Abstract
The effect of drought conditions at planting time on sugarcane red rot, caused by Colletotrichum falcatum, was evaluated in experiments conducted under controlled conditions and in the field. For experiments under controlled conditions, detached and topped mature stalks of five cultivars were inoculated with conidia of C. falcatum, then exposed to a 3-week desiccation treatment, followed by 3 weeks without desiccation, or maintained for 6 weeks without desiccation. Disease severity, assessed as the number of nodes beyond which rot symptoms extended, number of nodes rotted, internode rot severity, and a rot severity index, was increased in five cultivars by exposure to desiccation. However, response of individual cultivars varied for some disease traits assessed. In field experiments, C. falcatum inoculation alone did not reduce spring shoot populations for seven cultivars. The lowest shoot populations occurred in plantings of inoculated stalks exposed to desiccation. Some cultivars were adversely affected by desiccation alone. These results demonstrate that red rot severity can be increased by the occurrence of drought conditions during the initial growth processes of vegetatively propagated sugarcane stalks.
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 5
Claim · model-written summary
Stalk desiccation increased disease severity of sugarcane red rot in five cultivars.
Verbatim
t0“Sugarcane Red Rot”
e0“maintained for 6 weeks without desiccation”
e1“Disease severity, assessed as the number of nodes beyond which rot symptoms extended, number of nodes rotted, internode rot severity, and a rot severity index, was increased in five cultivars by exposure to desiccation”
e6“sugarcane red rot, caused by Colletotrichum falcatum”
Claim · model-written summary
Response of individual sugarcane cultivars varied for some disease traits.
Verbatim
t0“Sugarcane Red Rot”
e2“However, response of individual cultivars varied for some disease traits assessed”
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculation with C. falcatum alone did not reduce spring shoot populations of sugarcane in field experiments for seven cultivars.
- Taxon
- Sugarcanet0
- Material
- seven cultivarse3
- Treatment
- C. falcatum inoculation alonee3
- Interactor
- C. falcatumColletotrichum falcatume3pathogen
- Outcome
- spring shoot populationse3
- Direction
- did not reducee3
- Setting
- field experimentse3
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
t0“Sugarcane Red Rot”
e3“In field experiments, C. falcatum inoculation alone did not reduce spring shoot populations for seven cultivars”
Claim · model-written summary
The lowest sugarcane shoot populations occurred in plantings of inoculated stalks exposed to desiccation.
- Taxon
- Sugarcanet0
- Treatment
- inoculated stalks exposed to desiccatione4
- Outcome
- shoot populationse4
- Direction
- loweste4
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
t0“Sugarcane Red Rot”
e4“The lowest shoot populations occurred in plantings of inoculated stalks exposed to desiccation”
Claim · model-written summary
Desiccation alone adversely affected some sugarcane cultivars.
- Taxon
- Sugarcanet0
- Material
- Some cultivarse5
- Treatment
- desiccation alonee5
- Outcome
- adversely affectede5
- Direction
- adversely affectede5
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
t0“Sugarcane Red Rot”
e5“Some cultivars were adversely affected by desiccation alone”
The same questions in other papers
Colletotrichum falcatum · pest · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Results differ
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- negative
inoculation · pest · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →drought · pest · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- negative
- negative
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.