MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3049171228 · doi:10.5539/jas.v12n9p227

Relationship Between Efficacy of Fusarium Head Blight Chemical Control and Deoxynivalenol Contamination on Wheat Kernels

2020· article· en· W3049171228 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Erlei Melo Reis, Mateus Zanatta, Andrea Camargo Reis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycotoxins in Agriculture and Food
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFusariumMancozebFungicideBiologyAgronomyHorticultureCultivarGrowing seasonVomitoxinZearalenone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In field experiment carried out in the 2018 growing season we tried to show the inverse relation between the efficacy of fusarium head blight (FHB) chemical control and the deoxynivalenol (DON) concentration in harvested kernels. The wheat cultivar Tbio Mestre was established under no-till in soybean residues and in winter rotation with black oats. The leaf rust and yellow spot control was performed during the vegetative stage by spraying the whole experimental area with three applications of epoxiconazole + krezoxim methyl (0.7 L/ha). The most potent fungicides metconazole + pyraclostrobin (1.0 L/ha) + mancozeb (2.0 kg/ha), prothioconazole + trifloxystrobin (0.4 L/ha) and pydiflumetofen (1.0 L/ha) were compared to control FHB. Disease incidence in spikes, incidence in spikelets, or spikes severity, grain weight and yield were evaluated. DON concentration was. Using the most efficient technology available for FHB control, the hypothesis of the inverse relationship between disease intensity occurring naturally in spikes, and deoxinivalenol (DON) concentration in the harvested grains was confirmed. DON concentration in unsprayed grains was 3,675 and in the best treatments 821 to 1,067 ppb.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural Science→Same topicMycotoxins in Agriculture and Food→French-language works237,207→