Resistance to Dicarboximide Fungicides in a Canadian Population of <i>Microdochium nivale</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Isolates of Microdochium nivale suspected of resistance to iprodione [3‐(3,5‐Dichlorophenyl)‐ N ‐isopropyl‐2,4‐dioxoimidazolidine‐1‐carboxamide] were collected from a golf course in Victoria, British Columbia (BC), Canada, in Fall 2015. The 9 BC isolates and 12 other reference isolates from around the world were tested with four concentrations of iprodione: 0, 1, 10, and 100 μg mL −1 . The BC isolates showed a half maximal effective concentration (EC 50 ) range of 14.2 to 40.8 μg mL −1 with a mean of 24.2 μg mL −1 , while the non‐BC isolates showed an EC 50 range of 1.2 to 4.3 μg mL −1 with a mean of 1.9 μg mL −1 . The yielded resistance factor (EC 50 resistant/EC 50 sensitive) of 12.7 implies that these BC isolates have been selected for reduced sensitivity to iprodione. This level of resistance may be responsible for the reduced efficacy, particularly the observed reduced interval of control, but further research is needed to assess this. A test of >100 isolates of M. nivale from a worldwide collection using a discriminatory concentration of 10 μg mL −1 of iprodione showed four isolates with similar levels of reduced sensitivity, but these were the only isolates from their respective populations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".