BÉLAIR ET AL.: NEMATODES IN VINEYARDS Survey of plant-parasitic and entomopathogenic nematodes in vineyards of Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A survey of plant-parasitic and entomopathogenic nematodes associated with vineyards was undertaken in the Estrie and Montérégie regions, the two major grapevine-producing areas in Quebec. Soil samples from 13 sampled vineyards were analyzed for the occurrence of plant-parasitic and entomopathogenic nematodes. Six genera of plant-parasitic nematodes were observed. The most commonly encountered plant-parasitic nematode genera were Pratylenchus and Paratylenchus, both occurring in 85 % of sampled vineyards. No Xiphinema sp. were observed in surveyed vineyards. Entomopathogenic nematodes were recovered from 85 % of the samples. Heterorhabditid and steinernematid nematodes were isolated from one and 11 vineyards respectively. Steinernematid isolates were identified as Steinernema carpocapsae. [Inventaire des nématodes phytoparasites et entomopathogènes dans des vignobles du Québec] Un inventaire des nématodes phytoparasites et entomopathogènes présents dans des vignobles du Québec a été réalisé dans les régions de l’Estrie et de la Montérégie, les deux principales régions productrices de vignes. Des échantillons de sol provenant de 13 vignobles ont été analysés pour la présence de nématodes phytoparasites et entomopathogènes. Six genres de nématodes phytoparasites ont été observés. Les genres les plus fréquemment retrouvés étaient Pratylenchus et Paratylenchus, lesquels ont été observés dans 85 % des échantillons de sol. Aucun spécimen du genre Xiphinema n’a été retrouvé dans les vignobles. La présence de nématodes entomopathogènes fut notée dans 85 % des vignobles échantillonnés. Des nématodes entomopathogènes de la famille des Steinernematidae ont été observés dans 11 vignobles et des Heterorhabditidae dans un seul vignoble. Tous les isolats de Steinermatidae ont été identifiés comme étant de l’espèce Steinernema carpocapsae.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".