Abstract
Three successive crops of winter wheat or barley were grown as second, third and fourth cereals. Communities of fungi on shoot bases, identified after isolation on agar media, were more diverse (determined by number of taxa identified) on wheat than on barley, and their diversity increased from year to year. Diversity was not affected by seed treatments containing fluquinconazole or prochloraz. Eyespot (caused by Tapesia spp.) and brown foot rot (caused by Fusarium spp. or Microdochium nivale ) increased from year to year. Eyespot, brown foot rot (after the first year) and sharp eyespot (which remained infrequent), assessed in summer (June), affected wheat more than barley. Eyespot severity was increased slightly on barley by treatments containing fluquinconazole, formulated with or without prochloraz, in the second year (third cereal), when it was also decreased slightly on wheat by fluquinconazole plus prochloraz, except in plots where the treatment had been applied for two successive years. The increases or decreases in eyespot in the second year were accompanied by, respectively, decreases or increases in the frequency of Idriella bolleyi where fluquinconazole was applied alone. Although the eyespot pathogen Tapesia yallundae (but not Tapesia acuformis ) is sensitive to fluquinconazole in vitro , seed treatment, applied principally to control take‐all disease, is likely to have only a small effect against eyespot (or other stem‐base diseases), and then only on wheat and when formulated with prochloraz.
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 15
Claim · model-written summary
Fungal diversity on wheat shoot bases exceeded that on barley.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Organ / stage
- shoot basese0
- Outcome
- Communities of fungie0
- Direction
- more diversee0
- Comparator
- barleye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Communities of fungi on shoot bases, identified after isolation on agar media, were more diverse (determined by number of taxa identified) on wheat than on barley”
Claim · model-written summary
Fungal community diversity increased annually.
- Taxon
- Wheat and Barley
.jpg?width=60)
Hordeum vulgareTriticum aestivumt0 - Outcome
- diversitye0
- Direction
- increasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“and their diversity increased from year to year.”
e1“Communities of fungi on shoot bases”
t0“Wheat and Barley”
Claim · model-written summary
Fluquinconazole seed treatment did not affect diversity.
- Taxon
- Wheat and BarleyHordeum vulgareTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- fluquinconazolee0
- Outcome
- Diversitye0
- Direction
- not affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Diversity was not affected by seed treatments containing fluquinconazole or prochloraz.”
t0“Wheat and Barley”
Claim · model-written summary
Prochloraz seed treatment did not affect diversity.
- Taxon
- Wheat and BarleyHordeum vulgareTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- prochloraze0
- Outcome
- Diversitye0
- Direction
- not affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Diversity was not affected by seed treatments containing fluquinconazole or prochloraz.”
t0“Wheat and Barley”
Claim · model-written summary
Eyespot increased annually.
- Taxon
- Wheat and BarleyHordeum vulgareTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- Eyespote0
- Direction
- increasede0
MollisiaOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Eyespot (caused by Tapesia spp.) and brown foot rot (caused by Fusarium spp. or Microdochium nivale ) increased from year to year.”
t0“Wheat and Barley”
Claim · model-written summary
Brown foot rot increased annually.
- Taxon
- Wheat and BarleyHordeum vulgareTriticum aestivumt0
- Second interactor
- Microdochium nivale
_Samuels_%26_I.C._Hallett_562904.jpg?width=60)
Microdochium nivalee0pathogen - Outcome
- brown foot rote0
- Direction
- increasede0
FusariumOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_Samuels_%26_I.C._Hallett_562904.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Eyespot (caused by Tapesia spp.) and brown foot rot (caused by Fusarium spp. or Microdochium nivale ) increased from year to year.”
t0“Wheat and Barley”
Claim · model-written summary
Summer eyespot and sharp eyespot affected wheat more than barley.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Outcome
- Eyespote0
- Direction
- moree0
- Qualifier
- assessed in summer (June)e0
- Comparator
- barleye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Eyespot, brown foot rot (after the first year) and sharp eyespot (which remained infrequent), assessed in summer (June), affected wheat more than barley.”
Claim · model-written summary
After the first year, summer brown foot rot affected wheat more than barley.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Outcome
- brown foot rote0
- Direction
- moree0
- Qualifier
- after the first yeare0
- Comparator
- barleye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Eyespot, brown foot rot (after the first year) and sharp eyespot (which remained infrequent), assessed in summer (June), affected wheat more than barley.”
Claim · model-written summary
Sharp eyespot remained infrequent but affected wheat more than barley.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Outcome
- sharp eyespote0
- Direction
- moree0
- Qualifier
- remained infrequente0
- Comparator
- barleye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Eyespot, brown foot rot (after the first year) and sharp eyespot (which remained infrequent), assessed in summer (June), affected wheat more than barley.”
Claim · model-written summary
Fluquinconazole alone slightly increased barley eyespot severity in the second year.
- Taxon
- barleyHordeum vulgaree0
- Treatment
- fluquinconazolee0
- Outcome
- Eyespot severitye0
- Direction
- increased slightlye0
- Qualifier
- second year (third cereal)e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Eyespot severity was increased slightly on barley by treatments containing fluquinconazole, formulated with or without prochloraz, in the second year (third cereal)”
Claim · model-written summary
Fluquinconazole with prochloraz slightly increased barley eyespot severity in the second year.
- Taxon
- barleyHordeum vulgaree0
- Treatment
- fluquinconazole, formulated with or without prochloraze0
- Outcome
- Eyespot severitye0
- Direction
- increased slightlye0
- Qualifier
- second year (third cereal)e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Eyespot severity was increased slightly on barley by treatments containing fluquinconazole, formulated with or without prochloraz, in the second year (third cereal)”
Claim · model-written summary
Fluquinconazole plus prochloraz slightly decreased wheat eyespot in the second year except after two successive treatment years.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- fluquinconazole plus prochloraze0
- Outcome
- Eyespot severitye1
- Direction
- decreased slightlye0
- Qualifier
- except in plots where the treatment had been applied for two successive yearse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“when it was also decreased slightly on wheat by fluquinconazole plus prochloraz, except in plots where the treatment had been applied for two successive years.”
e1“Eyespot severity was increased slightly on barley”
Claim · model-written summary
Second year eyespot increases coincided with reduced Idriella bolleyi frequency under fluquinconazole alone.
Verbatim
e0“The increases or decreases in eyespot in the second year were accompanied by, respectively, decreases or increases in the frequency of Idriella bolleyi where fluquinconazole was applied alone.”
Claim · model-written summary
Second year eyespot decreases coincided with increased Idriella bolleyi frequency under fluquinconazole alone.
Verbatim
e0“The increases or decreases in eyespot in the second year were accompanied by, respectively, decreases or increases in the frequency of Idriella bolleyi where fluquinconazole was applied alone.”
Claim · model-written summary
Seed treatment is likely to have only a small stem base disease effect on wheat when formulated with prochloraz.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- seed treatmente0
- Outcome
- only a small effect against eyespot (or other stem‐base diseases)e0
- Qualifier
- when formulated with prochloraze0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“seed treatment, applied principally to control take‐all disease, is likely to have only a small effect against eyespot (or other stem‐base diseases), and then only on wheat and when formulated with prochloraz.”
The same questions in other papers
prochloraz · disease · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
prochloraz · disease · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →fluquinconazole · disease · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
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.