Single and Mixed Viral Infection Reduced Growth and Photosynthetic Pigment Content, Damaged Chloroplast Ultrastructure and Enhanced Virus Accumulation in Oriental Lily (Lilium auratum cv. Sorbonne)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Both single- and mixed-infection experiments were performed to study the effects of <i>Lily mottle virus</i> (LM<sub>0</sub>V) and <i>Cucumber mosaic virus</i> (CMV) on the growth, photosynthetic pigment content, chloroplast structure and virus accumulation in oriental lily (<i>Lilium auratum</i> L. cv. Sorbonne). Virus infection with LM<sub>0</sub>V significantly reduced plant height and leaf length and width. Mixed infection with LM<sub>0</sub>V and CMV caused significantly more severe effects on growth than single infection by LM<sub>0</sub>V. In leaves exposed to mixed infection, there was a decrease in content of chlorophyll <i>a</i> (chl <i>a</i>), chlorophyll <i>b</i> (chl <i>b</i>), and carotenoids (car) as well as in the chl <i>a/b</i> and chl (<i>a+b</i>)/ car ratios. In addition, mixed infection greatly damaged the chloroplast ultrastructure. Plants infected with both viruses exhibited a significantly greater accumulation of LM<sub>0</sub>V coat protein (CP) gene compared with the single infection by LM<sub>0</sub>V. These results clearly indicated that mixed infection by LM<sub>0</sub>V and CMV brought about more damage to the growth and photosynthetic apparatus of lily plant compared with single infection by LM<sub>0</sub>V.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".