MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1912912887 · doi:10.7202/706131ar

Effet de la brûlure cercosporéenne, causée par le Cercospora carotae, sur le développement, la croissance et le rendement de la carotte

2005· article· fr· W1912912887 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
G Bourgeois, Carole Brodeur, Ajjamada C. Kushalappa

Bibliographic record

VenuePhytoprotection · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Disease Resistance and Genetics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForestryHumanitiesBiologyGeographyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L'objectif de cette étude était de quantifier l'effet de la sévérité de la brûlure cercosporéenne (Cercospora carotae) sur le développement (stades végétatifs), la croissance (poids secs du feuillage et des racines, indice de surface foliaire) et le rendement de la carotte (Daucus carota var. sativa). Au cours d'expériences effectuées en sol organique durant les saisons 1990, 1991 et 1992, trois niveaux de sévérité ont été obtenus par des nombres différents d'applications de fongicides, à savoir aucune application, deux ou trois applications et une application à chaque semaine. Au cours des trois années, des différences entre les traitements ont été observées 60 jours après le semis pour la sévérité de la maladie, 80 jours après le semis pour le poids sec du feuillage et l'indice de surface foliaire, et 100 jours après le semis pour le poids sec des racines. Une augmentation du nombre d'applications a permis une augmentation du rendement total en carottes. Cependant, les applications hebdomadaires n'ont pas augmenté le rendement en carottes de classe régulière par rapport à deux ou trois applications pour l'ensemble de la saison. Il est donc possible de réduire le nombre d'applications de fongicides, tout en conservant un rendement économiquement acceptable.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations3
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhytoprotectionSame topicPlant Disease Resistance and GeneticsFrench-language works237,207