SEROLOGICAL, BIOLOGICAL AND MOLECULAR DETECTION OF Prunus necrotic ringspot virus ON Rosa damascena Mill. IN TURKEY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was carried out during 2012 in oil rose (Rosa damascena Mill.) production areas in Burdur prov-ince of Turkey. A total of 102 oil rose leaf samples showing virus-like symptoms were collected from 8 dif-ferent locations. All oil rose leaf samples were tested for Prunus necrotic ringspot virus (PNRSV) using commercially available DAS-ELISA kit with negative and positive control. 16 samples of 102 were found to be infected with PNRSV (16%). DAS-ELISA positive samples were later inoculated onto Cucumis sativus L. cv. Cemre F1, Chenopodium quinoa Wild. and Catharanthus roseus L.G. Don. Inoculation with extracts from PNRSV-positive plants produced chlorotic local lesions on Chenopodium quinoa Wild. The symptoms was not observed on Cucumis sativus L. cv. Cemre F1 and Catharanthus roseus L.G. Don. Total RNA was extracted from leaves of oil rose samples which were positive in the DAS-ELISA and PNRSV- inoculated Chenopodium quinoa Wild. plants. Total RNA was isolated from EZ-10 spin column plant total RNA minipreps kit (Bio Basic, Canada Inc). Reverse Transcription-Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) was performed using PNRSV specific primers as described by Rosner (15). The expected frag-ment size of 785 bp was observed after electrophoresis of PCR products in 1% agarose gel. RNA isolated from healthy Chenopodium quinoa Wild. was used as a negative control. No PCR products were amplified from this sample.
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 | 0.000 | 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".