Abstract
Systemic effect of two plant growth-promoting rhizobacterial (PGPR) strains,viz., Pseudomonas fluorescens (Pf4) and P. aeruginosa (Pag), was evaluated on pea (Pisum sativum) against the powdery mildew pathogen Erysiphe pisi. Foliar spray of the two PGPR strains was done on specific nodal leaves of pea and conidial germination of E. pisi was observed on other nodal leaves,distal to the treated ones. Conidial germination was reduced on distant leaves and at the same time,specific as well as total phenolic compounds increased in the leaves distal to those applied with PGPR strains,thereby indicating a positive correlation. The strains induced accumulation of phenolic compounds in pea leaves and the amount increased when such leaves were get inoculated with E. pisi conidia. Between the two strains, Pag was found to be more effective than Pf4 as its effect was more persistent in pea leaves. Foliar application of PGPR strains for the control of powdery mildew of pea is demonstrated in vitro while correlating it with the increased accumulation of plant phenolics.
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 4
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar PGPR application reduced E. pisi conidial germination on distant pea leaves.
- Taxon
- pea
Lathyrus oleraceuse0 - Treatment
- Foliar spray of the two PGPR strainse0
- Interactor
- E. pisi
.jpg?width=60)
Erysiphe pisie0pathogen - Second interactor
- Pseudomonas fluorescens (Pf4)
.JPG?width=60)
Pseudomonas fluorescense2biocontrol_agent - Outcome
- Conidial germinatione1
- Direction
- reducede1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
.JPG?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Foliar spray of the two PGPR strains was done on specific nodal leaves of pea and conidial germination of E. pisi was observed on other nodal leaves,distal to the treated ones.”
e1“Conidial germination was reduced on distant leaves”
e2“Pseudomonas fluorescens (Pf4) and P. aeruginosa (Pag)”
Claim · model-written summary
PGPR treatment increased phenolic compounds in distal pea leaves.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceuse1
- Organ / stage
- leavese0
- Treatment
- PGPR strainse0
- Interactor
- Pseudomonas fluorescens (Pf4)Pseudomonas fluorescense2biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- specific as well as total phenolic compoundse0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“specific as well as total phenolic compounds increased in the leaves distal to those applied with PGPR strains”
e1“on pea (Pisum sativum)”
e2“Pseudomonas fluorescens (Pf4) and P. aeruginosa (Pag)”
Claim · model-written summary
E. pisi inoculation further increased phenolic accumulation in PGPR treated pea leaves.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceuse0
- Organ / stage
- leavese0
- Treatment
- inoculated with E. pisi conidiae0
- Interactor
- E. pisiErysiphe pisie0pathogen
- Outcome
- phenolic compoundse0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The strains induced accumulation of phenolic compounds in pea leaves and the amount increased when such leaves were get inoculated with E. pisi conidia.”
Claim · model-written summary
Pag had a more persistent effect in pea leaves than Pf4.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceuse0
- Interactor
- Page0biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- effect was more persistente0
- Direction
- more persistente0
- Comparator
- Pf4e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Between the two strains, Pag was found to be more effective than Pf4 as its effect was more persistent in pea leaves.”
The same questions in other papers
inoculation · Erysiphe pisi · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →inoculation · quality: phytochemicals · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Results agree
3 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
inoculation · Pseudomonas fluorescens · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Results agree
3 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
application · Erysiphe pisi · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Results agree
6 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 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.