Exploring Genotype × Environment × Management synergies to manage fusarium head blight in wheat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fusarium head blight (FHB) is a devastating disease of wheat because of direct detrimental effects on grain yield, quality, and marketability and production of mycotoxins (e.g. deoxynivalenol or DON). Conditions most favourable for the development of FHB are high humidity, frequent rainfall and relatively warm night temperatures at heading, especially in regions where host crop residues are present. These risk factors have resulted in a significant westward expansion of FHB in the Canadian prairies, while favouring continued development in Ontario, Quebec and the Maritimes. Since cultivar selection is a key integrated pest management (IPM) strategy, a systems approach that couples genetic resistance with management tactics is required. Thus, successful FHB mitigation is an ideal case study in Genotype (G) × Environment (E) × Management (M) interactions where more resistant cultivars (G) are grown in at-risk regions (E), and unique approaches to management (M) for sustainable wheat production are required. Since no cultivar is completely resistant to FHB, greater attention to management strategies is needed. The over-arching principle for FHB management is the manipulation of agronomic factors that facilitate completion of critical crop developmental phases, such as flowering, while doing so rapidly and uniformly, as a consequence of early sowing and increased seeding rates. These strategies and the adoption of practices involving proper fungicide selection, and optimal application timings and methods will lead to improved yield stability and quality in high-risk environments. This paper explores the potential synergies that exist for FHB mitigation when appropriate genetics are combined with an array of key agronomic strategies.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".