MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2916155535 · doi:10.1094/pdis-12-18-2199-re

Effect of Seed Treatment and Foliar Crop Protection Products on Sudden Death Syndrome and Yield of Soybean

2019· article· en· W2916155535 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Yuba R. Kandel, Carl A. Bradley, Martin I. Chilvers, Febina M. Mathew, Albert Tenuta, Damon L. Smith, Kiersten Wise, Daren S. Mueller

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Disease · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Pathogens and Fungal Diseases
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
FundersBayer CropScienceNorth Central Soybean Research ProgramGrain Farmers of Ontario
KeywordsCultivarFungicideBiologySowingAgronomyYield (engineering)Seed treatmentHorticultureCropStrobilurinAzoxystrobinGermination

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sudden death syndrome (SDS), caused by Fusarium virguliforme, is an important soilborne disease of soybean. Risk of SDS increases when cool and wet conditions occur soon after planting. Recently, multiple seed treatment and foliar products have been registered and advertised for management of SDS but not all have been tested side by side in the same field experiment at multiple field locations. In 2015 and 2016, seed treatment fungicides fluopyram and thiabendazole; seed treatment biochemical pesticides citric acid and saponins extract of Chenopodium quinoa; foliar fungicides fluoxastrobin + flutriafol; and an herbicide, lactofen, were evaluated in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, South Dakota, Wisconsin, and Ontario for SDS management. Treatments were tested on SDS-resistant and -susceptible cultivars at each location. Overall, fluopyram provided the highest level of control of root rot and foliar symptoms of SDS among all the treatments. Foliar application of lactofen reduced foliar symptoms in some cases but produced the lowest yield. In 2015, fluopyram reduced the foliar disease index (FDX) by over 50% in both resistant and susceptible cultivars and provided 8.9% yield benefit in susceptible cultivars and 3.5% yield benefit in resistant cultivars compared with the base seed treatment (control). In 2016, fluopyram reduced FDX in both cultivars by over 40% compared with the base seed treatment. For yield in 2016, treatment effect was not significant in the susceptible cultivar while, in the resistant cultivar, fluopyram provided 3.5% greater yield than the base seed treatment. In this study, planting resistant cultivars and using fluopyram seed treatment were the most effective tools for SDS management. However, plant resistance provided an overall better yield-advantage than using fluopyram seed treatment alone. Effective seed treatments can be an economically viable consideration to complement resistant cultivars for managing SDS.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.370
Threshold uncertainty score0.361

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations34
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant DiseaseSame topicPlant Pathogens and Fungal DiseasesFrench-language works237,207