MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042269255 · doi:10.7202/706079ar

Evaluation of interactions between Rhynchosporium secalis and Pyrenophora teres on barley

2005· article· en· W2042269255 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Allen Xue, P. A. Burnett

Bibliographic record

VenuePhytoprotection · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Pathogens and Fungal Diseases
Canadian institutionsQuebec Society for the Protection of Plants
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInoculationBiologyHordeum vulgareSporePyrenophoraAntagonismHorticulturePathogenBotanyPoaceaeCultivarMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interactions between Rhynchosporiumsecalis and Pyrenophora teres were investigated on barley (Hordeum vulgare) seedlings grown in a greenhouse and growth chambers. Following mixed inoculations, the two pathogens colonized the same leaf simultaneously, but the leaf area with symptoms (LAS) was less than that produced by either of the two pathogens alone at the same inoculum concentration. On plants inoculated with the mixed inocula, LAS induced by R. secalis was reduced by a greater amount than LAS induced by P. teres. The predominance of P. teres over R. secaliswas observed even when inoculations with R. secalis either preceded or followed the inoculation with P. teres by 24 h. Antagonism occurred when inoculum densities were 103-104 spores mL-1 for each pathogen, wetting periods were 24-28 h, and incubation temperature was above 12°C.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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