Fungicide Mitigates Fusarium Head Blight in Durum Wheat When Applied as Late as the End of Flowering in Western Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fusarium head blight (FHB) is one of the most important diseases of durum, spring, and winter wheat in Canada. Growers rely on an integrated strategy to manage the disease, including fungicide application at the current recommendation of early to 50% anthesis (BBCH61–65). This study evaluated the effect of fungicide application timing and seeding rates of durum wheat on FHB. Field trials were carried out from 2016 to 2018 at three locations in Saskatchewan. Eight treatments of the metconazole fungicide Caramba were applied to durum seeded at 75 and 400 seeds m−2. The fungicide treatments consisted of a nontreated check, a treated check, and applications at BBCH59, BBCH61, BBCH65, BBCH69, and BBCH73 and a dual application treatment (BBCH61 followed by BBCH73). FHB index, proportion of Fusarium-damaged kernels (%FDK), deoxynivalenol (DON), grain protein content (GPC, %), and yield were evaluated. Seeding rates influenced all parameters. The high seeding rate had a higher yield and FHB index but lower DON and GPC than did the lower seeding rate. All fungicide treatments resulted in lower FHB index, DON, and %FDK than the nontreated check. Under FHB conducive conditions, all anthesis applications from BBCH61 to BBCH69 had a similar effect on FHB index, %FDK, DON, and yield, whereas in years with low disease severity, the application at BBCH65 had lower FHB index, %FDK, and DON relative to other single applications. The dual application (BBCH61 + 73) treatment resulted in similar FHB index levels, %FDK, and DON content as the BBCH65 application at all site years. Our results indicate that the window of fungicide application can be extended to the end of flowering when FHB risk is high.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".