Abstract
ABSTRACT Changes in the composition of soil microbial communities and relative disease-suppressive ability of resident microflora in response to apple cultivation were assessed in orchard soils from a site possessing trees established for 1 to 5 years. The fungal community from roots of apple seedlings grown in noncultivated orchard soil was dominated by isolates from genera commonly considered saprophytic. Plant-pathogenic fungi in the genera Phytophthora, Pythium, and Rhizoctonia constituted an increasing proportion of the fungal community isolated from seedling roots with increasing orchard block age. Bacillus megaterium and Burkholderia cepacia dominated the bacterial communities recovered from noncultivated soil and the rhizosphere of apple seedlings grown in orchard soil, respectively. Populations of the two bacteria in their respective habitats declined dramatically with increasing orchard block age. Lesion nematode populations did not differ among soil and root samples from orchard blocks of different ages. Similar changes in microbial communities were observed in response to planting noncultivated orchard soil to five successive cycles of 'Gala' apple seedlings. Pasteurization of soil had no effect on apple growth in noncultivated soil but significantly enhanced apple growth in third-year orchard block soil. Seedlings grown in pasteurized soil from the third-year orchard block were equal in size to those grown in noncultivated soil, demonstrating that suppression of plant growth resulted from changes in the composition of the soil microbial community. Rhizoctonia solani anastomosis group 5 (AG 5) had no effect on growth of apple trees in noncultivated soil but significantly reduced the growth of apple trees in soil from third-year orchard soil. Changes in the ability of the resident soil microflora to suppress R. solani AG 5 were associated with reductions in the relative populations of Burkholderia cepacia and Pseudomonas putida in the rhizosphere of apple.
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
The fungal community from roots of apple seedlings grown in noncultivated orchard soil was dominated by genera commonly considered saprophytic.
- Taxon
- Apple
Malus domesticat0 - Organ / stage
- rootse0
- Interactor
- genera commonly considered saprophytice0other
- Outcome
- fungal communitye0
- Setting
- noncultivated orchard soile0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The fungal community from roots of apple seedlings grown in noncultivated orchard soil was dominated by isolates from genera commonly considered saprophytic”
t0“Response to Apple Roots”
Claim · model-written summary
Plant-pathogenic fungi (Phytophthora, Pythium, Rhizoctonia) made up an increasing proportion of the root fungal community with increasing orchard block age.
- Taxon
- AppleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- increasing orchard block agee0
- Interactor
- Phytophthora, Pythium, and Rhizoctonia
Phytophthora.jpg?width=60)
Pythium.jpg?width=60)
Rhizoctoniae0pathogen - Outcome
- proportion of the fungal communitye0
- Direction
- increasinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Plant-pathogenic fungi in the genera Phytophthora, Pythium, and Rhizoctonia constituted an increasing proportion of the fungal community isolated from seedling roots with increasing orchard block age”
t0“Response to Apple Roots”
Claim · model-written summary
Bacillus megaterium dominated the bacterial communities recovered from noncultivated soil.
- Taxon
- AppleMalus domesticat0
- Interactor
- Bacillus megaterium
Priestia megateriume0other - Outcome
- bacterial communitiese0
- Setting
- noncultivated soile0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Bacillus megaterium and Burkholderia cepacia dominated the bacterial communities recovered from noncultivated soil and the rhizosphere of apple seedlings grown in orchard soil, respectively”
t0“Response to Apple Roots”
Claim · model-written summary
Burkholderia cepacia dominated the bacterial communities in the rhizosphere of apple seedlings grown in orchard soil.
- Taxon
- AppleMalus domesticat0
- Interactor
- Burkholderia cepacia
Burkholderia cepaciae0other - Outcome
- bacterial communitiese0
- Setting
- rhizosphere of apple seedlings grown in orchard soile0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Bacillus megaterium and Burkholderia cepacia dominated the bacterial communities recovered from noncultivated soil and the rhizosphere of apple seedlings grown in orchard soil, respectively”
t0“Response to Apple Roots”
Claim · model-written summary
Populations of Bacillus megaterium and Burkholderia cepacia declined with increasing orchard block age.
- Taxon
- AppleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- increasing orchard block agee0
- Interactor
- Bacillus megateriumPriestia megateriume1other
- Second interactor
- Burkholderia cepaciaBurkholderia cepaciae1other
- Outcome
- Populations of the two bacteriae0
- Direction
- declinede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Populations of the two bacteria in their respective habitats declined dramatically with increasing orchard block age”
e1“Bacillus megaterium and Burkholderia cepacia dominated the bacterial communities recovered from noncultivated soil and the rhizosphere of apple seedlings grown in orchard soil, respectively”
t0“Response to Apple Roots”
Claim · model-written summary
Lesion nematode populations did not differ among soil and root samples from orchard blocks of different ages.
