Abstract
The effect of fluazinam WP (active ingredient 39.5%, trade name: Frowncide SC) on white root rot (causal agent, Rosellinia necatrix) of grapevine was examined in the vineyard. Fluazinam soil-drench at either 790ppm or 395ppm showed high efficacy against white root rot of grapevine. Treatment with fluazinam at 790ppm after harvest time (October-December) was more efficient than treatment before sprouting time (March). The treatment protected grapevine roots from the disease for at least half a year even in highly infested soil, and was not phytotoxic against grapevine.
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 4
Claim · model-written summary
Fluazinam soil-drench at 790 or 395 ppm showed high efficacy against Rosellinia necatrix white root rot of grapevine.
- Treatment
- Fluazinam soil-drench at either 790ppm or 395ppme2
- Interactor
- Rosellinia necatrixRosellinia necatrixe1pathogen
- Outcome
- efficacye2
- Direction
- highe2
- Setting
- vineyarde1
VitisNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“on white root rot (causal agent, Rosellinia necatrix) of grapevine was examined in the vineyard”
e2“Fluazinam soil-drench at either 790ppm or 395ppm showed high efficacy against white root rot of grapevine”
Claim · model-written summary
Fluazinam at 790 ppm applied after harvest was more efficient against white root rot of grapevine than application before sprouting.
- Treatment
- fluazinam at 790ppm after harvest timee3
- Interactor
- Rosellinia necatrixRosellinia necatrixe1pathogen
- Outcome
- efficiente3
- Direction
- more efficiente3
- Comparator
- treatment before sprouting timee3
- Setting
- vineyarde1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“on white root rot (causal agent, Rosellinia necatrix) of grapevine was examined in the vineyard”
e3“Treatment with fluazinam at 790ppm after harvest time (October-December) was more efficient than treatment before sprouting time (March)”
Claim · model-written summary
Fluazinam soil-drench protected grapevine roots from Rosellinia necatrix for at least half a year, even in highly infested soil.
- Treatment
- Fluazinam soil-drenche2
- Interactor
- Rosellinia necatrixRosellinia necatrixe1pathogen
- Outcome
- grapevine rootse4
- Direction
- protectede4
- Qualifier
- for at least half a yeare4
- Setting
- vineyarde1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“on white root rot (causal agent, Rosellinia necatrix) of grapevine was examined in the vineyard”
e2“Fluazinam soil-drench at either 790ppm or 395ppm showed high efficacy against white root rot of grapevine”
e4“The treatment protected grapevine roots from the disease for at least half a year even in highly infested soil, and was not phytotoxic against grapevine”
Claim · model-written summary
Fluazinam soil-drench was not phytotoxic to grapevine.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“Fluazinam soil-drench at either 790ppm or 395ppm showed high efficacy against white root rot of grapevine”
e4“The treatment protected grapevine roots from the disease for at least half a year even in highly infested soil, and was not phytotoxic against grapevine”
The same questions in other papers
application · crop injury · VitisPositive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 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.