Paper · 2007 · Plant Disease

Biological Control of Grape Powdery Mildew Using Mycophagous Mites

Greg English-Loeb; Andrew P. Norton; David Gadoury; et al.

9
claims
18
verbatim quotes
41
citations
4
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

We evaluated the efficacy of a mycophagous tydeid mite, Orthotydeus lambi, in controlling grape powdery mildew on mature vines of nine different grape cultivars and one unnamed hybrid grown in an experimental vineyard over a 3-year period. O. lambi became well established on all vines where they were released. However, some cultivars supported higher densities than others, depending on, among other factors, the presence and abundance of leaf trichomes in vein axils (domatia). The establishment of O. lambi substantially reduced powdery mildew on foliage and fruit, although the magnitude of disease suppression was greater on some grape genotypes than others, depending on mite density and innate susceptibility to grape powdery mildew. Treatments where O. lambi was used alone were as effective as fungicide. Significantly better disease control was found in treatments with both mites and fungicides. The mass of pruning material and leaf photosynthetic rates were significantly greater for vines with O. lambi, fungicide, or a combination of mites and fungicide compared with untreated vines. The combination of mites and fungicide resulted in significantly greater yield than mites or fungicide alone. Our results illustrate the potential of O. lambi for biological control of grape powdery mildew but also highlight limitations related to differences among grape genotypes in innate susceptibility to mildew and suitability for mites.

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 9

Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Released O. lambi established on all vines.

Taxon
Grapet0
Interactor
O. lambie0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
well established on all vinese0

Verbatim

t0

“Grape”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–27 · show in text ↑
e0

“O. lambi became well established on all vines where they were released.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 240–311 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mite densities differed among cultivars and depended partly on leaf domatia.

Taxon
Grapet0
Material
cultivarse1
Organ / stage
leaf trichomes in vein axils (domatia)e1
Outcome
densitiese1
Direction
highere1

Verbatim

t0

“Grape”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–27 · show in text ↑
e1

“some cultivars supported higher densities than others, depending on, among other factors, the presence and abundance of leaf trichomes in vein axils (domatia).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 321–480 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

O. lambi establishment substantially reduced powdery mildew on foliage and fruit.

Taxon
Grapet0
Treatment
establishment of O. lambie2
Interactor
O. lambie2biocontrol_agent
Outcome
powdery mildew on foliage and fruite2
Direction
reducede2

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

t0

“Grape”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–27 · show in text ↑
e2

“The establishment of O. lambi substantially reduced powdery mildew on foliage and fruit, although the magnitude of disease suppression was greater on some grape genotypes than others, depending on mite density and innate susceptibility to grape powdery mildew.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 481–741 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Disease suppression differed among grape genotypes with mite density and innate susceptibility.

Taxon
Grapet0
Material
grape genotypese2
Outcome
magnitude of disease suppressione2
Direction
greatere2
Qualifier
depending on mite density and innate susceptibility to grape powdery mildewe2

Verbatim

t0

“Grape”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–27 · show in text ↑
e2

“The establishment of O. lambi substantially reduced powdery mildew on foliage and fruit, although the magnitude of disease suppression was greater on some grape genotypes than others, depending on mite density and innate susceptibility to grape powdery mildew.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 481–741 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mites alone were as effective as fungicide.

Taxon
Grapet0
Treatment
O. lambi was used alonee3
Interactor
O. lambie3biocontrol_agent
Outcome
as effectivee3
Direction
as effectivee3
Comparator
fungicidee3

Verbatim

t0

“Grape”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–27 · show in text ↑
e3

“Treatments where O. lambi was used alone were as effective as fungicide. Significantly better disease control was found in treatments with both mites and fungicides.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 742–907 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Mites plus fungicides gave significantly better disease control.

Taxon
Grapet0
Treatment
both mites and fungicidese3
Interactor
mitese3biocontrol_agent
Outcome
disease controle3
Direction
bettere3

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

t0

“Grape”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–27 · show in text ↑
e3

“Treatments where O. lambi was used alone were as effective as fungicide. Significantly better disease control was found in treatments with both mites and fungicides.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 742–907 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Mites, fungicide, or both increased pruning mass relative to untreated vines.

Taxon
Grapet0
Treatment
O. lambi, fungicide, or a combination of mites and fungicidee4
Outcome
mass of pruning materiale4
Direction
greatere4
Comparator
untreated vinese4

Verbatim

t0

“Grape”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–27 · show in text ↑
e4

“The mass of pruning material and leaf photosynthetic rates were significantly greater for vines with O. lambi, fungicide, or a combination of mites and fungicide compared with untreated vines.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 908–1100 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Mites, fungicide, or both increased leaf photosynthetic rate relative to untreated vines.

Taxon
Grapet0
Treatment
O. lambi, fungicide, or a combination of mites and fungicidee4
Outcome
leaf photosynthetic ratese4
Direction
greatere4
Comparator
untreated vinese4

Verbatim

t0

“Grape”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–27 · show in text ↑
e4

“The mass of pruning material and leaf photosynthetic rates were significantly greater for vines with O. lambi, fungicide, or a combination of mites and fungicide compared with untreated vines.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 908–1100 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined mites and fungicide increased yield relative to either alone.

Taxon
Grapet0
Treatment
combination of mites and fungicidee5
Outcome
yielde5
Direction
greatere5
Comparator
mites or fungicide alonee5

Verbatim

t0

“Grape”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–27 · show in text ↑
e5

“The combination of mites and fungicide resulted in significantly greater yield than mites or fungicide alone.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1101–1210 · show in text ↑

fungicide · yield · VitisPositive and negative results

6 papers: 5 positive, 1 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

fungicide · physiology: photosynthesis · VitisResults agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

fungicide · control · VitisResults 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.