The effects of bacterial and jasmonic acid treatments on insects of canola
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two strains of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria, Pseudomonas chlororaphis (PA23) and Bacillus amyloliquefaciens (BS6), can control some fungal diseases of canola through production of bacterial metabolites and through induced systemic resistance, which is initiated by the signalling molecule jasmonic acid. Direct application of jasmonic acid activates defence-related compounds and influences insect herbivory in canola. Field and laboratory studies investigated the effects of the two bacteria and of jasmonic acid on insects of canola. In the field there were no consistently significant effects of treatment on insects sampled by beat cloth or sweep net, level of flea beetle injury, canola yield or quality. In the laboratory, jasmonic acid significantly increased oviposition and decreased larval feeding in diamondback moth (Plutella xylostella) and slowed development and reduced reproduction in turnip aphid (Lipaphis erysimi). The effects of jasmonic acid on canola were systemic. Analysis of leaf tissue showed significant effects of treatment on defence-related compounds.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".