Paper · 2014 · American Journal of Life Sciences

A Protocol Suggested for Management of Cantaloupe Downy Mildew

Abada, K. A.

9
claims
16
verbatim quotes
11
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

The inhibitory effect of the fungicides Acrobat copper, Previcure-N and Unilax, the inducer resistance chemicals (IRCs) bion, chitosan, salicylic acid and zinc sulphate and the bioagents Bacillus polymyxa, B. subtilis and Pseudomonas fluorescens on sporangial germination of fungus like Pseudoperonospora cubensis, the causal of cantaloupe downy mildew was tested in vitro. The role of the tested fungicides, IRCs and bioagents on management of cantaloupe downy mildew was evaluated under greenhouse conditions. In addition, the alternation between the sprayed tested fungicide Unilax, IRC chitosan and bioagent P.fluorescens on management of the disease under field conditions was investigated. The inhibitory effect of the tested fungicides, IRCs and bioagents on sporangial germination of P. cubensis revealed that they caused significant reduction to the germinated sporangia. The tested fungicides were the most efficient ones followed by the bioagents then IRCs. Disease management showed the same trend of in vitro experiment when they sprayed on artificially inoculated cantaloupe plants with the sporangia of the causal fungus like under greenhouse conditions. Under field conditions, spraying cantaloupe plants with the tested fungicide Unilax still the most efficient trial for management the disease during 2012 and 2013 growing seasons compared with spraying any of IRC (chitosan) and the bioagent (P. fluorescens) alone . However, spraying the tested fungicide in alternation with the tested IRC and the bioagent ranked the second efficiency of disease management. Meanwhile, spraying the tested fungicide in alternation with any of the tested IRC and bioagent was of moderate efficiency.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 9

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Tested fungicides significantly reduced P. cubensis sporangial germination.

Treatment
tested fungicidese0
Interactor
P. cubensisPseudoperonospora cubensise0pathogen
Outcome
sporangial germination of P. cubensise0
Direction
reductione0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cucumis melo var. cantalupo
Cucumis melo var. cantalupo · TaxonRasbak at Dutch Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Pseudoperonospora cubensis
Pseudoperonospora cubensis · InteractorChristian Hummert ( Ixitixel ) · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The inhibitory effect of the tested fungicides, IRCs and bioagents on sporangial germination of P. cubensis revealed that they caused significant reduction to the germinated sporangia”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 696–879 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cantaloupe”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–49 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Tested resistance inducing chemicals significantly reduced P. cubensis sporangial germination.

Treatment
IRCse0
Interactor
P. cubensisPseudoperonospora cubensise0pathogen
Outcome
sporangial germination of P. cubensise0
Direction
reductione0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cucumis melo var. cantalupo
Cucumis melo var. cantalupo · TaxonRasbak at Dutch Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Pseudoperonospora cubensis
Pseudoperonospora cubensis · InteractorChristian Hummert ( Ixitixel ) · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The inhibitory effect of the tested fungicides, IRCs and bioagents on sporangial germination of P. cubensis revealed that they caused significant reduction to the germinated sporangia”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 696–879 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cantaloupe”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–49 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Tested bioagents significantly reduced P. cubensis sporangial germination.

Treatment
bioagentse0
Interactor
P. cubensisPseudoperonospora cubensise0pathogen
Outcome
sporangial germination of P. cubensise0
Direction
reductione0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cucumis melo var. cantalupo
Cucumis melo var. cantalupo · TaxonRasbak at Dutch Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Pseudoperonospora cubensis
Pseudoperonospora cubensis · InteractorChristian Hummert ( Ixitixel ) · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The inhibitory effect of the tested fungicides, IRCs and bioagents on sporangial germination of P. cubensis revealed that they caused significant reduction to the germinated sporangia”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 696–879 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cantaloupe”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–49 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fungicides ranked most efficient for germination inhibition.

Treatment
tested fungicidese0
Outcome
most efficiente0
Direction
most efficiente0
Comparator
bioagents then IRCse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cucumis melo var. cantalupo
Cucumis melo var. cantalupo · TaxonRasbak at Dutch Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The tested fungicides were the most efficient ones followed by the bioagents then IRCs”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 881–967 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cantaloupe”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–49 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bioagents ranked between fungicides and IRCs for germination inhibition.

Treatment
bioagentse0
Outcome
followed by the bioagentse0
Direction
followede0
Comparator
IRCse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cucumis melo var. cantalupo
Cucumis melo var. cantalupo · TaxonRasbak at Dutch Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The tested fungicides were the most efficient ones followed by the bioagents then IRCs”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 881–967 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cantaloupe”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–49 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Greenhouse disease management followed the in vitro ranking.

Outcome
Disease management showed the same trend of in vitro experimente0
Setting
under greenhouse conditionse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cucumis melo var. cantalupo
Cucumis melo var. cantalupo · TaxonRasbak at Dutch Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Disease management showed the same trend of in vitro experiment when they sprayed on artificially inoculated cantaloupe plants with the sporangia of the causal fungus like under greenhouse conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 969–1168 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Field Unilax spray was most efficient against disease in 2012 and 2013.

Treatment
spraying cantaloupe plants with the tested fungicide Unilaxe0
Outcome
management the diseasee0
Direction
most efficiente0
Qualifier
during 2012 and 2013 growing seasonse0
Comparator
spraying any of IRC (chitosan) and the bioagent (P. fluorescens) alonee0
Setting
Under field conditionse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cucumis melo var. cantalupo
Cucumis melo var. cantalupo · TaxonRasbak at Dutch Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Under field conditions, spraying cantaloupe plants with the tested fungicide Unilax still the most efficient trial for management the disease during 2012 and 2013 growing seasons compared with spraying any of IRC (chitosan) and the bioagent (P. fluorescens) alone”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1170–1433 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Alternating fungicide, IRC and bioagent ranked second for field disease management.

Treatment
spraying the tested fungicide in alternation with the tested IRC and the bioagente0
Outcome
disease managemente0
Direction
second efficiencye0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cucumis melo var. cantalupo
Cucumis melo var. cantalupo · TaxonRasbak at Dutch Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“spraying the tested fungicide in alternation with the tested IRC and the bioagent ranked the second efficiency of disease management”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1445–1577 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cantaloupe”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–49 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fungicide alternation with IRC or bioagent had moderate disease management efficiency.

Treatment
spraying the tested fungicide in alternation with any of the tested IRC and bioagente0
Outcome
moderate efficiencye0
Direction
moderate efficiencye0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cucumis melo var. cantalupo
Cucumis melo var. cantalupo · TaxonRasbak at Dutch Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“spraying the tested fungicide in alternation with any of the tested IRC and bioagent was of moderate efficiency”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1590–1701 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cantaloupe”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–49 · show in text ↑

fungicide · control · Cucumis melo (muskmelon)Positive and negative results

6 papers: 5 positive, 1 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

application · control · Cucumis melo (muskmelon)Positive and negative results

7 papers: 5 positive, 2 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. positive

3 papers more in this group

See all 7 papers →

biocontrol · control · Cucumis melo (muskmelon)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

biocontrol · Pseudoperonospora cubensis · Cucumis melo (muskmelon)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

fungicide · Pseudoperonospora cubensis · Cucumis melo (muskmelon)Results agree

4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.