7ESTEY: USE OF AIRCRAFT FOR PLANT PROTECTION Canadian use of aircraft for plant protection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since 1912, Canadians have used aircraft as aids in the protection of field crops, orchards, and forests from the ravages of fungi, insects, frost, and fire. At first, only fixed-wing aircraft could be used, but from 1947 both fixed-wing and rotary-wing aircraft have been employed. This review also relates the involvement of pioneering people and companies that have developed aerial control methods against biotic and abiotic agents damaging to our plants. [Utilisation d’avions pour la protection des plantes au Canada] Depuis 1912, les Canadiens ont souvent effectué la protection des cultures agricoles, des vergers et des forêts contre les dommages causés par des agents pathogènes, des insectes, le gel et le feu à l’aide d’avions. On utilisa en premier lieu l’avion à ailes fixes seulement, mais à partir de 1947, celui-ci ainsi que l’aéronef à voilures tournantes ont été utilisés. Cette synthèse retrace de plus l’implication de personnes et de compagnies qui furent des pionniers lors du développement de méthodes de contrôle aériens de plusieurs agents biotiques et abiotiques dommageables pour nos plantes. FIXED-WING AIRCRAFT In the early days of wheat farming in western Canada, it was somewhat of a mystery just how the rust dis-ease of wheat could suddenly appear in many wide-spread locations at the same time. In their study of this mysterious situation, plant pathologists assumed that spores of the rust fungus (Puccinia graminis Pers.:Pers.) were wind-blown, in the spring, from areas in the United States where wheat was already mature and infected with rust. Canadian plant pathologist, Arthur W. Henry (1896-1989) proved this, in 1912-1913, by being part of an aircraft crew that exposed glass microscope-slides, smeared with Vaseline, while the aircraft was flying at various heights. By thus catching rust spores they proved that the disease-inducing fungus came in the form of air-borne spores that were scattered over vast areas at the same time (Stakman et al. 1923). That was the earliest use of aircraft as an aid to plant disease control in North
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".