MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053849422 · doi:10.1071/ea04175

Towards the development of a Cavendish banana resistant to race 4 of fusarium wilt: gamma irradiation of micropropagated Dwarf Parfitt (Musa spp., AAA group, Cavendish subgroup)

2006· article· en· W2053849422 on OpenAlexaff
M. K. Smith, Sharon Hamill, PW Langdon, Janet E. Giles, VJ Doogan, K. G. Pegg

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Experimental Agriculture · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBanana Cultivation and Research
Canadian institutionsSmiths Detection (Canada)
FundersAustralian Centre for International Agricultural Research
KeywordsFusarium wiltFusarium oxysporumBiologyCultivarHorticultureRace (biology)Gamma irradiationFusarium oxysporum f.sp. cubenseDrought toleranceAgronomyVeterinary medicineBotanyIrradiation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

‘Dwarf Parfitt’, an extra-dwarf Cavendish cultivar with resistance to subtropical race 4 Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense (Foc), was gamma irradiated at a dose of 20 Gy and putative mutants were recovered with improved agronomic characteristics. Further screening of putative mutants for improved yield and fruit size, as well as a degree of resistance to fusarium wilt, led to the selection of a line (DPM25) with improved productivity when grown on soils infested with subtropical race 4 Foc. DPM25 was equal to the industry standard, ‘Williams’, in every agronomic trait measured and it consistently showed a lower incidence of fusarium wilt. Further improvement of field resistance to race 4 Foc is needed in DPM25 and further cycles of mutation induction and selection is an option discussed.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations51
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Journal of Experimental AgricultureSame topicBanana Cultivation and ResearchFrench-language works237,207