Evaluating seedbank stimulants for wild oat and volunteer cereal management on the Canadian Prairies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wild oat is a widespread threat to annual crop production on the Canadian Prairies. Infestations are difficult to manage due to a persistent seedbank, complex dormancy, a long emergence window, herbicide resistance, and seed shatter corresponding to crop harvest timings. The study objective was to evaluate the efficacy of potassium nitrate (KNO3) and pyroligneous acid for promoting germination and emergence of wild oat and volunteer wheat, barley, and oat. A total of 24 repeated experiments were conducted using freshly produced seeds to ensure adequate endodormancy. Wheat and barley demonstrated no endodormancy following seed formation and rapidly emerged with moisture. All species imbibed but did not germinate in Petri dishes within pyroligneous acid solutions of 5%–100%. Dormancy release was observed within 0.1% and 1% pyroligneous acid solutions. KNO3 did not stimulate germination or emergence for any species and was inhibitory at 125 kg N ha−1. Pyroligneous acid increased wild oat emergence with 50% and 100% solutions applied at 200 L ha−1 in the first study and with 10% solutions in the second study. Emergence inhibition was noted for oat, barley, and wheat with pyroligneous acid applications. This research further confirms that pyroligneous acid may stimulate wild oat emergence and confirms activity on freshly matured seed.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".