Effects of aldicarb and fungicides on Pratylenchus penetrans populations, root rot and net blotch severity on barley
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Population levels of the root lesion nematode, Pratylenchus penetrans, which produces necrotic lesions in the root cortex, were recorded in barley (Hordeum vulgare) in experimental plots during 1988, 1989, and 1990. Root lesion nematodes were the onlyendoparasitic nematodes recovered from barley roots and were the dominant nematode group found in the soil. Based on 3-yr averages, root rot ratings, caused primarily by Cochliobolussativusand Fusarium spp., increased from 27% at Zadoks Growth Stage (ZGS) 30-32 in July to 73 % at ZGS 70-72 in late August and early September. Net blotch (incited by Pyrenophora teres) was suppressed by a fungicide treatment consisting of a seed application of carbathiin and thiram, and a foliar application of propiconazole. Aldicarb suppressed the populations of root lesion nematodes in the soil, in the total root System, and in crown and seminal roots of barley. Yields were increased by ca 30% where aldicarb and fungicides were applied as a combined treatment. Population densities of root lesion nematodes were much greater in seminal roots than in crown roots at ZGS 30-32 and 55-60. Correlation coefficients between nematodes and yield data were often negative and significant (P≤0.05). There were no consistent trends in the numerical relationships between numbers of root lesion nematodes in roots or soil, and incidences of net blotch or root rot of barley.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".