MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979086613 · doi:10.5539/jas.v5n12p23

Laboratory Bioassay and Field Evaluation of Copper Gluconate as a New Potential Bactericide Against Xanthomonas campestris pv. citri (Hasse) Dye

2013· article· en· W1979086613 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yuhong Zhang, Runqian Mao, Jihuan Zheng, Yingfang Xiao, Mingli Tang, Quan JinCheng

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Pathogenic Bacteria Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCitrus cankerBioassayXanthomonas campestrisCopperMancozebSerial dilutionAdipateChemistryBacteriaMicrobiologyBiologyHorticultureFungicideOrganic chemistryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Laboratory bioassays and field trials were carried out to study the toxicity and effectiveness of copper gluconate (CG) against Xanthomonas campestris pv. citri (Hasse) in comparison with copper hydroxide (CH) and DT (copper succinate + copper glutarate + copper adipate). The results of laboratory experiment indicated that CG recorded significant control against the bacteria at the concentration of 40 g/L or more. In particular, CG had a similar result to those of CH at the concentration of 100 g/L. Meanwhile, field experiment confirmed that CG had a similar efficacy compared with those of CH, DT, and Mancozeb. It was suggested that CG (1: 1000 dilutions) could be used as effective bactericide for managing citrus canker.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicPlant Pathogenic Bacteria StudiesFrench-language works237,207