MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139044806 · doi:10.4141/p01-128

Effect of leaf spotting diseases on grain yield and seed traits of wheat in southern Saskatchewan

2002· article· en· W2139044806 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
H. Wang, M. R. Fernandez, F. R. Clarke, R. M. DePauw, J. M. Clarke

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaWestern Grains Research Foundation
KeywordsFungicideTest weightBiologyAgronomySpottingYield (engineering)Triticum turgidumGrain yieldHorticulturePoaceae

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although leaf spotting diseases have been reported to have a negative effect on grain yield and seed characteristics of wheat (Triticum spp.), the magnitude of such effects on wheat grown on dryland in southern Saskatchewan is not known. A fungicide experiment was conducted at Swift Current (Brown soil) and Indian Head (Black soil) from 1997 to 1999 to determine the effect of leaf spotting diseases on yield and seed traits of wheat. Two fungicides, Folicur 3.6F and Bravo 500, were applied at different growth stages on three common wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and three durum wheat (T. turgidum L. var durum) genotypes. Fungicide treatments generally did not affect yield, kernel weight, test weight or grain protein concentration, and these effects were relatively consistent among genotypes. Folicur applied at head emergence in 1997 and at flag leaf emergence and/or head emergence in 1998 increased yield at Indian Head (P < 0.05). Fungicides applied at and before flag leaf emergence tended to increase kernel weight. Grain protein concentration increased only in treatments of Bravo applications at Indian Head in 1998. These results suggested that under the dryland environment and management in southern Saskatchewan leaf spotting diseases generally have a small effect on yield, kernel weight, test weight and protein concentration. Key words: Wheat, leaf spotting diseases, fungicide, yield

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.807
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Citations31
Published2002
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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