MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Practical methods for estimating the infection rate of <i>Quercus robur</i> acorn seedlots by <i>Ciboria batschiana</i>

2004· article· en· W2106791564 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas Schröder, Rolf Kehr, Z. Procházková, J. R. Sutherland

Bibliographic record

VenueForest Pathology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Pathogens and Fungal Diseases
Canadian institutionsGovernment of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMyceliumBiologyAcornSowingQuercus roburHorticultureIncubationFungusBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary The pathogenic fungus, Ciboria batschiana infects acorns prior to fall collection and if they are not freed of the fungus by thermotherapy seedlots can suffer serious losses during subsequent storage. However, since thermotherapy is time‐consuming and expensive, and sometimes has undesirable side‐effects, its use is not justified without knowing if and how intensively a seedlot is infected. It is demonstrated here that typical lesions on the surface of the cotyledons are a reliable indicator of infection by C. batschiana and that a method based on mycelium development on incubated cotyledons allows C. batschiana infection levels to be determined within 1–2 weeks. There were no significant differences in estimated C. batschiana infection levels between the visual assessment of the lesions before the incubation and the visual assessment of outgrowing mycelium from these lesions after the incubation. Using one or both of the described methods a decision can be made on the necessity for thermotherapy of acorn seedlots, i.e. before nursery sowing or long‐term, cold storage. The test based on mycelium development on incubated cotyledons can also be used for quality control following thermotherapy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations16
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueForest PathologySame topicPlant Pathogens and Fungal DiseasesFrench-language works237,207