MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109908842 · doi:10.7202/706005ar

Response of maize inbred lines to two European corn borer (Ostrinia nubilalis) strains in Canada

2005· article· en· W2109908842 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
M. Hudon, R.E. Pitblado, R. I. Hamilton, G Bourgeois, S. Kuzir, R. A. Girgis

Bibliographic record

VenuePhytoprotection · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect Pest Control Strategies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOstriniaEuropean corn borerVoltinismBiologyGermplasmAgronomyInbred strainCrambidaePEST analysisLarvaWestern corn rootwormStrain (injury)HorticultureBotanyPyralidae

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1986 and 1987, six maize inbred lines (CM47, A619, F2, CM107, CM7, and A654) were evaluated at four locations across Ontario and Quebec for their resistance to artificially infested univoltine and lst generation bivoltine strains of the European corn borer, Ostrinia nubilalis. Three criteria were used: leaf feeding, total plant damage at harvest and length of tunnels/plant height ratio. Substantial interactions in borer damage measurements were observed between locations and years, but inbred reaction was relatively consistent. For all criteria, the univoltine strain often caused significantly more damage than the bivoltine borer. In general, A619 had the greatest resistance-tolerance with good standability until harvest. Wherever possible, evaluation of genetic resistance in maize germplasm should be conducted using the univoltine borer strain.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.452
Threshold uncertainty score0.910

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhytoprotectionSame topicInsect Pest Control StrategiesFrench-language works237,207