Potential biological control of clubroot on canola and crucifer vegetable crops
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clubroot caused by Plasmodiophora brassicae is an emerging threat to canola ( Brassica napus ) production in western Canada, and a serious disease on crucifer vegetable crops in eastern Canada. In this study, seven biological control agents and two fungicides were evaluated as soil drenches or seed treatments for control of clubroot. Under growth cabinet conditions, a soil‐drench application of formulated biocontrol agents Bacillus subtilis and Gliocladium catenulatum reduced clubroot severity by more than 80% relative to pathogen‐inoculated controls on a highly susceptible canola cultivar. This efficacy was similar to that of the fungicides fluazinam and cyazofamid. Under high disease pressure in greenhouse conditions, the biocontrol agents were less effective than the fungicides. Additionally, all of the treatments delivered as a seed coating were less effective than the soil drench. In field trials conducted in 2009, different treatments consisting of a commercial formulation of B. subtilis , G. catenulatum , fluazinam or cyazofamid were applied as an in‐furrow drench at 500 L ha −1 water volume to one susceptible and one resistant cultivar at two sites seeded to canola in Alberta and one site of Chinese cabbage in Ontario. There was no substantial impact on the susceptible canola cultivar, but all of the treatments reduced clubroot on the susceptible cultivar of Chinese cabbage, lowering disease severity by 54–84%. There was a period of 4 weeks without rain after the canola was seeded, which likely contributed to the low treatment efficacy on canola. Under growth cabinet conditions, fluazinam and B. subtilis products became substantially less effective after 2 weeks in a dry soil, but cyazofamid retained its efficacy for at least 4 weeks.
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".