IsPuccinia xanthiia suitable biological control agent ofAmbrosia artemisiifolia?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Common ragweed, Ambrosia artemisiifolia, is a highly allergenic North American plant that has become invasive in some parts of Europe, Asia and Australia following its introduction to many places in the world. Some earlier works suggested that a microcyclic autoecious rust fungus, Puccinia xanthii, known to infect A. artemisiifolia in the USA only, can be considered as a potential classical biocontrol agent (BCA) of this noxious weed in Europe and elsewhere. However, an extensive field survey did not reveal the presence of either P xanthii or any other rusts on common ragweed in 14 US states and two Canadian provinces in 2002 and 2003. Moreover, P xanthii infecting A. artemisiifolia has never been recorded in Canada, although it is known to occur on A. trifida and Xanthium spp. there. Nevertheless, herbarium specimens collected between 1855 and 1963 in five states of the USA confirmed the presence of P xanthii on A. artemisiifolia. It is concluded that currently P xanthii cannot be regarded as a promising BCA of A. artemisiifolia, although it did occur on common ragweed at least a few decades ago in the USA and some forms of this rust species have already been evaluated as effective BCAs of Xanthium in Australia.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".