Abstract
Inoculated field experiments were carried out in 1994 and 1995 to study the effect of the timing of inoculation with Mycosphaerella pinodes (Berk. & Bloxam) Vestergren on disease development, yield reduction and seed infection, in three field pea (Pisum sativum L.) cv. Bohatyr, cv. Scorpio and cv. Triumph. The greatest impact of inoculation on all disease and yield parameters was at the 8–10 node stage in 1994, and at the mid-flowering stage in 1995. The lowest impact of inoculation was at the pod swell stage for both years. When inoculated at 8–10 nodes, mid-flowering and pod swell stages, M. pinodes reduced yield by 31, 24 and 19%, respectively, in 1994 and 33, 43 and 30%, respectively, in 1995. The 1000-seed weight was not affected by the timing of inoculation; however, all inoculations reduced seed weight in both years. Plant-to-seed transmission of M. pinodes was affected by the timing of inoculation in 1994, but not in 1995. Results of this study suggest that prevention of early infection by M. pinodes will provide the best economic return in a mycosphaerella blight control program on field pea. Key words: Mycosphaerella blight, Mycosphaerella pinodes, field pea, Pisum sativum, yield reduction
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 14
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculation with Mycosphaerella pinodes at 8–10 nodes had the greatest impact on disease and yield parameters in 1994.
- Taxon
- field peae7
- Organ / stage
- 8–10 node stagee1
- Treatment
- timing of inoculatione0
- Interactor
- Mycosphaerella pinodes
Didymella pinodese0pathogen - Outcome
- disease and yield parameterse1
- Direction
- greatest impacte1
- Qualifier
- in 1994e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“effect of the timing of inoculation with Mycosphaerella pinodes”
e1“The greatest impact of inoculation on all disease and yield parameters was at the 8–10 node stage in 1994”
e7“prevention of early infection by M. pinodes will provide the best economic return in a mycosphaerella blight control program on field pea”
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculation at mid-flowering had the greatest impact on disease and yield parameters in 1995.
- Taxon
- field peae7
- Organ / stage
- mid-flowering stagee2
- Treatment
- timing of inoculatione0
- Interactor
- Mycosphaerella pinodesDidymella pinodese0pathogen
- Outcome
- disease and yield parameterse2
- Direction
- greatest impacte2
- Qualifier
- in 1995e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“effect of the timing of inoculation with Mycosphaerella pinodes”
e2“The greatest impact of inoculation on all disease and yield parameters was at the 8–10 node stage in 1994, and at the mid-flowering stage in 1995”
e7“prevention of early infection by M. pinodes will provide the best economic return in a mycosphaerella blight control program on field pea”
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculation at the pod swell stage had the lowest impact in both years.
- Taxon
- field peae7
- Organ / stage
- pod swell stagee3
- Treatment
- timing of inoculatione0
- Interactor
- Mycosphaerella pinodesDidymella pinodese0pathogen
- Outcome
- impact of inoculatione3
- Direction
- loweste3
- Qualifier
- for both yearse3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“effect of the timing of inoculation with Mycosphaerella pinodes”
e3“The lowest impact of inoculation was at the pod swell stage for both years”
e7“prevention of early infection by M. pinodes will provide the best economic return in a mycosphaerella blight control program on field pea”
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculation at 8–10 nodes reduced yield by 31% in 1994.
- Taxon
- field peae7
- Organ / stage
- 8–10 nodese4
- Treatment
- inoculatede4
- Interactor
- M. pinodesDidymella pinodese4pathogen
- Outcome
- yielde4
- Direction
- reducede4
- Value
- 31e4
- Qualifier
- in 1994e4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“When inoculated at 8–10 nodes, mid-flowering and pod swell stages, M. pinodes reduced yield by 31, 24 and 19%, respectively, in 1994 and 33, 43 and 30%, respectively, in 1995”
e7“prevention of early infection by M. pinodes will provide the best economic return in a mycosphaerella blight control program on field pea”
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculation at mid-flowering reduced yield by 24% in 1994.
- Taxon
- field peae7
- Organ / stage
- mid-floweringe4
- Treatment
- inoculatede4
- Interactor
- M. pinodesDidymella pinodese4pathogen
- Outcome
- yielde4
- Direction
- reducede4
- Value
- 24e4
- Qualifier
- in 1994e4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“When inoculated at 8–10 nodes, mid-flowering and pod swell stages, M. pinodes reduced yield by 31, 24 and 19%, respectively, in 1994 and 33, 43 and 30%, respectively, in 1995”
e7“prevention of early infection by M. pinodes will provide the best economic return in a mycosphaerella blight control program on field pea”
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculation at the pod swell stage reduced yield by 19% in 1994.
