Overwinter survival and alternative crop hosts of fungi and oomycetes present in field pea residue on the Canadian prairies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Root rot is an important disease of field pea (Pisum sativum L.) on the Canadian Prairies. The composition and alternative crop hosts of fungal and oomycete communities colonizing pea residues from Alberta and Manitoba were studied in field trials over two years. Standing pea residues were sampled from diseased and asymptomatic patches of 17 commercial fields in 2013 and 2014 after harvest and again in early spring the following year prior to seeding. The pea residue was ground to a powder and mixed with sterile Cornell potting mix. Plants of pea, wheat, and canola were grown in this mixture under controlled conditions. The root rot severity on each plant was evaluated and sections from diseased roots were plated on agar medium. Fungal and oomycete communities isolated from symptomatic roots were identified based on culture morphology and PCR analysis. About 3000 fungal isolates, belonging to some 50 species, were identified. Canola was less susceptible to infection than pea or wheat. Fusarium avenaceum (Fr.) Sacc. was the most abundant species infecting the three hosts; F. culmorum (Wm.G.Sm.) Sacc. and Bipolaris sorokiana (Sacc.) Shoemaker were more frequently isolated from wheat, and F. solani (Mart.) Sacc., F. oxysporum Schlecht. and Aphanomyces euteiches Drechsler were more frequently isolated from pea. Pathogen communities from asymptomatic and diseased patches of fields were similar. Overall, composition of the fungal community changed over winter, but the most abundant species did not change. The results show that multiple pathogens, and particularly Fusarium spp., can survive overwinter on pea residue.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".