Corrigendum PM 7/024 (5) Xylella fastidiosa

Q3 Agricultural and Biological Sciences
EPPO Bulletin Pub Date : 2024-12-04 DOI:10.1111/epp.13060
{"title":"Corrigendum PM 7/024 (5) Xylella fastidiosa","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/epp.13060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>\n <b>Background information</b>\n </p><p>In the EPPO diagnostic protocol PM 7/024 (5) <i>Xylella fastidiosa</i> (EPPO, <span>2023</span>), the test of Hodgetts et al. (2021) is recommended under Section 3.4 on Screening test in Section 3.4.2.2 and as an identification and subspecies determination test in Section 4. It is described in full in Appendix 11.</p><p>It should be noted that during a Proficiency Test (PT) organized by the European Union Reference Laboratory for bacteriology (EURL-BAC) on <i>Xylella fastidiosa</i> some issues concerning analytical sensitivity and analytical specificity have been encountered with this test (Vreeburg et al., <span>2024a</span>). A lower analytical sensitivity for subsp. <i>pauca</i> ST74 has been observed compared to the other subspecies. Therefore, using Hodgetts et al. (2021) as a single test for screening is not recommended.</p><p>In terms of assignment of subspecies in Section 4.2, the results of the PT showed that for Hodgetts et al. (2021) some of the subsp. <i>pauca</i> strains from sequence type 74 (ST74) can cross react with the test for subsp. <i>fastidiosa</i> (Vreeburg et al., <span>2024a</span>). It is therefore recommended to laboratories using this test to include ST74 strains in the set of strains selected for verification of this test.</p><p>In Section 4.2 Molecular tests for the identification of <i>X. fastidiosa</i> and assignment of <i>X. fastidiosa</i> subspecies it is stated: ‘In other cases, subspecies assignment may be performed by subspecies-specific molecular tests (Pooler &amp; Hartung, 1995, see Appendix 18; Hernandez-Martinez et al., 2006, see Appendices 19 and 20) or Sanger sequencing.’</p><p>It should be noted that during the PT organized by the EURL-BAC on <i>Xylella fastidiosa</i> subspecies determination, several participants used the conventional PCR tests of Hernandez-Martinez et al. (2006). These participants found that these conventional PCR tests could not distinguish between subsp. <i>sandyi</i> and subsp. <i>morus</i>, since both subspecies produced a PCR product of 638 bp (Vreeburg et al., <span>2024b</span>).</p><p>It is therefore recommended to laboratories performing Hernandez-Martinez et al. (2006), that if a band of 638 bp is obtained, then additional tests (Appendices 10, 11, 16 or 17) should be performed to distinguish between subsp. <i>sandyi</i> and subsp. <i>morus</i>.</p><p>\n <b>List of changes:</b>\n </p><p><b>Using Hodgetts et al. (2021) as a single test for screening on plant samples is not recommended</b>.</p><p>Section 4 of Appendix 11 for exclusivity is modified as follows (new text in bold):</p><p>[ ]: 100%.</p><p><b>With Hodgetts et al. (2021) some of the subsp. <i>pauca</i> strains from sequence type 74 (ST74) can cross react with the test for subsp. <i>fastidiosa</i> (Vreeburg et al</b>., <span><b>2024a</b></span><b>). It is therefore recommended to laboratories using this test to include ST74 strains in the set of strains selected for this test</b>.</p><p>Section 4 of Appendix 19 and 20 for Analytical specificity is modified as follows (new text in bold):</p><p>[ ]</p><p><b>Hernandez-Martinez et al. (2006) cannot distinguish between subsp. <i>sandyi</i> and subsp. <i>morus</i>, since both subspecies produce a PCR product of 638 bp (Vreeburg et al</b>., <span><b>2024b</b></span><b>)</b>.</p><p><b>It is therefore recommended to laboratories performing Hernandez-Martinez et al. (2006), that if a band of 638 bp is obtained, then additional tests (Appendices 10, 11, 16 or 17) should be performed to distinguish between subsp. <i>sandyi</i> and subsp. <i>morus</i></b>.</p>","PeriodicalId":34952,"journal":{"name":"EPPO Bulletin","volume":"54 3","pages":"391-392"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/epp.13060","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EPPO Bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/epp.13060","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background information

In the EPPO diagnostic protocol PM 7/024 (5) Xylella fastidiosa (EPPO, 2023), the test of Hodgetts et al. (2021) is recommended under Section 3.4 on Screening test in Section 3.4.2.2 and as an identification and subspecies determination test in Section 4. It is described in full in Appendix 11.

It should be noted that during a Proficiency Test (PT) organized by the European Union Reference Laboratory for bacteriology (EURL-BAC) on Xylella fastidiosa some issues concerning analytical sensitivity and analytical specificity have been encountered with this test (Vreeburg et al., 2024a). A lower analytical sensitivity for subsp. pauca ST74 has been observed compared to the other subspecies. Therefore, using Hodgetts et al. (2021) as a single test for screening is not recommended.

In terms of assignment of subspecies in Section 4.2, the results of the PT showed that for Hodgetts et al. (2021) some of the subsp. pauca strains from sequence type 74 (ST74) can cross react with the test for subsp. fastidiosa (Vreeburg et al., 2024a). It is therefore recommended to laboratories using this test to include ST74 strains in the set of strains selected for verification of this test.

In Section 4.2 Molecular tests for the identification of X. fastidiosa and assignment of X. fastidiosa subspecies it is stated: ‘In other cases, subspecies assignment may be performed by subspecies-specific molecular tests (Pooler & Hartung, 1995, see Appendix 18; Hernandez-Martinez et al., 2006, see Appendices 19 and 20) or Sanger sequencing.’

It should be noted that during the PT organized by the EURL-BAC on Xylella fastidiosa subspecies determination, several participants used the conventional PCR tests of Hernandez-Martinez et al. (2006). These participants found that these conventional PCR tests could not distinguish between subsp. sandyi and subsp. morus, since both subspecies produced a PCR product of 638 bp (Vreeburg et al., 2024b).

It is therefore recommended to laboratories performing Hernandez-Martinez et al. (2006), that if a band of 638 bp is obtained, then additional tests (Appendices 10, 11, 16 or 17) should be performed to distinguish between subsp. sandyi and subsp. morus.

List of changes:

Using Hodgetts et al. (2021) as a single test for screening on plant samples is not recommended.

Section 4 of Appendix 11 for exclusivity is modified as follows (new text in bold):

[ ]: 100%.

With Hodgetts et al. (2021) some of the subsp. pauca strains from sequence type 74 (ST74) can cross react with the test for subsp. fastidiosa (Vreeburg et al., 2024a). It is therefore recommended to laboratories using this test to include ST74 strains in the set of strains selected for this test.

Section 4 of Appendix 19 and 20 for Analytical specificity is modified as follows (new text in bold):

[ ]

Hernandez-Martinez et al. (2006) cannot distinguish between subsp. sandyi and subsp. morus, since both subspecies produce a PCR product of 638 bp (Vreeburg et al., 2024b).

It is therefore recommended to laboratories performing Hernandez-Martinez et al. (2006), that if a band of 638 bp is obtained, then additional tests (Appendices 10, 11, 16 or 17) should be performed to distinguish between subsp. sandyi and subsp. morus.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
EPPO Bulletin
EPPO Bulletin Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Horticulture
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
70
期刊介绍: As the official publication of the European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization, the EPPO Bulletin publishes research findings on all aspects of plant protection, but particularly those of immediate concern to government plant protection services. Papers are published in English and French, with summaries also in Russian.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信