The influence of edaphic and competitive factors on productivity of marsh reed grass (<i>Calamagrostis canadensis</i>) in a cooperative pathosystem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Calamagrostis canadensis (Michx.) Beauv., marsh reed grass, hinders the regeneration of conifer seedlings. The influence of nutrients, autoallelopathy, and intraspecific competition on the productivity of greenhouse-grown marsh reed grass inoculated with a combined Fusarium avenaceum (Fr.:Fr.) Sacc. Pseudomonas sp. pathosystem was studied. The productivity of uninoculated plants increased following fertilization, but these increases were not observed in inoculated plants. Leaf damage in inoculated plants was enhanced by P and K fertilization, but shoot height was not affected. Autoallelopathic straw extract interacted with intraspecific competition to nearly double pathogenic inhibition of shoot growth at high levels of competition. The straw extract also interacted with N fertilizer to reduce shoot productivity. Shoot growth was inhibited at higher levels of intraspecific competition. Responses to nutrients, autoallelopathy, and competition may be useful in developing improved biological control strategies.Key words: Fusarium avenaceum, rhizobacteria, biocontrol, bioherbicide, fertility, soil ecology.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".