MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3025763387 · doi:10.1139/cjm-2020-0085

It takes three to tango: the importance of microbes, host plant, and soil management to elucidate manipulation strategies for the plant microbiome

2020· review· en· W3025763387 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Microbiology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicNematode management and characterization studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrobiomeAgricultureFood securityAgroecosystemEcologyBiologyEcosystemHost (biology)Environmental resource managementAgroforestryProductivityPopulationEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The world’s population is expected to grow to almost 10 billion by 2050, placing unprecedented demands on agriculture and natural resources. The risk in food security is also aggravated by climate change and land degradation, which compromise agricultural productivity. In recent years, our understanding of the role of microbial communities on ecosystem functioning, including plant-associated microbes, has advanced considerably. Yet, translating this knowledge into practical agricultural technologies is challenged by the intrinsic complexity of agroecosystems. Here, we review current strategies for plant microbiome manipulation, classifying them into three main pillars: (i) introducing and engineering microbiomes, (ii) breeding and engineering the host plant, and (iii) selecting agricultural practices that enhance resident soil and plant-associated microbial communities. In each of these areas, we analyze current trends in research, as well as research priorities and future perspectives.

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.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.593
Threshold uncertainty score0.949

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.189 · 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