<i>Pyricularia setariae</i>: a potential bioherbicide agent for control of green foxtail (<i>Setaria viridis</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One hundred and thirty-three fungal isolates, pathogenic to green foxtail, were evaluated for weed control potential under controlled conditions. To determine weed control efficacy, these pathogens were applied as spore or mycelial suspensions at approximately 105propagules ml−1to green foxtail at the three-leaf stage. One week after inoculation, most isolates caused only minor injury to the plants, but 15 isolates caused 50 to 100% disease. Among the most efficacious isolates, only those ofPyricularia setariaeexhibited strong host specificity to the target weed, revealing no significant pathogenicity on 28 other plant species tested, including many important crops such as wheat, barley, and oat. On green foxtail leaves, conidia of this fungus germinated readily at 14, 20, and 26 C, but the process of germination and appressorial formation was more rapid at the higher temperatures. The fungus applied at the concentration of 105spores ml−1reduced weed fresh weight by 34% 7 d after the treatment when compared with controls, whereas a concentration of 107spores ml−1reduced fresh weight by 87%. This efficacy was comparable with that of the herbicide sethoxydim. When applied to the weed at the one- to four-leaf stages, the fungus reduced green foxtail fresh weight by more than 80%. Efficacy was slightly lower on plants at the five-leaf stage or older. On the green foxtail biotype resistant to the herbicide sethoxydim,P. setariaecaused 80% fresh weight reduction compared with untreated controls, as opposed to 17% achieved with the herbicide. At 20 C, the fungus required a minimum of 6-h dew period to initiate infection, but a 10-h dew period was needed to cause severe damage to green foxtail.
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".