Here's some interesting tidbits to ponder on.
The WSM doesn't give much information on DTC's. It tells you what they mean (for the most part) but that's about it. In order to get the accurate diagnosis you need the diagnosis manual-which is built into the diagnostic software. You can't get access to that unless you're a dealer or know someone at a dealer. One of many gripes about Kubota.
P0335 and P0336 are similar but not the same. And-to add insult to injury the diagnosis manual included in the software actually lists 335 and 336 as different codes, contrary to the WSM.
With that said, if you had a 336 showing, the engine will still run. The programming is such that if there is a fault with the crank sensor, the system will default to reading the cam sensor only. It doesn't run great but it will run enough to work. Regeneration is affected too. 335? LOL. WSM says check the sensor and check the wiring. But I know from experience that if you unplug the sensor the engine will still run, so then you get to go into the diag manual and read up on 335 which is different, and that's different than the WSM. Confusing enough? You can thank the engineers for this.
Even as a (now former) tech I hated the way they did certain things and this was one of the many. Basically all you can do is check the sensor and wiring visually and with a digital volt-ohm meter, and that is the extent of your available testing. In order to properly diagnose you need the proper hardware and software--again Kubota dealer only stuff. If you had access to that, you could go into the ecu, read all of the trouble codes. Let's say you also had a P0606 with a P0336. I'd be looking at all of the connections first. If you had 335 with some can line communication codes, wiring and/or ecu would be my best guess. Use of all of the available information is what is best, and we (tractor owners and operators) don't have access to all of it.
It's been argued that the codes are standard OBD2 codes and that is true. BUT.....if you know anything about OBD2, differnet manufacturers sometimes use different nomenclature which strays from "standard"--and therein lies the big issue with this particular code.