- Taxon
- field peae7
- Organ / stage
- pod swelle4
- Treatment
- inoculatede4
- Interactor
- M. pinodesDidymella pinodese4pathogen
- Outcome
- yielde4
- Direction
- reducede4
- Value
- 19e4
- Qualifier
- in 1994e4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“When inoculated at 8–10 nodes, mid-flowering and pod swell stages, M. pinodes reduced yield by 31, 24 and 19%, respectively, in 1994 and 33, 43 and 30%, respectively, in 1995”
e7“prevention of early infection by M. pinodes will provide the best economic return in a mycosphaerella blight control program on field pea”
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculation at 8–10 nodes reduced yield by 33% in 1995.
- Taxon
- field peae7
- Organ / stage
- 8–10 nodese4
- Treatment
- inoculatede4
- Interactor
- M. pinodesDidymella pinodese4pathogen
- Outcome
- yielde4
- Direction
- reducede4
- Value
- 33e4
- Qualifier
- in 1995e4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“When inoculated at 8–10 nodes, mid-flowering and pod swell stages, M. pinodes reduced yield by 31, 24 and 19%, respectively, in 1994 and 33, 43 and 30%, respectively, in 1995”
e7“prevention of early infection by M. pinodes will provide the best economic return in a mycosphaerella blight control program on field pea”
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculation at mid-flowering reduced yield by 43% in 1995.
- Taxon
- field peae7
- Organ / stage
- mid-floweringe4
- Treatment
- inoculatede4
- Interactor
- M. pinodesDidymella pinodese4pathogen
- Outcome
- yielde4
- Direction
- reducede4
- Value
- 43e4
- Qualifier
- in 1995e4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“When inoculated at 8–10 nodes, mid-flowering and pod swell stages, M. pinodes reduced yield by 31, 24 and 19%, respectively, in 1994 and 33, 43 and 30%, respectively, in 1995”
e7“prevention of early infection by M. pinodes will provide the best economic return in a mycosphaerella blight control program on field pea”
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculation at the pod swell stage reduced yield by 30% in 1995.
- Taxon
- field peae7
- Organ / stage
- pod swelle4
- Treatment
- inoculatede4
- Interactor
- M. pinodesDidymella pinodese4pathogen
- Outcome
- yielde4
- Direction
- reducede4
- Value
- 30e4
- Qualifier
- in 1995e4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“When inoculated at 8–10 nodes, mid-flowering and pod swell stages, M. pinodes reduced yield by 31, 24 and 19%, respectively, in 1994 and 33, 43 and 30%, respectively, in 1995”
e7“prevention of early infection by M. pinodes will provide the best economic return in a mycosphaerella blight control program on field pea”
Claim · model-written summary
The 1000-seed weight was not affected by the timing of inoculation.
Verbatim
e6“The 1000-seed weight was not affected by the timing of inoculation”
e7“prevention of early infection by M. pinodes will provide the best economic return in a mycosphaerella blight control program on field pea”
Claim · model-written summary
All inoculations reduced seed weight in both years.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e5“all inoculations reduced seed weight in both years”
e7“prevention of early infection by M. pinodes will provide the best economic return in a mycosphaerella blight control program on field pea”
Claim · model-written summary
Plant-to-seed transmission of M. pinodes was affected by the timing of inoculation in 1994.
- Taxon
- field peae7
- Treatment
- timing of inoculatione6
- Interactor
- M. pinodesDidymella pinodese6pathogen
- Outcome
- Plant-to-seed transmissione6
- Direction
- affectede6
- Qualifier
- in 1994e6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e6“Plant-to-seed transmission of M. pinodes was affected by the timing of inoculation in 1994, but not in 1995”
e7“prevention of early infection by M. pinodes will provide the best economic return in a mycosphaerella blight control program on field pea”
Claim · model-written summary
Plant-to-seed transmission of M. pinodes was not affected by the timing of inoculation in 1995.
- Taxon
- field peae7
- Treatment
- timing of inoculatione6
- Interactor
- M. pinodesDidymella pinodese6pathogen
- Outcome
- Plant-to-seed transmissione6
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede6
- Qualifier
- but not in 1995e6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e6“Plant-to-seed transmission of M. pinodes was affected by the timing of inoculation in 1994, but not in 1995”
e7“prevention of early infection by M. pinodes will provide the best economic return in a mycosphaerella blight control program on field pea”
Claim · model-written summary
Prevention of early infection by M. pinodes is recommended as the best economic return in a mycosphaerella blight control program on field pea.
Verbatim
e7“prevention of early infection by M. pinodes will provide the best economic return in a mycosphaerella blight control program on field pea”
The same questions in other papers
inoculation · yield · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Results differ
18 papers in the same direction as this paper · 108 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
123 papers more in this group
See all 127 papers →inoculation · Didymella pinodes · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- positive
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 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.