MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405087284 · doi:10.1002/its2.173

A practical field assay to detect demethylation inhibitor fungicide resistance in <i>Clarireedia jacksonii</i>

2024· article· en· W4405087284 on OpenAlexaffabout
Edward McNab, Tom Hsiang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Turfgrass Society research journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicTurfgrass Adaptation and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPropiconazoleFungicideBiologyDemethylationInoculationHorticultureBiotechnologyVeterinary medicineMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Dollar spot, caused by Clarireedia jacksonii , is one of the most common turfgrass diseases, and requires abundant fungicide use for control. Currently, identification resistance to demethylation‐inhibitor fungicides requires lab facilities for isolation and sensitivity assessment. We have developed a selective medium containing 0.5 µg/mL propiconazole, antibiotics, and tartaric acid capable of identifying propiconazole‐resistant isolates from field samples. Tests with leaves from inoculated turfgrass plots showed that from ∼2000 samples, resistant or sensitive isolates could be identified accurately 96% of the time. Field tests by both end users (turf managers) and researchers were conducted at 20 locations across Southern Ontario involving over 200 samples. Clarireedia jacksonii was found at 13 of the sampled locations on non‐fungicidal media, and at 12 of these locations, propiconazole‐resistant isolates were found using amended media. The proportion of resistant isolates found ranged from 0% to 100% at the locations. This field assay can be developed into a field kit for turf managers, and this proof of concept will assist in the development of similar assays for other pathogens and on other crops.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.836
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Turfgrass Society research journalSame topicTurfgrass Adaptation and ManagementFrench-language works237,207