Grain mold fungi and their effect on sorghum grain quality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The major grain mold fungi of sorghum in South Africa were determined by assaying five sorghum cultivars from three localities in 2002 and eight localities in 2003. The predominant fungal genera from all the cultivars and localities were Alternaria, Curvularia, Epicoccum, Fusarium and Phoma spp. in order of frequency isolated. The relative frequency of grain mold fungal isolates differed with locality. Grain mold fungi were least frequently encountered at Bethlehem followed by Heilbron. The incidence of grain mold fungi correlated negatively with milling quality and certain malting properties of sorghum grain were affected. The effect of fungal isolates on various grain quality parameters was examined by inoculating sorghum panicles under glasshouse conditions. All inoculated fungi reduced grain germination in a range of 5.0-50.1% with Curvularia lunata resulting in the highest reduction (50.1%) followed by a mixed population of fungi (30.2%). Fusarium proliferatum, A. alternata, F. graminearum, P. sorghina and an inoculum mixture of equal proportions of the five test fungi significantly (P≤ 0.05) reduced 1000 kernel mass by 31.5, 26.2, 21.3, 10.6 and 7.4%, respectively. Fusarium thapsinum and C. lunata yielded a 3.8 and 0.5% reduction in 1000 kernel mass, respectively. Fusarium thapsinum, F. proliferatum and the mixed fungal population followed by P. sorghina, C. lunata and A. alternata resulted in higher levels of grain discolouration in glasshouse studies. A significant increase in mycotoxin concentration on grains inoculated with different grain mold fungi was recorded. These results indicated that various fungi are involved in the grain mold disease complex and that both qualitative and quantitative losses of sorghum may result.
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 | 0.000 | 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".