MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976546903 · doi:10.7202/706083ar

Détection du Heterobasidion annosum au Québec

2005· article· fr· W1976546903 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
G. Laflamme, Robert Blais

Bibliographic record

VenuePhytoprotection · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Pathogens and Fungal Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeterobasidion annosumForestryHumanitiesGeographyArtPicea abiesBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depuis 1955, le champignon Heterobasidion annosum, cause de la maladie du rond, n'était présent, dans l'est du Canada, que dans le sud de l'Ontario. En 1968, le champignon fut identifié plus au nord, près des frontières du Québec. À partir de 1983, un groupe de quatre plantations de pins rouges (Pinus resinosa) ayant déjà été éclaircies a fait l'objet d'un programme de surveillance, ce qui nous a permis de détecter le H. annosum dans la plantation de Mayo en 1989. Cette détection constitue la première mention de la présence du champignon au Québec. En 1993, on a observé la maladie dans une autre plantation du groupe, à Saint-Philippe-d'Argenteuil. Une troisième plantation infectée a aussi été trouvée près de Harrington en 1993, mais elle nefaisait pas partie du groupe sous surveillance. Elle aurait été infectée avant les autres, soit en 1977. La détection du H. annosum au Québec démontre l'urgence d'effectuer des traitements préventifs dans les plantations de pins rouges lors de l'éclaircie et d'éradiquer la maladie dans les trois plantations infectées pendantqu'il en est encore temps.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations16
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhytoprotectionSame topicPlant Pathogens and Fungal DiseasesFrench-language works237,207