MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7009155552

Developing risk models to mitigate Fusarium Head Blight in western Canadian cereal production

2022· dissertation· en· W7009155552 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2022
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycotoxins in Agriculture and Food
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCropFungicideFusariumGrowing seasonBlightCrop managementRisk assessmentCrop loss
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Producers in western Canada can mitigate the risk of Fusarium Head Blight (FHB) infection and damage to their cereal crops by growing resistant varieties and applying fungicides during critical flowering period. However, fungicide application should not be based only on conventional calendar since FHB occurrence and severity are sporadic and primarily influenced by weather conditions. Weather-based decision-making tools can improve FHB management while also providing significant financial and environmental benefits. Several models have been developed worldwide, with some predicting Fusarium damaged kernels (FDK) or deoxynivalenol (DON) indirectly based on visual estimates of FHB incidence/severity/index (FHBi). This study analyzed FHB over two growing seasons and revealed no significant correlation between FHBi and FDK and FHBi and DON in all crop types except durum. However, the correlation between FDK and DON was significant across all crop types; though, it varied between the two years. Weather-based risk models were developed for predicting FHBi, FDK, and DON in spring wheat, winter wheat, barley, and durum across three Canadian prairie provinces. The number of models developed ranged from 5 to 9 for each disease indicator and crop type, but only two best models for each disease indicator and crop type were further evaluated. The prediction accuracy of the selected models ranged between 75 and 81, 77 and 84, 78 and 79% for FHBi, FDK, and DON, respectively, across crop types. The selected models were validated using producer field data collected in western Canada. The prediction accuracy of the models across crop types ranged between 70 and 100, 66 and 89, 75 and 82% for FHBi, FDK, and DON, respectively. The accuracy of models was greatest when the distance between the fields and nearest weather stations was <40 km. Additionally, this study validated FHBi models currently used in western Canada, which were originally developed in the USA. Although the De Wolf I model predicted winter wheat FHBi with high accuracy (80%), it predicted spring wheat with low accuracy (59%). The models will be used to power an interactive, online digital viewer and provide early warning of potential FHBi, FDK, and DON epidemics in prairie cereal 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.108

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)→Same topicMycotoxins in Agriculture and Food→French-language works237,207→