Chemical Trials for Dollar Spot Disease Control Greens Height Turf - Summer 2004
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seven chemical and control treatments were evaluated on a 11 year old sward of Penncross7 creeping bentgrass (Agrostis palustris) at the Guelph Turfgrass Institute in Guelph, Ontario during July to October 2004 for control of dollar spot disease (caused by Sclerotinia homoeocarpa). The grass was maintained at greens height (5 mm). In addition to inoculated and uninoculated control treatments, a standard fungicide treatment, Daconil 2787 EC containing 40% chlorothalonil which is registered and recommended for control of dollar spot disease of turfgrass in Ontario was included. The treatments were applied over a 12-week period. Disease was monitored over a 13-week period. BAS 51004F 70 WG (3.14 g and 4.0 g - 14 days) and BAS 51004F 70 WG alternate with Insignia 20 WG (4.0 g alt. 28.0 g - 14 days) achieved excellent results 28 July onward. BAS 51004F 70 WG (5.57 g - 21-28 days) significantly reduced disease on 22 and 28 July and achieved excellent results for the duration on the trial. Daconil 2787 EC (190 mL - 14 days) achieved excellent control with the exception of 16 and 23 September. No phytotoxicity was observed throughout the trial.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 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 teacher head, 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".