Antifungal activity of some common weed extracts against phytopathogenic fungi Alternaria spp.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Herbal fungicides are mostly using to control plant disease of fungi because of their ecofriendly nature and their cost effectiveness. The present investigation focuses on the antifungal activity of solvent based extracts extracted from some common weeds Achyranthes aspera, Parthenium hysterophorus, Cannabis sativa, Calotropis gigantean, Chenopodium album, Canada thistle, Phalaris minor, Cynoden dactylon, Argemone maxicana, Ageratum conyzoides, and Lantana camera were screened against seed-borne phytopathogenic fungus Alternaria SPP. by modified food poison method. The acetone, methanol, benzene, ethyl acetate and chloroform extracts of different parts of plants were evaluated for this study; the antifungal activity was more effect in extracts of \nAgeratum conyzoides and Parthenium hysterophorus, against phytopathogenic fungus Alternaria SPP. The present study \nsuggests that chloroform and methnol extracts of Ageratum \nconyzoides and methanol extract of Parthenium hysterophorus, can form the basis for the development of novel broad spectrum herbal fungicidal formulations. We conclude from this that these extracts exhibit amazing fungicidal properties that support the notion that plant extracts may be used as herbal fungicides.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it