MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Assessment of the impact of resistant and susceptible canola on <i>Plasmodiophora brassicae</i> inoculum potential

2012· article· en· W1962897542 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Pathology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Disease Resistance and Genetics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaAgriculture Food and Rural Development
FundersCanola Council of CanadaSaskatchewan Canola Development CommissionAlberta Crop Industry Development Fund
KeywordsClubrootCanolaBiologyCultivarAgronomyCropHorticultureBotanyBrassica

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The impact on clubroot severity of growing susceptible canola or mixtures of resistant and susceptible canola genotypes was examined. Bioassays revealed greater clubroot severity and incidence, and reduced plant height, where 100% of a susceptible cultivar had been grown. A higher proportion of susceptible plants within a resistant canola crop increased root hair and secondary infections. Regression analysis of root hair infection and the amount of Plasmodiophora brassicae DNA (as determined by quantitative PCR) revealed strong linear relationships between the two parameters. The linear relationships between root hair infection and P. brassicae DNA were stronger for the resistant cultivar than for the susceptible cultivar when regression analysis was conducted by cultivar over the sampling dates. In conclusion, the cropping of a resistant cultivar reduced clubroot severity, while the presence of susceptible volunteer canola increased inoculum potential. Quantitative PCR was a reliable tool for the quantification of root hair infection.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.815
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.230 · 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