Paper · 2001 · Journal of Phytopathology

Effects of Metalaxyl, Fosetyl‐Al, Dimethomorph and Cymoxanil on Phytophthora cactorum of Peach Tree

T. Thomidis; K. Elena

16
claims
30
verbatim quotes
19
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

The activity of metalaxyl, fosetyl‐Al, dimethomorph, and cymoxanil against Phytophthora crown rot of peach trees was examined. Application of fosetyl‐Al or metalaxyl by painting the trunk (150 g/l) of 3‐year‐old PR204 trees was inhibitory to growth of the fungus but neither dimethomorph nor cymoxanil were effective. Application of metalaxyl as a soil drench suppressed canker development when the treated trees were subsequently inoculated with Phytophthora cactorum . Fosetyl‐Al significantly reduced the growth of fungus compared with cymoxanil, dimethomorph and control but it was not as effective as metalaxyl. Again, dimethomorph and cymoxanil did not influence canker development. Both metalaxyl and fosetyl‐Al were active for at least 21 days after applications. Strips of trunk bark were removed from trees, that had been drenched with the tested chemicals 20 days before, and inoculated on the cambium side with P. cactorum . Metalaxyl was the most effective fungicide and fosetyl‐Al significantly reduced the development of fungus compared with dimethomorph, cymoxanil and the untreated strips. Colonization of strips treated with dimethomorph was significantly less than untreated strips. In contrast, cymoxanil did not inhibit the growth of fungus. Application of metalaxyl or fosetyl‐Al as trunk paint or a soil drench appear to be effective procedures for preventing Phytophthora rot of peach trees.

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 16

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Trunk-painted fosetyl‐Al inhibited fungal growth.

Material
PR204e0
Treatment
fosetyl‐Ale0
Outcome
growth of the funguse0
Direction
inhibitorye0
Value
150 g/le0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Application of fosetyl‐Al or metalaxyl by painting the trunk (150 g/l) of 3‐year‐old PR204 trees was inhibitory to growth of the fungus”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 127–262 · show in text ↑
t0

“Peach Tree”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 89–99 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Trunk-painted metalaxyl inhibited fungal growth.

Material
PR204e0
Treatment
metalaxyle0
Outcome
growth of the funguse0
Direction
inhibitorye0
Value
150 g/le0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Application of fosetyl‐Al or metalaxyl by painting the trunk (150 g/l) of 3‐year‐old PR204 trees was inhibitory to growth of the fungus”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 127–262 · show in text ↑
t0

“Peach Tree”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 89–99 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Dimethomorph trunk painting was ineffective.

Treatment
dimethomorphe0
Outcome
effectivee0
Direction
neithere0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“neither dimethomorph nor cymoxanil were effective”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 267–316 · show in text ↑
t0

“Peach Tree”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 89–99 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cymoxanil trunk painting was ineffective.

Treatment
cymoxanile0
Outcome
effectivee0
Direction
neithere0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“neither dimethomorph nor cymoxanil were effective”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 267–316 · show in text ↑
t0

“Peach Tree”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 89–99 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Metalaxyl soil drench suppressed canker development after inoculation.

Taxon
treese0
Treatment
metalaxyl as a soil drenche0
Interactor
Phytophthora cactorumPhytophthora cactorume0pathogen
Outcome
canker developmente0
Direction
suppressede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Phytophthora cactorum
Phytophthora cactorum · InteractorMary Ann Hansen · CC BY 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Application of metalaxyl as a soil drench suppressed canker development when the treated trees were subsequently inoculated with Phytophthora cactorum”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 318–468 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Fosetyl‐Al significantly reduced fungal growth versus cymoxanil, dimethomorph and control.

Treatment
Fosetyl‐Ale0
Outcome
growth of funguse0
Direction
reducede0
Comparator
cymoxanil, dimethomorph and controle0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“Fosetyl‐Al significantly reduced the growth of fungus compared with cymoxanil, dimethomorph and control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 471–574 · show in text ↑
t0

“Peach Tree”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 89–99 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fosetyl‐Al was less effective than metalaxyl.

Outcome
effectivee0
Direction
not as effectivee0
Comparator
metalaxyle0

Not reportedTaxonTreatment

Verbatim

e0

“it was not as effective as metalaxyl”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 579–615 · show in text ↑
t0

“Peach Tree”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 89–99 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Dimethomorph did not influence canker development.

Treatment
dimethomorphe0
Outcome
canker developmente0
Direction
did not influencee0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“dimethomorph and cymoxanil did not influence canker development”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 624–687 · show in text ↑
t0

“Peach Tree”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 89–99 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cymoxanil did not influence canker development.

Treatment
cymoxanile0
Outcome
canker developmente0
Direction
did not influencee0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“dimethomorph and cymoxanil did not influence canker development”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 624–687 · show in text ↑
t0

“Peach Tree”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 89–99 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Metalaxyl remained active at least 21 days.

Treatment
metalaxyle0
Outcome
activee0
Value
at least 21 dayse0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“Both metalaxyl and fosetyl‐Al were active for at least 21 days after applications”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 689–770 · show in text ↑
t0

“Peach Tree”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 89–99 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fosetyl‐Al remained active at least 21 days.

Treatment
fosetyl‐Ale0
Outcome
activee0
Value
at least 21 dayse0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“Both metalaxyl and fosetyl‐Al were active for at least 21 days after applications”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 689–770 · show in text ↑
t0

“Peach Tree”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 89–99 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Metalaxyl was the most effective fungicide in bark strips.

Treatment
Metalaxyle0
Outcome
most effectivee0
Direction
most effectivee0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Metalaxyl was the most effective fungicide”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 937–979 · show in text ↑
t0

“Peach Tree”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 89–99 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Fosetyl‐Al significantly reduced fungal development versus other agents and untreated strips.

Treatment
fosetyl‐Ale0
Outcome
development of funguse0
Direction
reducede0
Comparator
dimethomorph, cymoxanil and the untreated stripse0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“fosetyl‐Al significantly reduced the development of fungus compared with dimethomorph, cymoxanil and the untreated strips”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 984–1105 · show in text ↑
t0

“Peach Tree”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 89–99 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Dimethomorph significantly reduced strip colonization versus untreated strips.

Treatment
dimethomorphe0
Outcome
Colonization of stripse0
Direction
lesse0
Comparator
untreated stripse0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“Colonization of strips treated with dimethomorph was significantly less than untreated strips”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1107–1200 · show in text ↑
t0

“Peach Tree”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 89–99 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cymoxanil did not inhibit fungal growth on bark strips.

Treatment
cymoxanile0
Outcome
growth of funguse0
Direction
did not inhibite0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“cymoxanil did not inhibit the growth of fungus”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1215–1261 · show in text ↑
t0

“Peach Tree”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 89–99 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend metalaxyl trunk painting to prevent peach Phytophthora rot.

Taxon
peach treesPrunus persicae0
Treatment
metalaxyle0
Interactor
PhytophthoraPhytophthorae0pathogen
Outcome
preventing Phytophthora rote0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus persica
Prunus persica · TaxonAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Phytophthora
Phytophthora · Interactor · picture of the genus (one of its species)Rasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Application of metalaxyl or fosetyl‐Al as trunk paint or a soil drench appear to be effective procedures for preventing Phytophthora rot of peach trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1263–1414 · show in text ↑