Practical Utilization of Botanical Extracts and Microbial in Controlling Dieback Disease of Tea [<i>Camellia sinensis</i> (L) O. Kuntze] Caused by <i>Fusarium solani</i> (Mart.) Sacc.
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 Northeast Indian tea plantations infection of Fusaruim solani , resulting dieback of tea plant is increasing which causes considerable crop loss during the recent times. In this investigation, native plant extracts, i.e. Acorus calamus L., Azadirachta indica A. Juss., Clerodendrum viscosum Vent., and Xanthium strumarium L. and microbials i.e. Bacillus subtilis and Trichoderma viride Pers. were utilized to evaluate the efficacy in controlling dieback disease of tea. These extracts inhibited the growth of Fusarium solani by 60-90%. In field application of C. viscosum and X. strumarium extracts reduced the disease up to 89.3% and 81% respectively. More than 70% disease reduction was observed when aqueous extracts of A. calamus and A. indica were used separately. Maximum disease reduction was achieved up to 86.9% due to application of T. viride . The results, thus, suggested the potential use of herbal extracts and microbial strains as an effective component of integrated disease management (IDM) schedule in the organic tea farming. The methods and rate of application are also discussed.
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 | 0.010 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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