Cyprosulfamide Safens Isoxaflutole in Sweet Corn (Zea mays L.)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is little published information on the sensitivity of sweet corn to the PRE and POST application of isoxaflutole + cyprosulfamide. Four field trials were conducted during 2010 and 2011 in Ontario, Canada, to determine the sensitivity of ‘Merit’, ‘GH 4927’, ‘BSS 5362’, and ‘GG 741’ sweet corn hybrids to the PRE and POST application of isoxaflutole alone or in combination with cyprosulfamide. Isoxaflutole applied PRE or POST at 105 and 210 g a.i./ha caused as much as 12% visual injury, 18% reduction in height. and 24% reduction in marketable yield of some sweet corn hybrids evaluated. Isoxaflutole + cyprosulfamide applied PRE or POST at 105 and 210 g·ha −1 caused up to 7% initial injury in some sweet corn hybrids but the injury was transient with no effect on sweet corn height, cob size, and yield. Isoxaflutole applied POST was more injurious to sweet corn than when applied PRE; however, there was no differences in sweet corn injury between the PRE and POST applications of isoxaflutole + cyprosulfamide. Based on these results, there is potential for use of isoxaflutole + cyprosulfamide applied at 105 g a.i./ha in ‘Merit’, ‘GH 4927’, ‘BSS 5362’, and ‘GG 741’ sweet corn hybrids.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".