Scholler and Toike 2001). This report from California was followed by reports of P. lagenophorae infections on common groundsel in New York, Oklahoma, and Oregon (Little-field et al. 2005). In 2007, Bruckart et al. published the first report of this host-pathogen combi-nation in Canada (Bruckart et al. 2007). To our knowledge, there are no published reports of P. lagenophorae on common groundsel in Pennsylvania (Farr and Rossman 2022). In May 2022, symptomatic common groundsel plants were observed in Biglerville, Adams Co., southern Penn-sylvania (N 39.9268047, E 77.2473878). Host plants exhibited conspicuous aecia on deformed stems (Fig. 1). Disease symptomology and morphology were consistent with P. langenophorae (Scholler and Toike 2001). P. lagenophorae is an autoecious rust that forms aecia and telia, but only aecia are typically formed on Senecio spp.; telia were not noted during our observations. Aecia were orange, cup-shaped, bordered by fragmented recurved peridia (Fig. 1), and they had mean diameters 262.9 ± 20.9 X 175.2 ± 22.2 μm (n = 20). Aeciospores were orange, oval, with mean diameters of 16.5 ± 0.97 X 11.5 ± 1.08 μm (n = 20). Fungal DNA was extracted from symptomatic stems. Polymerase chain reaction and sequencing of the 28S region of the nuclear ribosomal DNA repeat were conducted with primers Rust2inv and LR6 following protocols in Aime (2006). The sequence shared 100% identity (909 / 909 bp) with 8 sequences of P. la-genphorae in GenBank, including one on Ozothamnus cordatus from Perth, Western Australia, Australia (KF690699), vouchered in the Queensland Plant Pathology Herbarium (BRIP 57770), Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. A voucher specimen has been preserved in the Arthur Fungari-um at Purdue University (PUR N24039) with corresponding 28S sequence (GenBank accession OP718536).
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".