MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3084411497 · doi:10.5539/jas.v12n10p105

Rice Blast Prevalence in Smallholder Rice Farmlands in Uganda

2020· article· en· W3084411497 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Robert Amayo, Teddy Oparok, Jimmy Lamo, D. Silué, Richard Edema, G. Tusiime

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlast diseaseIncidence (geometry)AgricultureGeographyUpland riceVeterinary medicineAgronomyBiologyOryza sativaAgroforestryEcologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rice blast disease remains the most important contributor to low and stagnated rice yields in Uganda. However, the role of the smallholder farming system in shaping the prevalence of the disease in the country is not known. In 2015B and 2016A, we surveyed smallholder rice farmlands in 27 districts of Uganda and recorded blast incidence, severity, and symptoms expression. Infected rice samples taken from the infected plants were sub-cultured on PDA media to confirm the pathogen and obtain isolates for the establishment of a core collection for breeding work. Rice blast prevalence in the districts varied from 50-100% and the national average stood at 72.61%, higher than that recorded five years ago. Mean incidence and severity varied significantly (< 0.001) with the highest incidence (96.8%) recorded in Luwero district and the least (21.3%) was recorded in the Amuru district. However, the eastern region recorded the highest average incidence (74.5%) followed by the central, the northern, and Mid-western regions. In the rice ecologies, the highest blast incidence was recorded in the rain-fed lowland rice (72.18%) followed by irrigated lowland (59.53%) and rain-fed upland rice (47.27%). This is the first report on the prevalence of blast in smallholder rice farmlands in Uganda and showed a higher prevalence of the disease.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicPlant Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207