Temporal dispersal patterns of<i>Sclerotinia sclerotiorum</i>ascospores during canola flowering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The temporal patterns of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum ascospore dispersal in canola fields were studied at two North Dakota locations between 2005 and 2007. Seven-day volumetric spore samplers were used to monitor airborne ascospore populations while electronic data loggers recorded hourly information on air temperature, relative humidity, soil moisture and soil temperature under the canola canopy. Ascospore dispersal occurred during single periods that lasted 4 to 6 hours. In 2005 and 2007, most ascospores were collected between 10 am and 1 pm; however, in 2006, a drier than normal year, most were collected between 2 am and 7 am. In 2005 and 2007, the first sharp increase in ascospore dispersal was preceded by a 10-unit drop in relative humidity from close to saturation, and an increase in air temperature of 5 °C. In 2006, however, no significant changes in relative humidity, which remained around 90%, or air temperature, which hovered around 15 °C, were recorded prior to the start of the discharges. These nighttime discharges lasted 2 hours longer than daytime discharges. Daily discharges, daytime and nighttime, started when relative humidity was ≥ 90% and air temperature was around 15–16 °C. Multiple peak-days, days with mean ≥ 20 ascospores m−3, were recorded in 2005 and 2007, but none were recorded in 2006. Peak-days were associated with preceding periods of seven consecutive days with mean relative humidity ≥ 85% in the canola canopy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".