MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969728848 · doi:10.1080/07060660409507167

Fusarium head blight of oat — current status in western Canada

2004· article· en· W1969728848 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
A. Tekauz, Brent McCallum, Nancy Ames, J. Mitchell Fetch

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Pathology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycotoxins in Agriculture and Food
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFusariumBiologyCultivarAvenaAgronomyCropMycotoxinHorticultureBiotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The occurrence of fusarium head blight (FHB) in oat in Canada is reviewed, and preliminary results of recent studies in Manitoba are presented. Fusarium head blight was common in oat crops surveyed in southern Manitoba in 2002 and 2003, but visually, only low levels were evident. Fusarium graminearum and F. poae were the principal fungal species recovered from affected kernels. Levels of Fusarium spp. and deoxynivalenol (DON) varied among oat cultivars tested for their reactions to FHB in field trials. Putative Fusarium-damaged kernels were also assessed, but their identification was equivocal. As such, evaluation of DON and F. graminearum appear to be the best means of determining general FHB levels in oat and reaction differences among oat genotypes. Compared with wheat and barley, oat was less affected by FHB and may be more resistant to the disease. Dehulled oats (groats), when processed, had much lower levels of DON compared with whole oats. Effective management of FHB, including incorporation of improved levels of resistance and use of cultural options is needed to minimize the impact of the disease and ensure the sustainability of the crop in the region. Fusarium head blight is a major (new) disease of oat in western Canada.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.146

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations65
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant PathologySame topicMycotoxins in Agriculture and FoodFrench-language works237,207