Are early foliar fungicide applications on durum wheat grown in southeast Saskatchewan beneficial in increasing grain productivity?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fernandez, M. R., May, W. E., Chalmers, S., Savard, M. E. and Singh, A. K. 2014. Are early foliar fungicide applications on durum wheat grown in southeast Saskatchewan beneficial in increasing grain productivity? Can. J. Plant. Sci. 94: 891-903. Producers have expressed interest in applying fungicides early in the development of durum wheat to reduce disease severity and increase grain yield. To address this issue, a field trial was conducted in southeast Saskatchewan (2004-2006) to determine the impacts of single and double foliar fungicide (tebuconazole) applications at various growth stages on leaf spotting, Fusarium head blight/Fusarium-damaged kernels, deoxynivalenol concentration, dark kernel discolouration, and grain traits of durum wheat. In most cases, application at stem elongation was not effective in reducing Fusarium diseases, or improving yield and grain characteristics. Application at flag leaf emergence was more effective, but for the most part, application at anthesis resulted in the most consistent reduction in disease levels, and improvement in test weight. Double fungicide applications (stem elongation or flag leaf emergence, and anthesis) were not more effective in disease control than a single application at anthesis. Grain yield did not differ significantly among any of the treatments. In contrast to Fusarium diseases and leaf spotting, fungicide applications at stem elongation and/or flag leaf emergence resulted in increased kernel weight and percentage dark kernel discolouration, which was significant in 2005 (10.53-10.60% total kernel discolouration in the stem and flag leaf treatments vs. 6.13% for the untreated control). In one or more years, kernel weight was negatively associated with Fusarium disease variables and leaf spotting, but positively associated with kernel discolouration. We conclude that under variable environmental conditions in Saskatchewan, early preventative fungicide use on durum wheat should not be recommended as a strategy to improve productivity, and might even result in increases in dark kernel discolouration and grain downgrading.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".