Effects of reduced‐rate methyl bromide applications under conventional and virtually impermeable plastic film in perennial crop field nurseries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Producers of perennial crop nursery stock in California use preplant soil fumigation to meet state phytosanitary requirements. Although methyl bromide (MB) has been phased out in many agricultural industries, it is still the preferred treatment in the perennial nursery industry and is used under Critical Use Exemptions and Quarantine/Preshipment provisions of the Montreal Protocol. The present research was conducted to evaluate reduced-rate MB applications sealed with conventional and low-permeability plastic films compared with the primary alternative material. RESULTS: Reduced rates (100-260 kg ha(-1)) of MB applied in combination with chloropicrin (Pic) and sealed with a low-permeability plastic film provided weed and nematode control similar to the industry standard rate of 392 kg ha(-1) MB:Pic (98:2) sealed with high-density polyethylene (HDPE) film. However, the primary alternative chemical, 1,3-dichloropropene (1,3-D), tended to provide slightly lower pest control even on sites with relatively low plant parasitic nematode, soil-borne pathogen and weed pest pressure. CONCLUSION: If California regulations change to allow the use of low-permeability films in broadcast fumigant applications, the results of this research suggest that reduced rates of MB in perennial crop nurseries could serve as a bridge strategy until more technically, economically and environmentally acceptable alternatives are developed.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".