Antifungal Effects of Paraquat and Glyphosate on Rhizoctonia solani (Kühn) in Potato in vitro Condition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Potato is one of the main crops worldwide. It this research, antifungal activity in vitro of paraquat and glyphosate were evaluated for Rhizoctonia solani control. R. solani was identified from potato tubers collected out from at open markets in Saltillo, Coahuila, Mexico. Two types of herbicides were applied: paraquat and glyphosate, at four different dosage treatments of: 10, 100, 1 000 and 10 000 μL. One 5 mm diameter PDA disc with R. solani mycelium was placed at the center of the Petri dish, with a radial registry fungal every 24 h for 192 h. Pathogen was identified by morphological criteria and the data was evaluated randomly with a factorial arrangement, on which, herbicides represented factor A and dosage treatments were represented by factor B. Thus experimental design had two levels for factor A and five levels for factor B with six replications. The results were analyzed by the SAS version 9.1 statistical program, the mean separation with the Tukey test (p=0.05). Glyphosate achieved inhibition of R. solani by 35.5882% and paraquat up to 80.0399%. Results reveal the importance of the need for more studies of these herbicides as fungicides. High concentrations of paraquat (10 000 μL) inhibits R. solani, and glyphosate does not affect R. solani mycelium development at low dosages (10 and 100 μL) and inhibits it at higher doses (10 000 μL).
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".