MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210502124 · doi:10.3389/fmolb.2021.777042

A Meta-Analysis to Determine the State of Biological Control of Aphanomyces Root Rot

2022· review· en· W4210502124 on OpenAlexafffund
Ashebir T. Godebo, Naomi Marie J. Wee, Christopher K. Yost, F.L. Walley, James J. Germida

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Molecular Biosciences · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant-Microbe Interactions and Immunity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ReginaUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistry of Agriculture - Saskatchewan
KeywordsBiological pest controlBiologyRoot rotBiotechnologyAgronomyHorticulture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing incidence and prevalence of the pathogen Aphanomyces euteiches in various pulse-growing regions worldwide necessitates the development of effective management strategies, including biological control agents. Numerous labs have undertaken research examining biological control methods to evaluate aphanomyces root rot suppression in multistep processes that include isolation of inhibitory organisms, lab assays, growth chamber assays, and field trials. Given the emergence of various biocontrol agents and the need to mitigate aphanomyces yield losses, we have undertaken a meta-analysis approach to analyze the effectiveness of biocontrol agents in relation to application method, biocontrol agent richness, biocontrol agent type, the type of study, and reporting system-oriented moderator variables. An effect size, calculated as a natural log response ratio, resulted in a summary weighted mean of −0.411, suggesting the overall effectiveness of biocontrol agents (p < .001). Aphanomyces root rot suppression using biological treatments showed significant heterogeneity for all moderator variables, confirming that the studies do not share a common effect size and the use of a random effect model was appropriate. Across studies, meta-analyses revealed that soil amendments, biocontrol agent application as a seed coating and suspension, bacterial and fungal biocontrol agents, mixed applications, growth chamber and field studies, and qualitative and quantitative reporting systems were all associated with significantly positive outcomes for aphanomyces root rot suppression. Our findings suggest that there is potential promise for biological control of aphanomyces root rot, and more field trials need to be conducted to demonstrate the efficacy level observed under growth chamber conditions. Moreover, we identified a lack of detailed understanding of the mechanism(s) of biological control of aphanomyces root rot as a research priority.

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)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.055
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.176

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.055
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.065
Bibliometrics0.0080.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Molecular BiosciencesSame topicPlant-Microbe Interactions and ImmunityFrench-language works237,207