Impact of crop management on leaf diseases in Alberta barley fields, 1995–1997
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conservation tillage may increase the risk of leaf diseases for Alberta barley producers. A study was undertaken from 1995 to 1997 to assess the impact of the tillage system, crop rotation, and cultivar resistance on levels of scald [Rhynchosporium secalis] and net blotch [Pyrenophora teres] in commercial barley (Hordeum vulgare) fields. Scald and net-blotch levels were assessed in 99, 148, and 91 barley fields in 1995, 1996, and 1997, respectively, throughout Alberta. Fields were classified according to tillage regime (conventional, zero, and minimum tillage), cultivar resistance to both diseases, and crop rotation. The tillage system did not influence the probability of higher levels of scald or net blotch in all 3 years. The previous crop did influence the probability of higher levels of scald in 1995 and 1996; fields previously planted to barley were 3–4 times more likely to have greater scald severity than fields planted to a nonhost crop. The previous crop affected the level of net blotch in 1995 only; fields previously planted to barley were 4.5 times more likely to have increased disease severity compared with fields previously planted to a nonhost. Cultivar resistance to either scald or net blotch was the management factor that most consistently reduced the probability of a higher level of disease. On average, susceptible cultivars were 4–8 and 5–12 times more likely to have higher levels of scald and net blotch, respectively, compared with resistant cultivars.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".