The history, etiology, and management of ginseng replant disease: a Canadian perspective in review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ginseng replant disease (GRD) has had a major impact on the American ginseng (Panax quinquefolius L.) industry in Canada and is a threat to its survival. With only 150 yr of domestic ginseng cultivation, GRD and its effect on the industry in North America is well documented compared with replant diseases in other crops. However, minimal research has been published on the etiology and management of GRD. Research and observations of replant diseases of the major commercial Panax species worldwide are presented to propose mechanisms of GRD and potential management options. The available evidence suggests the specific involvement of the soil-borne fungus Ilyonectria mors-panacis (A.A. Hildebr.) A. Cabral & Crous combined with an unknown host-related factor as the ultimate cause of GRD, since other proposed mechanisms seem unlikely to have occurred in the diversity of regions where GRD is reported. Other abiotic and biotic factors influencing the severity of the disease are also likely to be involved. Given the lack of clarity in the scientific literature between problems associated with continuous cultivation of ginseng and true replant disease, a definition of GRD is proposed. The development of an effective and economical management regime will require a better understanding of the mechanisms of GRD. Potential management options include reducing ginseng debris after harvest of the first crop, preplant testing to identify low-risk sites for replanting, fumigation, alternative disinfestation techniques, and fungicides (including biofungicides) targeting I. mors-panacis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".