Secondary seed dormancy prolongs persistence of volunteer canola in western Canada
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In western Canada, little is known about the seedbank ecology of volunteer canola. Therefore, integrated recommendations for the management of this weed are limited. In this study, we investigated the seedbank persistence and seedling recruitment of two spring canola genotype groups with different secondary seed dormancy potentials under contrasting tillage systems. The study was conducted at two locations with different soils in the Mixed Moist Grassland ecoregion of Saskatchewan. A single cohort seedbank was established in 1999 and was followed for 3 yr in successive wheat crops. In a separate laboratory study, the six canola genotypes examined were classified as those with high and those with medium potentials for the development of secondary seed dormancy (HD and MD, respectively). After one, two, and three winters, maximum persistence of 44, 1.4, and 0.2% of the original seedbank was observed among the treatments, respectively. In 2001, HD canola genotypes tended to exhibit 6- to 12-fold greater persistence than MD canola genotypes, indicating lower seedbank mortality in HD canola. Seedling recruitment of HD canola also was higher than MD canola when differences were observed between these genotype groups. Therefore, long-term seedbank persistence of canola can be reduced by growing genotypes with low inherent potential for the development of secondary seed dormancy. The proportion of persisting seeds tended to be higher under conventional tillage than under zero tillage because of lower seedbank mortality, but no clear distinction in seedbank persistence in terms of absolute time could be made between these two tillage systems. Volunteer canola seedling recruitment followed the pattern of a typical summer-annual weed, where seedling emergence was observed only during May and June.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it