Wheat Density Alters but Does Not Repress the Expression of a Fluroxypyr-Resistant Kochia (Bassia scoparia) Phenotype
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dose-response experiments for confirmation of herbicide-resistant weeds are almost always conducted using weed monocultures, thereby ignoring the interaction of interspecific plant interference with herbicide efficacy. Controlled-environment dose-response bioassays were conducted using three kochia [Bassia scoparia (L.) A.J. Scott] populations with four spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) densities (0, 200, 400, and 600 plants m−2) to determine how increasing intensity of interspecific plant interference altered the fluroxypyr dose-response relationship of resistant and susceptible kochia. The resistant population exhibited 10.8-, 15.0-, 7.0-, and 8.1-fold resistance to fluroxypyr in the absence of crop interference based on plant survival, biomass fresh weight, and visible control at two and four weeks after application, respectively. Increased wheat densities suppressed fluroxypyr-resistant kochia the greatest, resulting in a linear reduction in the fluroxypyr rate causing 50% plant mortality (LD50) and visible control (ED50) for the resistant but not the susceptible populations. This reduced the expression of fluroxypyr resistance based on kochia plant survival (from 10.8- to 4.3-fold resistance) and visible control (from 8.1- to 4.6-fold resistance) as wheat density increased from 0 to 600 plants m−2. Therefore, enhanced interspecific plant interference caused by increased wheat densities altered but did not repress the expression of fluroxypyr resistance in kochia.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".