Paper · 2000 · Canadian Journal of Plant Science

Effect of mancozeb on the control of mycosphaerella blight of field pea

T. D. Warkentin; A. G. Xue; D. W. McAndrew

4
claims
9
verbatim quotes
28
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Mycosphaerella blight (MB) [Mycosphaerella pinodes (Berk. & Blox.)Vestergr.] causes substantial yield loss to field pea in western Canada in most seasons and is a disease for which genetic resistance is lacking. The objective of this research was to evaluate the effectiveness of foliar application of mancozeb for the control of MB of field pea. Field trials of split-plot design were conducted at two sites per year from 1996 to 1998 in southern Manitoba, with cultivars as main-plots and fungicide treatments as sub-plots. In most site-years, a single application of mancozeb at the early flowering stage was effective in reducing MB severity and in increasing yield. Mancozeb had similar efficacy to chlorothalonil, the only currently registered fungicide for control of MB in field pea. The beneficial effect of both fungicides was greater for the highly MB susceptible cultivars AC Tamor and Carrera than the moderately MB susceptible cultivar Radley. Key words: Pisum sativum, field pea, mycosphaerella blight, mancozeb, chlorothalonil

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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

A single application of mancozeb at early flowering reduced MB severity in field pea in most site-years.

Taxon
field peae0
Treatment
a single application of mancozeb at the early flowering stagee1
Interactor
Mycosphaerella pinodesDidymella pinodese0pathogen
Outcome
MB severitye1
Direction
reducinge1
Qualifier
In most site-yearse1
Setting
southern Manitobae4

Not reportedComparator

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

Didymella pinodes
Didymella pinodes · InteractorWheelwalker · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Mycosphaerella blight (MB) [Mycosphaerella pinodes (Berk. & Blox.)Vestergr.] causes substantial yield loss to field pea in western Canada in most seasons”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–153 · show in text ↑
e1

“In most site-years, a single application of mancozeb at the early flowering stage was effective in reducing MB severity and in increasing yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 526–669 · show in text ↑
e4

“Field trials of split-plot design were conducted at two sites per year from 1996 to 1998 in southern Manitoba”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 347–456 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

A single application of mancozeb at early flowering increased field pea yield in most site-years.

Taxon
field peae0
Treatment
a single application of mancozeb at the early flowering stagee1
Outcome
yielde1
Direction
increasinge1
Qualifier
In most site-yearse1

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Mycosphaerella blight (MB) [Mycosphaerella pinodes (Berk. & Blox.)Vestergr.] causes substantial yield loss to field pea in western Canada in most seasons”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–153 · show in text ↑
e1

“In most site-years, a single application of mancozeb at the early flowering stage was effective in reducing MB severity and in increasing yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 526–669 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mancozeb had similar efficacy to chlorothalonil for controlling MB in field pea.

Taxon
field peae2
Treatment
mancozebe2
Outcome
similar efficacye2
Direction
similar efficacye2
Comparator
chlorothalonile2

Verbatim

e0

“Mycosphaerella blight (MB) [Mycosphaerella pinodes (Berk. & Blox.)Vestergr.] causes substantial yield loss to field pea in western Canada in most seasons”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–153 · show in text ↑
e2

“Mancozeb had similar efficacy to chlorothalonil, the only currently registered fungicide for control of MB in field pea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 671–790 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The beneficial effect of both fungicides was greater for the highly susceptible cultivars AC Tamor and Carrera than for the moderately susceptible cultivar Radley.

Taxon
field peae0
Material
AC Tamor and Carrerae3
Treatment
both fungicidese3
Outcome
beneficial effecte3
Direction
greatere3
Comparator
moderately MB susceptible cultivar Radleye3

Verbatim

e0

“Mycosphaerella blight (MB) [Mycosphaerella pinodes (Berk. & Blox.)Vestergr.] causes substantial yield loss to field pea in western Canada in most seasons”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–153 · show in text ↑
e3

“The beneficial effect of both fungicides was greater for the highly MB susceptible cultivars AC Tamor and Carrera than the moderately MB susceptible cultivar Radley”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 792–956 · show in text ↑

mancozeb · yield · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)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 →

stage · Didymella pinodes · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
See all 2 papers →

stage · yield · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results

15 papers: 11 positive, 4 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative

11 papers more in this group

See all 15 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.