Paper · 2015 · Journal of Economic Entomology

Relationship Between Piercing-Sucking Insect Control and Internal Lint and Seed Rot in Southeastern Cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL.)

Enrique G. Medrano; Alois A. Bell; Jeremy K. Greene; et al.

8
claims
16
verbatim quotes
8
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · public-domain

Abstract

In 1999, crop consultants scouting for stink bugs (Hemiptera spp.) in South Carolina discovered a formerly unobserved seed rot of cotton that caused yield losses ranging from 10 to 15% in certain fields. The disease has subsequently been reported in fields throughout the southeastern Cotton Belt. Externally, diseased bolls appeared undamaged; internally, green fruit contain pink to dark brown, damp, deformed lint, and necrotic seeds. In greenhouse experiments, we demonstrated transmission of the opportunistic bacterium Pantoea agglomerans by the southern green stink bug, Nezara viridula (L.). Here, green bolls were sampled from stink bug management plots (insecticide protected or nontreated) from four South Atlantic coast states (North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida) to determine disease incidence in the field and its association with piercing-sucking insects feeding. A logistic regression analysis of the boll damage data revealed that disease was 24 times more likely to occur (P = 0.004) in bolls collected from plots in Florida, where evidence of pest pressure was highest, than in bolls harvested in NC with the lowest detected insect pressure. Fruit from plots treated with insecticide, a treatment which reduced transmission agent numbers, were 4 times less likely to be diseased than bolls from unprotected sites (P = 0.002). Overall, punctured bolls were 125 times more likely to also have disease symptoms than nonpunctured bolls, irrespective of whether or not plots were protected with insecticides (P = 0.0001). Much of the damage to cotton bolls that is commonly attributed to stink bug feeding is likely the resulting effect of vectored pathogens.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed public-domain. 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 8

Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Seed rot caused cotton yield losses of 10 to 15% in certain South Carolina fields.

Outcome
yield lossese0
Value
10 to 15%e0
Setting
certain fieldse0

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 100–129 · show in text ↑
e0

“seed rot of cotton that caused yield losses ranging from 10 to 15% in certain fields”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 118–202 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Diseased cotton bolls showed damaged lint and necrotic seeds internally despite appearing undamaged outside.

Organ / stage
green fruite0
Outcome
pink to dark brown, damp, deformed lint, and necrotic seedse0

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 100–129 · show in text ↑
e0

“Externally, diseased bolls appeared undamaged; internally, green fruit contain pink to dark brown, damp, deformed lint, and necrotic seeds”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 298–436 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Southern green stink bugs transmitted Pantoea agglomerans in greenhouse experiments.

Interactor
Pantoea agglomeransPantoea agglomeranse0pathogen
Second interactor
Nezara viridula (L.)Nezara viridulae0pest
Outcome
transmission of the opportunistic bacterium Pantoea agglomeranse0

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Pantoea agglomerans
Pantoea agglomerans · InteractorDr. Sahay · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Nezara viridula
Nezara viridula · Second interactorDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 100–129 · show in text ↑
e0

“transmission of the opportunistic bacterium Pantoea agglomerans by the southern green stink bug, Nezara viridula (L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 481–598 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Cotton boll disease was 24 times more likely in Florida plots than in NC plots.

Outcome
diseasee0
Direction
more likelye0
Value
24 timese0
Comparator
NCe0
Setting
Floridae0

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 100–129 · show in text ↑
e0

“disease was 24 times more likely to occur (P = 0.004) in bolls collected from plots in Florida, where evidence of pest pressure was highest, than in bolls harvested in NC with the lowest detected insect pressure”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 966–1177 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Insecticide protected cotton bolls were four times less likely to be diseased than bolls from unprotected sites.

Treatment
insecticidee0
Outcome
diseasede0
Direction
less likelye0
Value
4 timese0
Comparator
unprotected sitese0

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 100–129 · show in text ↑
e0

“Fruit from plots treated with insecticide, a treatment which reduced transmission agent numbers, were 4 times less likely to be diseased than bolls from unprotected sites (P = 0.002)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1179–1361 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Insecticide treatment reduced transmission agent numbers.

Treatment
insecticidee0
Outcome
transmission agent numberse0
Direction
reducede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 100–129 · show in text ↑
e0

“plots treated with insecticide, a treatment which reduced transmission agent numbers”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1190–1274 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Punctured cotton bolls were 125 times more likely to have disease symptoms than nonpunctured bolls, regardless of insecticide protection.

Outcome
disease symptomse0
Direction
more likelye0
Value
125 timese0
Qualifier
irrespective of whether or not plots were protected with insecticidese0
Comparator
nonpunctured bollse0

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 100–129 · show in text ↑
e0

“punctured bolls were 125 times more likely to also have disease symptoms than nonpunctured bolls, irrespective of whether or not plots were protected with insecticides (P = 0.0001)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1372–1552 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The authors infer that vectored pathogens likely cause much damage usually attributed to stink bug feeding in cotton bolls.

Interactor
vectored pathogense0pathogen
Outcome
damage to cotton bollse0
Qualifier
likelye0

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 100–129 · show in text ↑
e0

“Much of the damage to cotton bolls that is commonly attributed to stink bug feeding is likely the resulting effect of vectored pathogens”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1554–1690 · show in text ↑

insecticide · disease · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree

6 papers: 6 positive, 0 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 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.