Assessing the impact of plant growth regulators on anther retention and Fusarium head blight in spring wheat (<i>Triticum aestivum</i> L.) infected by <i>Fusarium graminearum</i> in field conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fusarium head blight (FHB) resistance in wheat is often associated with undesirable agronomic traits such as tall plant height and a propensity for lodging. Plant height in wheat is genetically controlled by some semi-dwarfing alleles that alter the plant's sensitivity to gibberellins (GAs). The presence of semi-dwarfing alleles increases the frequency of anther retention, which may contribute to FHB susceptibility by providing an initiation site for infection. The application of plant growth regulators (PGRs) may enable farmers to grow the most resistant cultivars while controlling plant height to minimize lodging risk. In this study, five spring wheat cultivars that differed in level of FHB resistance, height, and semi-dwarfing alleles were tested to determine the effect of PGRs, specifically Manipulator™ and Ethrel™, on plant height, anther retention, and FHB resistance level and the interactions between them in Winnipeg and Carman, Manitoba in 2019 and 2020. Combined field results showed that Ethrel™ significantly reduced plant height. Both PGRs did not affect the anther retention or FHB resistance levels of the tested cultivars under dry conditions. There were significant interactions between variables, but they were relatively small compared to the main treatment and cultivars. Based on the results of this study, producers could benefit from the higher levels of FHB resistance often associated with tall cultivars and use PGRs to manage plant height and lodging without increased risk of FHB.
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) | 0.000 | 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".