MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396906108 · doi:10.1139/cjps-2024-0043

Effects of reduced pesticide use on winter wheat production in the Canadian Prairies

2024· article· en· W4396906108 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Zhijie Wang, Maya Subedi, Ramona M. Mohr, Charles M. Geddes, Reem Aboukhaddour, Christian J. Willenborg, Breanne D. Tidemann, Hiroshi Kubota, Brian L. Beres

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWeed Control and Herbicide Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaWestern Grains Research Foundation
KeywordsPesticideEnvironmental scienceProduction (economics)Winter wheatAgronomyPesticide applicationBiologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) is a highly competitive crop with the potential to enhance on-farm revenue and reduce reliance on crop protection inputs. The adoption of winter wheat in the Canadian Prairies has varied significantly over recent decades; however, improved weed and disease management practices could facilitate stability of hectares cultivated. To assess current and alternative pesticide management practices, we conducted a study across 15 site-years at four locations over 4 years (2018–2022). Experimental treatments included pre-plant weed management (glyphosate vs. glyphosate mixed with pyroxasulfone + carfentrazone-ethyl), in-crop weed management (no in-crop herbicide vs. fall-applied 2,4-D vs. fall-applied 2,4-D + spring-applied site-year-specific herbicides), and in-crop fungicide management (no in-crop fungicide vs. one prothioconazole + tebuconazole application at Zadoks Growth Stage (ZGS) 60 vs. two prothioconazole + tebuconazole applications at ZGS32 and ZGS60). Pre-plant glyphosate alone and glyphosate tank-mixed with pyroxasulfone + carfentrazone-ethyl exhibited comparable effects on grain yield, quality parameters, and agronomic characteristics. In-crop weed management had no significant influence on these factors compared to the no in-crop herbicide control, suggesting that in-crop herbicide applications are unnecessary due to the high competitiveness of winter wheat against weeds. However, disease mitigation was prudent as single and double application of fungicide increased grain yield while maintaining grain protein concentration levels. A high-yielding, stable system for optimal grain yield typically required pre-plant weed management coupled with two fungicide applications. These observations confirm herbicide inputs can be reduced in a winter wheat cropping system, but disease pressure requires careful cultivar selection with respect to disease resistance as multiple applications of fungicides were needed to optimize grain yield.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicWeed Control and Herbicide ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207