Time of wild oat (<i>Avena fatua</i>) panicle clipping influences seed viability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Wild oat ( Avena fatua L.) is one of the most problematic weed species in western Canada due to widespread populations, herbicide resistance, and seed dormancy. In wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), and especially in shorter crops such as lentil ( Lens culinaris Medik.), A. fatua seed panicles elongate above the crop canopy, which can facilitate physical cutting of the panicles (clipping) to reduce viable seed return to the seedbank. However, the viability of A. fatua seed at the time of panicle elongation is not known. The objective of this study was to determine the viability of A. fatua seed at successive time intervals after elongation above a wheat or lentil crop canopy. A 2-yr panicle clipping and removal study in wheat and lentil was conducted in Lacombe, AB, and Saskatoon, SK, in 2015 and 2016 to determine the onset of viability in A. fatua seeds at successive clipping intervals. Manual panicle clipping of A. fatua panicles above each crop canopy began when the majority of panicles were visible above respective crop canopies and continued weekly until seed shed began. At the initiation of panicle clipping, A. fatua seed viability was between 0% and 10%. By the last clipping treatment (approximately 6 to 7 wk after elongation), 95% of the A. fatua seeds were viable. Seed moisture and awn angle were not good predictors of A. fatua viability, and therefore were unlikely to provide effective tools to estimate appropriate timing for implementation of A. fatua clipping as a management technique. Based on A. fatua seed viability, earlier clipping of A. fatua is likely to be more effective in terms of population management and easier to implement in shorter crops such as lentil. Investigations into long-term effects of clipping on A. fatua populations are needed to evaluate the efficacy of this management strategy on A. fatua .
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".