Pilot for Harmonization of Diagnostic Protocols for Tomato Brown Rugose Fruit Virus (ToBRFV) in Tomato and Pepper Seeds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Global seed trade is subject to various national, regional, and international regulations to prevent the introduction and spread of harmful seed-borne and seed-transmitted pathogens. When the plant health regulatory agencies of trading partners employ different diagnostic protocols for the same pathogen, contradictory test results may require additional testing that can cause delays in trade. Establishing equivalency of diagnostic protocols may expedite trade by adding confidence to diagnostic test results. The member countries of the North American Plant Protection Organization (NAPPO) conducted a project evaluating several diagnostic protocols for a seed-transmitted virus, tomato brown rugose fruit virus (ToBRFV), an emerging pathogen that has severely affected tomato and pepper fruit and seed production and trade globally. The objective of the study was to find protocols that could be harmonized among NAPPO member countries, thereby avoiding retesting of samples at different border points. The project was a collaboration between academia, industry, trade organizations, and national plant protection organizations (NPPOs). Three end-point PCR and two real-time PCR protocols were evaluated via a ring test. Nine laboratories from Canada, the United States, and Mexico participated in the ring test, which generated 3,680 data points from analytical, diagnostic, and calibrator samples. Four out of five diagnostic protocols were found to be fully transferable, and three protocols demonstrated optimal performance for accurate, reproducible, and user-friendly detection. The results of this regional effort will simplify the detection of ToBRFV-infected seeds in NAPPO member countries and demonstrate a way to establish equivalency of testing methods between the NPPOs. [Formula: see text] Copyright © 2025 The Author(s). This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".