MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2753542768 · doi:10.1094/pdis-04-17-0504-re

Weather-Based Models for Assessing the Risk of <i>Sclerotinia sclerotiorum</i> Apothecial Presence in Soybean (<i>Glycine max</i>) Fields

2017· article· en· W2753542768 on OpenAlexaff
Jaime F. Willbur, Mamadou L. Fall, Christopher Bloomingdale, Adam M. Byrne, Scott A Chapman, Scott A. Isard, Roger D. Magarey, Megan McCaghey, Brian Mueller, Joseph M. Russo, Jay W. Schlegel, Martin I. Chilvers, Daren S. Mueller, Mehdi Kabbage, Damon L. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Disease · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant pathogens and resistance mechanisms
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersNational Institute of Food and AgricultureWisconsin Soybean Marketing BoardUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonUnited Soybean BoardNorth Central Soybean Research ProgramU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsSclerotinia sclerotiorumSclerotiniaHorticultureLeaf wetnessBiologyAscocarpRelative humidityDewCropGrowing seasonAgronomyMathematicsBotanyMeteorologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sclerotinia stem rot (SSR) epidemics in soybean, caused by Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, are currently responsible for annual yield reductions in the United States of up to 1 million metric tons. In-season disease management is largely dependent on chemical control but its efficiency and cost-effectiveness depends on both the chemistry used and the risk of apothecia formation, germination, and further dispersal of ascospores during susceptible soybean growth stages. Hence, accurate prediction of the S. sclerotiorum apothecial risk during the soybean flowering period could enable farmers to improve in-season SSR management. From 2014 to 2016, apothecial presence or absence was monitored in three irrigated (n = 1,505 plot-level observations) and six nonirrigated (n = 2,361 plot-level observations) field trials located in Iowa (n = 156), Michigan (n = 1,400), and Wisconsin (n = 2,310), for a total of 3,866 plot-level observations. Hourly air temperature, relative humidity, dew point, wind speed, leaf wetness, and rainfall were also monitored continuously, throughout the season, at each location using high-resolution gridded weather data. Logistic regression models were developed for irrigated and nonirrigated conditions using apothecial presence as a binary response variable. Agronomic variables (row width) and weather-related variables (defined as 30-day moving averages, prior to apothecial presence) were tested for their predictive ability. In irrigated soybean fields, apothecial presence was best explained by row width (r = -0.41, P < 0.0001), 30-day moving averages of daily maximum air temperature (r = 0.27, P < 0.0001), and daily maximum relative humidity (r = 0.16, P < 0.05). In nonirrigated fields, apothecial presence was best explained by using moving averages of daily maximum air temperature (r = -0.30, P < 0.0001) and wind speed (r = -0.27, P < 0.0001). These models correctly predicted (overall accuracy of 67 to 70%) apothecial presence during the soybean flowering period for four independent datasets (n = 1,102 plot-level observations or 30 daily mean observations).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.624
Threshold uncertainty score0.419

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations47
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant DiseaseSame topicPlant pathogens and resistance mechanismsFrench-language works237,207