MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412545331 · doi:10.1080/03235408.2025.2530793

Deciphering inter-relationship between disease incidence and disease severity and prediction of yield loss in lentil-stemphylium pathosystem

2025· article· en· W4412545331 on OpenAlexaff
Shishir Rizal, Poly Saha

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Phytopathology and Plant Protection · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Pathogens and Resistance
Canadian institutionsExtendicare (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPathosystemBiologyDiseaseIncidence (geometry)Yield (engineering)GeneticsInternal medicineMedicineHost (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Exploring the relationship between disease incidence (DI) and disease severity (DS) of Stemphylium blight (SB) in lentil, the study aimed to assess the feasibility of using DI as a predictive measure for DS, reducing workload of disease quantification while ensuring accuracy. Quantifying disease is a critical task in field surveys, resistance breeding programs, and timely disease management strategies. Data on DI and DS of SB were collected from 35 different genotypes of lentil over three consecutive years, enabling the development of mathematical model which was validated using the widely cultivated lentil variety ‘Moitree’ (WBL 77) grown in West Bengal. The quadratic regression model, derived from independent datasets on DI and DS of genotypes, demonstrated a highly satisfactory fit, expressed as Y = −16.17 + 1.849X − 0.008X2; R2 = 0.95. This model showcased remarkable consistency across multiple growing seasons under varying disease pressures, confirming its reproducibility for other lentil varieties too. Critical point of DS (with cut-off value = 0.395) was also determined to take up timely crop protection measures. Yield loss estimations revealed for every unit increase in DS, an estimated 13.34 kg/ha yield loss could be expected, aligning well with observed field data.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.170

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.190 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Phytopathology and Plant ProtectionSame topicPlant Pathogens and ResistanceFrench-language works237,207