Influence of leaf scorch on vegetative growth and yield of three strawberry (<i>Fragaria</i> × <i>ananassa</i> Duch.) cultivars with differing levels of resistance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three strawberry cultivars, Kent, Jewel and Blomidon, were evaluated for their reaction to leaf scorch (Diplocarpon earlianum) disease. The three cultivars are considered to be susceptible, moderately resistant and resistant to leaf scorch, respectively. Plants were grown in the field in a runnerless culture system and inoculated with conidial suspensions at one of five concentrations to generate a range of disease severities. The control plants were not innoculated. Disease severity was monitored during the establishment year and these data were used to calculate area under the disease progress curves (AUDPC) for each cultivar. At dormancy, vegetative growth analysis was performed on a sample of plants from each plot. The remaining plants were overwintered and data were collected on yield and yield components the following season. The difference in AUDPC values between control and highest levels of the disease for Kent, Jewel and Blomidon were 31.6, 26.0 and 25.2 units, respectively. Leaf scorch reduced photosynthetically active leaf area in all three cultivars, which reduced dry matter accumulation. The vegetative characters most affected were leaf area and number, crown number and dry weight and root dry weight. At the highest level of disease attained total yield declined 58, 41 and 31 g plant-1 corresponding with disease severities of 44.5, 36.4 and 32.4 units AUDPC for Kent, Jewel and Blomidon, respectively. This represented a 20–21% yield reduction in each cultivar. Fruit number was the yield component most sensitive to the leaf scorch disease. A strong relationship was established between highest disease severity during late summer and fall (which includes the time of flower bud initiation) and yield the following season. Key words: Diplocarpon earlianum, foliar disease, June-bearing
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".