Sowing Density and Cultivar Effects on Pith Expression in Solid‐Stemmed Durum Wheat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The wheat stem sawfly (WSS) ( Cephus cinctus ; Hymenoptera: Cephidae ) is a destructive insect pest of spring, winter ( Triticum aestivum L.), and durum wheat ( Triticum turgidum L. var. durum ) in North America. Sawfly larvae hatch from eggs deposited inside the stem, and their subsequent feeding damages vascular tissue, reducing photosynthetic capacity and grain yields. Growing solid‐stemmed wheat cultivars that develop pith in the culm lumen is the most effective method to minimize yield losses. Recent work has focused on optimizing sowing densities to achieve maximum levels of pith expression and grain yields in common wheat; however, little research has been conducted on durum wheat. We investigated the influence of four sowing densities (150, 250, 350, 450 seeds m −2 ) on pith expression in two newly released solid‐stemmed durum cultivars, CDC Fortitude and AAC Raymore, and compared them to the solid‐stemmed common wheat cultivar, Lillian. CDC Fortitude and AAC Raymore displayed consistently high levels of pith expression across environments and sowing densities, in contrast to Lillian, which produced only slightly more pith than the hollow‐stemmed durum check cultivar, Strongfield. A yield drag often associated with high pith expression was not evident as CDC Fortitude and AAC Raymore produced grain yield similar to Strongfield. When averaged over cultivars, increasing sowing density had a positive effect on grain yield, but was negatively associated with stem solidness. Our findings suggest that, unlike with CWRS solid‐stemmed cultivars, altering sowing density is not required to achieve effective sawfly resistance with CDC Fortitude and AAC Raymore.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".