Meta-Analytic and Economic Approaches for Evaluation of Pesticide Impact on Sclerotinia Stem Rot Control and Soybean Yield in the North Central United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As complete host resistance in soybean has not been achieved, Sclerotinia stem rot (SSR) caused by Sclerotinia sclerotiorum continues to be of major economic concern for farmers. Thus, chemical control remains a prevalent disease management strategy. Pesticide evaluations were conducted in Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, and Wisconsin from 2009 to 2016, for a total of 25 site-years (n = 2,057 plot-level data points). These studies were used in network meta-analyses to evaluate the impact of 10 popular pesticide active ingredients, and seven common application timings on SSR control and yield benefit, compared with not treating with a pesticide. Boscalid and picoxystrobin frequently offered the best reductions in disease severity and best yield benefit (P < 0.0001). Pesticide applications (one- or two-spray programs) made during the bloom period provided significant reductions in disease severity index (DIX) (P < 0.0001) and led to significant yield benefits (P = 0.0009). Data from these studies were also used in nonlinear regression analyses to determine the effect of DIX on soybean yield. A three-parameter logistic model was found to best describe soybean yield loss (pseudo-R2 = 0.309). In modern soybean cultivars, yield loss due to SSR does not occur until 20 to 25% DIX, and considerable yield loss (−697 kg ha−1 or −10 bu acre−1) is observed at 68% DIX. Further analyses identified several pesticides and programs that resulted in greater than 60% probability for return on investment under high disease levels.
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 | 0.066 | 0.110 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.043 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".