Crop Sequence Effects on Root Maggot (Diptera: Anthomyiidae: <I>Delia</I> spp.) Infestations in Canola
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Strong market demand for canola, Brassica napus L., has prompted some western Canadian producers to increase the frequency of this crop in rotations with other crop species, but the impact of this practice on canola insect pests has not been determined. Here, we investigate 12 cropping sequences involving canola over a 3-yr period (2008-2010 inclusive) at five locations across western Canada. Cropping sequences varied from continuous production of two herbicide-tolerant canola varieties, to production in two of 3 yr, to canola production in one of the 3 yr. Treatments analyzed were the frequency and timing of canola within the rotational sequence. Damage by larvae of root maggots (Diptera: Anthomyiidae: Delia spp.) to canola taproots increased as the study progressed, particularly in 2010 after canola had been grown continuously for 3 yr. Yield declined with continuous canola production, and differences were greatest in 2010. At mean canola crop prices for 2010, the yield reduction from continuous production amounted to economic losses of approximately Can$282-$377/ha. Crop quality, in terms of oil and protein concentrations of harvested seed, was affected more by crop variety than cropping sequence. Crop sequence effects for root maggot damage, yield, and seed quality were relatively stable in the presence of environmental (location) variation. Results of our study suggest that continuous canola production could be unsustainable over the long-term even though market forces currently provide incentive for this practice.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".