- Taxon
- AppleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- orchard blocks of different agese0
- Interactor
- Lesion nematodee0pest
- Outcome
- Lesion nematode populationse0
- Direction
- did not differe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Lesion nematode populations did not differ among soil and root samples from orchard blocks of different ages”
t0“Response to Apple Roots”
Claim · model-written summary
Microbial communities changed in noncultivated orchard soil after five successive cycles of Gala apple seedlings.
- Taxon
- AppleMalus domesticat0
- Material
- Galae0
- Treatment
- five successive cyclese0
- Outcome
- microbial communitiese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Similar changes in microbial communities were observed in response to planting noncultivated orchard soil to five successive cycles of 'Gala' apple seedlings”
t0“Response to Apple Roots”
Claim · model-written summary
Pasteurization of soil had no effect on apple growth in noncultivated soil.
- Taxon
- AppleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- Pasteurization of soile0
- Outcome
- apple growthe0
- Direction
- had no effecte0
- Setting
- noncultivated soile0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Pasteurization of soil had no effect on apple growth in noncultivated soil but significantly enhanced apple growth in third-year orchard block soil”
t0“Response to Apple Roots”
Claim · model-written summary
Pasteurization of soil significantly enhanced apple growth in third-year orchard block soil.
- Taxon
- AppleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- Pasteurization of soile0
- Outcome
- apple growthe0
- Direction
- significantly enhancede0
- Setting
- third-year orchard block soile0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Pasteurization of soil had no effect on apple growth in noncultivated soil but significantly enhanced apple growth in third-year orchard block soil”
t0“Response to Apple Roots”
Claim · model-written summary
Seedlings grown in pasteurized third-year orchard soil were equal in size to those grown in noncultivated soil.
- Taxon
- AppleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- pasteurized soil from the third-year orchard blocke0
- Outcome
- sizee0
- Direction
- equale0
- Comparator
- noncultivated soile0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Seedlings grown in pasteurized soil from the third-year orchard block were equal in size to those grown in noncultivated soil, demonstrating that suppression of plant growth resulted from changes in the composition of the soil microbial community”
t0“Response to Apple Roots”
Claim · model-written summary
Suppression of apple seedling growth is attributed to changes in the composition of the soil microbial community.
- Taxon
- AppleMalus domesticat0
- Outcome
- suppression of plant growthe0
- Qualifier
- changes in the composition of the soil microbial communitye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Seedlings grown in pasteurized soil from the third-year orchard block were equal in size to those grown in noncultivated soil, demonstrating that suppression of plant growth resulted from changes in the composition of the soil microbial community”
t0“Response to Apple Roots”
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizoctonia solani AG 5 had no effect on growth of apple trees in noncultivated soil.
- Taxon
- AppleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- Rhizoctonia solani anastomosis group 5e0
- Interactor
- Rhizoctonia solani anastomosis group 5
Rhizoctonia solanie0pathogen - Outcome
- growth of apple treese0
- Direction
- had no effecte0
- Setting
- noncultivated soile0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Rhizoctonia solani anastomosis group 5 (AG 5) had no effect on growth of apple trees in noncultivated soil but significantly reduced the growth of apple trees in soil from third-year orchard soil”
t0“Response to Apple Roots”
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizoctonia solani AG 5 significantly reduced the growth of apple trees in soil from third-year orchard soil.
- Taxon
- AppleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- Rhizoctonia solani anastomosis group 5e0
- Interactor
- Rhizoctonia solani anastomosis group 5Rhizoctonia solanie0pathogen
- Outcome
- growth of apple treese0
- Direction
- significantly reducede0
- Setting
- soil from third-year orchard soile0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Rhizoctonia solani anastomosis group 5 (AG 5) had no effect on growth of apple trees in noncultivated soil but significantly reduced the growth of apple trees in soil from third-year orchard soil”
t0“Response to Apple Roots”
Claim · model-written summary
Reductions in the relative populations of Burkholderia cepacia and Pseudomonas putida in the apple rhizosphere were associated with changes in soil microflora suppression of R. solani AG 5.
- Taxon
- AppleMalus domesticat0
- Interactor
- Burkholderia cepaciaBurkholderia cepaciae0other
- Second interactor
- Pseudomonas putida
Pseudomonas putidae0other - Outcome
- relative populationse0
- Direction
- reductionse0
- Setting
- rhizosphere of applee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Changes in the ability of the resident soil microflora to suppress R. solani AG 5 were associated with reductions in the relative populations of Burkholderia cepacia and Pseudomonas putida in the rhizosphere of apple”
t0“Response to Apple Roots”
The same questions in other papers
processing · growth · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
12 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- negative
16 papers more in this group
See all 20 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.