Composting Effect on Three Fungal Pathogens Affecting Elm Trees in Edmonton, Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The City of Edmonton, Alberta, produces compost from a mix of wood chips and biosolids at its aerated static pile composting facility. A portion of the wood comes from the City's Parks Branch, which supplies clean wood waste to the composter, and sends wood known to be diseased to landfill. However, wood from other wood suppliers is not necessarily screened, allowing the possibility that diseased wood might still be processed. It was of interest to determine the fate of some important Edmonton-area plant disease organisms during composting, in order to determine if infested wood actually needs to be diverted away from the composter. The current study focused on the fate of three fungi: Dothiorella ulmi; Verticillium dahliae; and V. albo-atrum. Wood chips inoculated with the three organisms of interest were placed into a newly constructed aerated static pile at various locations. The chips were retrieved during the first active composting stage and tested for pathogen survival. At locations where temperatures exceeded 40°C, all three pathogens were inactivated. However, survival of fungi was observed in cooler zones of the pile (e.g. near the surface). It is expected that mixing in subsequent stages of composting will move all material into the high-temperature zones.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".