The efficacy of an experimental biofumigant on Plasmodiophora brassicae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clubroot, Plasmodiophora brassicae, is a soilborne pathogen that causes clubs to form on the roots of brassica crops. Management is difficult due to the longevity of resting spores, the overwintering structure, in the soil. The efficacy of an experimental biofumigant was tested in both field and controlled environment studies. The field trial was conducted on high organic matter (muck) soil comparing 150 L/ha of biofumigant applied with a watering can to a control. In repeated controlled environment studies, 150 L/ha was applied to mineral and muck soils, in sealed plastic bags before transferring soil into pots. Soil samples were taken pre-and post-treatment application to determine the effect on resting spore number. All trials were seeded with clubroot susceptible canola and assessed for clubroot development six or seven weeks after seeding using a 0-3 scale to calculate disease severity index. In the field trial, there was no effect on clubroot severity. There was a decrease in resting spore concentrations, however it was not significant enough to decrease disease development. In the first repetition of the controlled environment study there was low severity and incidence in both soil types. The biofumigant caused a decrease in severity, however there was no interaction with soil type. In the repetition there was no clubroot development in mineral soil but high disease severity in muck soil. There was no effect of the biofumigant on disease severity. The experimental biofumigant may be more efficacious when there is lower disease pressure, however, more research is required.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".