Nitrogen and Fungicide Applications for the Management of Fungal Blights of Carrot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alternaria leaf blight (ALB) caused by Alternaria dauci (Kühn) Groves and Skolko and Cercospora leaf spot (CLS) caused by Cercospora carotae (Pass.) Solheim are the major foliar diseases of carrot in Ontario, Canada. In addition to reducing photosynthetic area, the diseases can weaken carrot tops, which can break during mechanical harvesting, reducing harvested yields. Fungicides are commonly used to manage the disease, but there is potential to reduce fungicide applications through nitrogen (N) management. Trials were conducted on mineral soils from 2006 to 2008 to determine the importance of applied N and fungicide applications to control fungal leaf blights of carrot. Three rates of N (0, 110, and 220 kg·ha −1 ) and 0, 3, or 5 (2006 and 2007) or 6 (2008) fungicide applications were applied. Leaf blight severity was assessed biweekly throughout the season and at harvest. The severity of both ALB and CLS and combined disease severity index at harvest decreased with increasing N and fungicide application. In some cases, disease severity of carrots treated with high N and no fungicides was equivalent to carrots treated with no N and five fungicide sprays. Total and marketable yield increased with increasing number of fungicide sprays in 2006 and 2007, but N application did not affect yield. Results suggest that severity of ALB and CLS can be minimized through a combination of N and fungicide applications, but rates of N higher than 110 kg·ha −1 may reduce marketable yield through a decrease in stand and an increase in oversized roots.
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 | 0.001 | 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".