Abstract
Rhizoctonia solani (AG 2-2IIIB), causing root and crown rot in sugar beet, poses an increasing problem in Europe. Agronomic measures have to be optimized to control disease and minimize yield and quality loss, because no fungicides can be applied. Resistant sugar beet cultivars have been introduced to reduce disease occurrence. Furthermore, crop rotation can influence R. solani occurrence. In contrast to other cereals, maize serves as a host of the fungus. In order to study the combined effect of these factors, a series of four field trials was established with crop rotations varying in the proportion of maize and comparing a resistant with a susceptible sugar beet cultivar in 2001-02 in southern Germany. Within crop rotations, cultivation methods were varied in the form of soil tillage, intercrops, or both. Sugar beet cultivar and crop rotation had the main impact on disease severity and sugar yield. With increasing proportion of maize, sugar yield decreased, whereas cultivation method had only a minor impact. Plowing directly before sugar beet increased sugar yield only within the unfavorable maize-maize-sugar beet rotation compared with mulching. These results give strong evidence that crop rotation of sugar beet with nonhost plants and cultivation of resistant sugar beet cultivars are adequate means for integrated R. solani control.
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
Claim · model-written summary
Cultivar choice had a main impact on disease severity.
- Taxon
- Sugar beet
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0 - Material
- cultivare0
- Interactor
- Rhizoctonia solani
Rhizoctonia solanit0pathogen - Outcome
- disease severitye0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sugar beet cultivar and crop rotation had the main impact on disease severity and sugar yield”
t0“Rhizoctonia solani”
Claim · model-written summary
Crop rotation had a main impact on disease severity.
- Taxon
- Sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Treatment
- crop rotatione0
- Interactor
- Rhizoctonia solaniRhizoctonia solanit0pathogen
- Outcome
- disease severitye0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sugar beet cultivar and crop rotation had the main impact on disease severity and sugar yield”
t0“Rhizoctonia solani”
Claim · model-written summary
Cultivar choice had a main impact on sugar yield.
- Taxon
- Sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Material
- cultivare0
- Outcome
- sugar yielde0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sugar beet cultivar and crop rotation had the main impact on disease severity and sugar yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Crop rotation had a main impact on sugar yield.
- Taxon
- Sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Treatment
- crop rotatione0
- Outcome
- sugar yielde0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sugar beet cultivar and crop rotation had the main impact on disease severity and sugar yield”
Claim · model-written summary
A greater maize proportion in rotation reduced sugar yield.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- increasing proportion of maizee0
- Outcome
- sugar yielde0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“With increasing proportion of maize, sugar yield decreased”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
Cultivation method had only a minor impact.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- cultivation methode0
- Outcome
- minor impacte0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“cultivation method had only a minor impact”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
Plowing before sugar beet increased sugar yield versus mulching within maize-maize-sugar beet rotation.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Treatment
- Plowing directly before sugar beete0
- Outcome
- sugar yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- maize-maize-sugar beet rotatione0
- Comparator
- mulchinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Plowing directly before sugar beet increased sugar yield only within the unfavorable maize-maize-sugar beet rotation compared with mulching”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend rotation with nonhost plants for integrated R. solani control.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Interactor
- R. solaniRhizoctonia solanie0pathogen
- Outcome
- crop rotation of sugar beet with nonhost plantse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“crop rotation of sugar beet with nonhost plants and cultivation of resistant sugar beet cultivars are adequate means for integrated R. solani control”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend resistant sugar beet cultivars for integrated R. solani control.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Interactor
- R. solaniRhizoctonia solanie0pathogen
- Outcome
- cultivation of resistant sugar beet cultivarse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“cultivation of resistant sugar beet cultivars are adequate means for integrated R. solani control”
The same questions in other papers
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · quality: sugar starch · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
15 papers more in this group
See all 19 papers →tillage · quality: sugar starch · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
12 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
18 papers more in this group
See all 22 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.