MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044113364 · doi:10.1080/07060660009501156

Review: Fusarium head blight of barley in western Canada

2000· article· en· W2044113364 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
A. Tekauz, Brent McCallum, J. Gilbert

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Pathology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycotoxins in Agriculture and Food
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersWestern Grains Research Foundation
KeywordsFusariumBiologyAgronomyCropCultivarDiseaseResistance (ecology)BlightDisease managementBiotechnologyMedicineHorticulturePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fusarium head blight (FHB), caused primarily by Fusarium graminearum, has rapidly become the most notorious disease of cereals in parts of western Canada. The situation in barley is particularly striking, for until 1993 FHB was not observed in the crop at all, but by 1996 it affected every barley field examined in Manitoba. The disease is largely responsible for the decline in acreage and the loss of markets for both malting and feed barley in the region. Several aspects of FHB in barley are examined for this review, beginning with an overview and description of symptoms and disease epidemiology. Differences in the expression of FHB in barley as compared with wheat, including causal species, infection period, symptoms, and resulting damage (yield and quality losses) are described. These have implications for disease management, including breeding for resistance. The latter is ongoing at several institutions and should result in cultivars with improved resistance to FHB in future. Until then, an integrated protocol for disease management must be implemented to minimize the threat of FHB for producers and the industry.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.523
Threshold uncertainty score0.949

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations126
Published2000
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant PathologySame topicMycotoxins in Agriculture and FoodFrench-language works237,207