<i>Leptosphaeria</i> spp., phoma stem canker and potential spread of <i> <scp>L</scp> . maculans </i> on oilseed rape crops in <scp>C</scp> hina
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In China, the incidence of phoma stem canker observed in pre‐harvest surveys from 2005 to 2012 was greater on winter oilseed rape in provinces in central C hina (in M ay) than on spring oilseed rape in north C hina (in A ugust). In all 742 cases when the causal pathogen was isolated from stem cankers, it was identified as L eptosphaeria biglobosa by morphology in culture and/or by species‐specific polymerase chain reaction. Both L . biglobosa and L eptosphaeria maculans were detected on crop debris and seed in shipments of oilseed rape seed imported into China through Shanghai or Wuhan ports in 2009–2011. Descriptions of the observed spread of L . maculans into areas previously colonized by L. biglobosa across a spring oilseed rape growing region ( A lberta, C anada, westwards, 1984–1998) and across a winter oilseed rape growing region ( P oland, eastwards, 1984–2004) were used to estimate the potential westward spread of L . maculans in China across spring oilseed rape growing regions (north C hina) and winter oilseed rape growing regions (central China, generally provinces along the Yangtze River), respectively. The rates of spread were estimated as 47 km per year across spring oilseed rape in north China and 70 km per year across winter oilseed rape in central China. Dispersal modelling suggested that the rate of spread of L . maculans across A lberta, C anada ( c . 17 km per year) could be explained by windborne dispersal of ascospores.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".