MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7018485479

Development of field and microplate assays for evaluating DMI-fungicide resistance in Clarireedia jacksonii and other poaceous fungi

2023· dissertation· en· W7018485479 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Atrium (University of Guelph) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFungal Plant Pathogen Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsCorteva Agriscience
KeywordsPhyllosphereAgarAgrostis stoloniferaInoculationFungicideBioassayAgar plateEC50
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two assays for assessing Clarireedia jacksonii resistance to DMI fungicides and a propiconazole-tolerant microbiome in the Agrostis stolonifera phyllosphere were developed. The first assay allowed researchers and end users to identify resistant isolates from field samples using a selective medium (PDA amended with 0.5 µg/ml propiconazole, antibiotics, and tartaric acid). This medium was 96% successful in identifying resistant isolates from over 2000 inoculated leaf blades, and 92% successful in over 100 samples assessed by end users from 20 intensively managed turfgrass sites. The second assay used light absorbance to assess fungal growth in 96-well microplates with fungicide-amended media. The EC50 values of 32 isolates from the microplate assay were significantly correlated to those a traditional amended agar assay when both were log10 transformed (R = 0.75, p < 0.001). From the selective microbiome study, 19 propiconazole-tolerant fungi were isolated, five of which have not been previously associated with turfgrass phyllospheres.

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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Atrium (University of Guelph)Same topicFungal Plant Pathogen ControlFrench-language works237,207