MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100034122 · doi:10.7202/045777ar

Earliest documented report of Scleroderris canker in North America: damage believed until now to be caused by summer frost

2011· article· en· W2100034122 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
G. Laflamme

Bibliographic record

VenuePhytoprotection · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicYeasts and Rust Fungi Studies
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCankerFrost (temperature)BiologyWoody plantRed pineSnowGeographyHorticultureBotanyPinus <genus>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1934, over 200,000 red pine (Pinus resinosa) seedlings were planted at Valcartier, near Quebec City. By 1939, more than 28% of these pines were dead. Fifteen years after plantation, red pine mortality reached 93% and the plantation was considered a total loss. Summer frost was thought to be the cause of red pine mortality, while white pine (Pinus strobus) trees planted at the same time were killed by white pine blister rust (Cronartium ribicola) , without any trace of frost damage. However, while summer frost was not listed in insect and disease survey reports published from 1953 to 1993, it was reported in the Valcartier area. Analysis of archival documents and publications shows that Scleroderris canker caused by Gremmeniella abietina was responsible for this mortality. This disease was not known in Canada before 1960. Our diagnosis is based on the description of signs and symptoms, on photographs of damage and on samples collected on site. Gremmeniella abietina , North American race, was isolated and identified. The age of the trees confirms the identity of the plantation; the age of the cankers on residual pines shows that the disease reached the trunks around 1945. High snow depth - not frost - in topographic depressions created conditions conducive to the development of the disease at the epidemic level. This is the earliest documented report of Scleroderris canker in North America.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.390
Threshold uncertainty score0.825

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhytoprotectionSame topicYeasts and Rust Fungi StudiesFrench-language works237,207