Effects of crop rotation and tillage on blackleg disease of canola
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of a 4-year crop rotation and two tillage systems on blackleg (Leptosphaeria maculans) disease of canola were determined in a field experiment carried out from 1999 through 2002 at Carman, Manitoba. Crops in rotation were canola (Brassica napus) (C), wheat (Triticum aestivum) (W), and flax (Linum usitatissimum) (F). Rotations were done under conventional tillage (T) or zero-till (Z) systems. Diseased stem incidence and severity were assessed. Diseased stem incidence and severity in 2001 and 2002 were significantly lower when canola was rotated with wheat, and rotated with wheat and flax under both tillage systems. The CCCCT rotation had a higher disease incidence than CWCCT, CWFCT, and CCWCT rotations, which were not significantly different from each other. Zerotill plots had significantly greater diseased stem incidence and severity than tilled plots, with or without rotation. Tillage reduced the disease when it was performed with a simple-crop rotation; however, the effect was reduced with a two-crop rotation. The results suggest that an appropriate rotation and tillage strategy could be effective in reducing the severity of blackleg of canola in farmers' fields.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".