MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117141523 · doi:10.1080/07060661.2011.536650

Races of<i>Puccinia graminis</i>on barley, oat and wheat in Canada in 2006

2010· article· en· W2117141523 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
T. G. Fetch, J. Mitchell Fetch, Allen Xue

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Pathology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStem rustAvenaPucciniaHordeum vulgareBiologyVirulenceCultivarPathogenPoaceaeAgronomyRust (programming language)MildewBotanyGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Stem rust, caused by Puccinia graminis, is a disease of cereal crops worldwide. In Canada, it is primarily controlled using resistant cultivars. Tracking the virulence structure in the pathogen populations is essential to detect new virulent races that may occur. Surveys of barley (Hordeum vulgare), oat (Avena sativa) and wheat (Triticum aestivum) fields and trap nurseries were conducted to provide incidence and severity information and to identify the virulence structure in the pathogen populations. Stem rust samples were collected in Manitoba and Saskatchewan in 2006. Stem rust was not found on cultivated wheat and was at trace levels in barley and oat fields. From wheat and barley samples, four races of P. graminis f. sp. tritici were found and QFCSC (89%) was predominant. Thirteen races of P. graminis f. sp. avenae were found in 2006. From cultivated oat samples, the predominant races were TJJ (67%), TJS (17%), and TGD (9%). From wild oat samples, the predominant races were TJJ (40%), TGD (23%), and TGB (12%). Two new races of P. graminis f. sp. avenae (TGN and TJN) with virulence to Pg12 but avirulence to Pg13 were detected on both cultivated and wild oat both in Manitoba and Saskatchewan in 2006.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.297
Threshold uncertainty score0.299

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.169
Teacher spread0.161 · 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 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

Citations33
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant PathologySame topicWheat and Barley Genetics and PathologyFrench-language works237,207