Characterization of ethametsulfuron-methyl and group 2 herbicide resistance in ALS resistant wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis L.) populations in Manitoba
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis L.) is a common and competitive weed of field and horticultural crops and occurs across all of the Canadian provinces. Since 1989, wild mustard has been effectively controlled in argentine canola (Brassica napus L.), polish canola (Brassica rapa L.) and commercial brown mustard (Brassica juncea L.) by ethametsulfuron-methyl. In 2000, splaying with ethametsulfuron failed to control 20 geographically separate wild mustard populations in conventional canola crops in southem Manitoba. Escaping patches of wild mustard were sampled in August of 2000 and ethametsulfuron herbicide resistance was confirmed at the whole plant level in a greenhouse trial. Subsamples of four acetolactate synthase (ALS) inhibitor resistant wild mustard populations (and a known susceptible population) were selected for indoor, whole-plant, dose response experiments to characterize the patterns and levels of cross-resistance to several ALS inhibitor herbicides and to the group 4 herbicide 2,4-D. ALS inhibitor herbicides used in these indoor dose-response experiments included ethametsulfuron, thifensulfuron, and imazethapyr. Furthermore, the insecticide malathion, which is a known inhibitor of Cytochrome P450 enzymes, was tank-mixed with ethametsulfuron in an additional dose-response experiment. In 2002, one ALS inhibitor resistant wild mustard population was evaluated in a separate field experiment to determine the efficacy of group 2 herbicides in competition with a competitive canola crop. The results of the greenhouse experiments show that that pattems of resistance to ethametsulfuron varied among biotypes with one biotype showing a very high level of resistance...
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".