Abstract
Two greenhouse and two field experiments were conducted in 1994 and 1995 to quantify the incidence of maize kernel infection resulting from systemic infection of maize plants by Fusarium moniliforme. Seeds were infected by two methods: (i) spray-inoculation of maize silks during seed development (field-infected), and (ii) soak-inoculation of mature seeds in a spore suspension (laboratory-infected). Plants were grown from infected seeds and assayed for systemic infection by the seed-inoculated strain, determined by vegetative compatibility of recovered isolates with the original strain. The seed-inoculated strain was recovered from stalks and kernels of plants grown from both types of infected seed. Mature plants grown from field-infected seeds had a higher percentage of their kernels infected with the seed-inoculated strain compared with plants from laboratory-infected seed. Mean incidence of infection by the seed-inoculated strain was 9.9 to 29.4% of all kernels (33.0 to 55.9% of F. moniliforme-infected kernels) in the plants grown from field-infected seed. Some plants from infected seed were subsequently silk-inoculated, and the silk-inoculated strain was recovered from a much higher percentage of kernels (26.5 to 37.5% of all kernels or 77.9 to 78.4% of F. moniliforme-infected kernels) than was the seed-inoculated strain; furthermore, silk inoculation significantly reduced incidence of kernel infection by the seed-inoculated strain. Seed infection by F. moniliforme resulted in systemic infection of plants and kernels. However, local infection (via silks) was a more important pathway to kernels than was systemic infection, and strains infecting the silks competed successfully against those entering the kernels through systemic development.
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 7
Claim · model-written summary
Plants grown from field-infected seed had a higher percentage of kernels infected by the seed-inoculated strain than plants from laboratory-infected seed.
- Organ / stage
- kernelse1
- Treatment
- field-infected seedse1
- Interactor
- Fusarium moniliforme
Fusarium verticillioidese0pathogen - Outcome
- percentage of their kernels infected with the seed-inoculated straine1
- Direction
- highere1
- Comparator
- laboratory-infected seede1
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Two greenhouse and two field experiments were conducted in 1994 and 1995 to quantify the incidence of maize kernel infection resulting from systemic infection of maize plants by Fusarium moniliforme”
e1“Mature plants grown from field-infected seeds had a higher percentage of their kernels infected with the seed-inoculated strain compared with plants from laboratory-infected seed”
Claim · model-written summary
Incidence of infection by the seed-inoculated strain ranged from 9.9 to 29.4% of all kernels in plants grown from field-infected seed.
- Organ / stage
- kernelse2
- Interactor
- F. moniliformeFusarium verticillioidese2pathogen
- Outcome
- incidence of infection by the seed-inoculated straine2
- Value
- 9.9 to 29.4%e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Two greenhouse and two field experiments were conducted in 1994 and 1995 to quantify the incidence of maize kernel infection resulting from systemic infection of maize plants by Fusarium moniliforme”
e2“Mean incidence of infection by the seed-inoculated strain was 9.9 to 29.4% of all kernels (33.0 to 55.9% of F. moniliforme-infected kernels) in the plants grown from field-infected seed”
Claim · model-written summary
Silk-inoculated strain was recovered from a much higher percentage of kernels than the seed-inoculated strain, at 26.5 to 37.5% of all kernels.
- Treatment
- silk-inoculatede3
- Interactor
- F. moniliformeFusarium verticillioidese3pathogen
- Outcome
- percentage of kernelse3
- Direction
- highere3
- Value
- 26.5 to 37.5%e3
- Comparator
- seed-inoculated straine3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Two greenhouse and two field experiments were conducted in 1994 and 1995 to quantify the incidence of maize kernel infection resulting from systemic infection of maize plants by Fusarium moniliforme”
e3“Some plants from infected seed were subsequently silk-inoculated, and the silk-inoculated strain was recovered from a much higher percentage of kernels (26.5 to 37.5% of all kernels or 77.9 to 78.4% of F. moniliforme-infected kernels) than was the seed-inoculated strain”
Claim · model-written summary
Silk inoculation significantly reduced kernel infection by the seed-inoculated strain.
- Treatment
- silk inoculatione4
- Interactor
- Fusarium moniliformeFusarium verticillioidese0pathogen
- Outcome
- incidence of kernel infection by the seed-inoculated straine4
- Direction
- reducede4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Two greenhouse and two field experiments were conducted in 1994 and 1995 to quantify the incidence of maize kernel infection resulting from systemic infection of maize plants by Fusarium moniliforme”
e4“furthermore, silk inoculation significantly reduced incidence of kernel infection by the seed-inoculated strain”
Claim · model-written summary
Seed infection by Fusarium moniliforme resulted in systemic infection of plants and kernels.
- Treatment
- Seed infectione5
- Interactor
- F. moniliformeFusarium verticillioidese5pathogen
- Outcome
- systemic infection of plants and kernelse5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Two greenhouse and two field experiments were conducted in 1994 and 1995 to quantify the incidence of maize kernel infection resulting from systemic infection of maize plants by Fusarium moniliforme”
e5“Seed infection by F. moniliforme resulted in systemic infection of plants and kernels”
Claim · model-written summary
Local infection via silks was a more important pathway to kernels than systemic infection.
- Treatment
- local infection (via silks)e6
- Interactor
- Fusarium moniliformeFusarium verticillioidese0pathogen
- Outcome
- pathway to kernelse6
- Direction
- more importante6
- Comparator
- systemic infectione6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Two greenhouse and two field experiments were conducted in 1994 and 1995 to quantify the incidence of maize kernel infection resulting from systemic infection of maize plants by Fusarium moniliforme”
e6“However, local infection (via silks) was a more important pathway to kernels than was systemic infection”
Claim · model-written summary
Strains infecting the silks competed successfully against those entering the kernels through systemic development.
- Interactor
- Fusarium moniliformeFusarium verticillioidese0pathogen
- Outcome
- competed successfullye7
- Qualifier
- against those entering the kernels through systemic developmente7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Two greenhouse and two field experiments were conducted in 1994 and 1995 to quantify the incidence of maize kernel infection resulting from systemic infection of maize plants by Fusarium moniliforme”
e7“strains infecting the silks competed successfully against those entering the kernels through systemic development”
The same questions in other papers
inoculation · Fusarium verticillioides · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
13 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
21 papers more in this group
See all 25 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.