Crop rotation can confer resistance to potatoes from <i>Phytophthora erythroseptica</i> attack
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The influence of 2- and 3-yr crop rotations and conservation tillage practices on the severity of pink rot of potato (causal agent: Phytophthora erythroseptica) was examined in Prince Edward Island, Canada. The 2-yr rotation crops included spring barley and potato (cv. Russet Burbank), and the 3-yr rotation was comprised of barley (undersown with red clover), red clover and potato. In the potato year only, the main plots were split to examine conventional and minimum tillage (sub-plot) treatments. Soil samples and potato tubers were extracted from field plots 6-7 yr after the initiation of the field trial. Following post-harvest inoculation of field-grown tubers with P. erythroseptica, we determined that pink rot disease development was significantly (P = 0. 05) less pronounced in potatoes from 3-yr rotational than from 2-yr rotational soils. The effect of tillage management was not significant. Potato plants grown in greenhouse trials in 3-yr rotational soils (from field plots) were significantly (P = 0.05) less diseased than those grown in 2-yr rotational soils following inoculation with P. erythroseptica. These results suggest that potato plants grown in soils managed under a 3-yr rotation are intrinsically more resistant to pathogen attack than those managed under a 2-yr rotation. We confirmed that crop rotation provides disease control benefits beyond those normally associated with pathogen population decline in the absence of the susceptible host. The possibility that beneficial soil microflora and tuber endophytes were involved in disease suppression is discussed. Key words: Phytophthora erythroseptica, pink rot, potato, Solanum tuberosum, crop rotation, minimum tillage, beneficial endophytes, biocontrol
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".