(258) Differential Response of Colored Carrots to Cavity Spot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cavity spot of carrot, caused by several species of Pythium , is endemic in many carrot production areas of the world, including the Holland/Bradford Marsh region of Ontario, Canada. Field trials were conducted from 2002–04 to determine if carrots with different pigments varied in susceptibility to the disease. Carrots from the USDA breeding program at the University of Wisconsin were seeded in muck soil (pH 6.4, 60% organic matter) on 28, 30, and 27 May, harvested 22, 22, and 23 Oct., and assessed for disease on 5, 8, and 10 Dec. 2002, 2003, and 2004, respectively. The carrots were white (W 105-7), yellow (W 102-1), dark orange (W 101-23), red (W 104-3), and purple (W 106-3). Cultivar `Cellobunch' was included in 2003 and 2004. Twenty-five carrots of each of four replicate plots were assessed in 2002 and 2003, and 50 carrots were assessed in 2004, for disease incidence and severity [disease severity index (DSI), based on the size of the largest lesion per carrot]. Disease incidence was moderate in 2002 and 2003 (34%, 33%), and high in 2004 (60%). Consistent differences in susceptibility to cavity spot were identified over the three years of trials. The purple carrot had the lowest incidence (12%) and severity (7 DSI) of cavity spot, followed by the dark orange carrot (39%, 22 DSI) as compared to the susceptible yellow carrot (58%, 41 DSI). There was no difference in disease reaction between the yellow and white carrots. `Cellobunch' had the same reaction as the dark orange carrot. Studies are needed to determine whether the pigments themselves cause differences in the disease response.
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) | 0.002 | 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".