MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1781826992 · doi:10.7202/706181ar

Use of the growth regulator paclobutrazol in the management of dollar spot of creeping bentgrass in Minnesota

2005· article· en· W1781826992 on OpenAlexaffvenue
J. Mercier

Bibliographic record

VenuePhytoprotection · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicTurfgrass Adaptation and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPropiconazolePaclobutrazolChlorothalonilFungicideGrowth regulatorBiologyPoa annuaAgronomyHorticulturePoaceae

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The control of dollar spot by paclobutrazol applied as a growth regulator on a creeping bentgrass (Agrostis palustris) and annual bluegrass (Poa annua) fairway turf was compared with two standard fungicide treatments in Minnesota during two growing seasons. Paclobutrazol was applied every 3 weeks, staggered by about 10 days with fungicide treatments (chlorothalonil or propiconazole), also applied every 3 weeks. Paclobutrazol alone significantly reduced the number of dollar spot infection centers during both summers, often by as much as 80%. Chlorothalonil or propiconazole were usually more effective in controlling dollar spot than paclobutrazol. Paclobutrazol improved disease control by fungicides when tested in combination with various rates of chlorothalonil or propiconazole. Paclobutrazol applied as a growth regulator could thus be used to reduce the base line severity of dollar spot of turf.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.194 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhytoprotectionSame topicTurfgrass Adaptation and ManagementFrench-language works237,207