Abstract
Trees of each of five apple ( Malus × domestica Borkh.) rootstocks were inoculated above and below ground with three strains of Agrobacterium tumefaciens (Smith & Townsend) Conn. (AT). These were compared with controls that were not wounded or wounded and treated with sterile deionized water. Percentage of inoculated sites forming galls above ground was significantly greater in Mark and Mailing 9 (M.9 EMLA) than in all other rootstocks except M.26 EMLA at 18 months after inoculation. At both 4 and 18 months after inoculation, gall formation below ground on M.7A was twice as high as above ground, but within other rootstocks, gall formation above and below ground was similar. For the rootstock × strain interaction of AT both 4 and 18 months after inoculation, each measure of crown gall susceptibility above ground was significantly correlated with corresponding below-ground data at P ≤ 0.01. This high correlation and frequent occurrence of galls or protruding callus from wounds below ground in controls suggest that above-ground inoculations are suitable for evaluating crown gall susceptibility in apple rootstocks. Eighteen months after inoculation most of the Mark trees had developed characteristic root mass proliferation (RMP). Three years after inoculation few crown galls were apparent below ground in Mark rootstock, but all but one of trees examined had developed RMP. Among other rootstocks only three (38%) M.9 EMLA trees and one (8%) M.7A tree produced swellings identified as RMP, and all but one (5%) of these trees had been inoculated with AT. Pockets of callus scattered throughout the xylem were observed when Mark RMP were examined microscopically. RMP from other rootstocks and most crown galls contained similar pockets of callus. Although inoculation with AT did not enhance RMP development in Mark, experimental results are not inconsistent with some AT involvement in RMP. Mark RMP is more extensive but not qualitatively different from structures formed at a lower frequency in M.9 EMLA and M.7A inoculated with AT.
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 13
Claim · model-written summary
Above-ground gall formation was higher in Mark and M.9 EMLA than in most other rootstocks.
- Taxon
- apple
Malus domesticae7 - Material
- Marke0
- Interactor
- Agrobacterium tumefaciens
Agrobacterium tumefaciense1pathogen - Outcome
- galls above grounde0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Qualifier
- 18 months after inoculatione0
- Comparator
- all other rootstocks except M.26 EMLAe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Percentage of inoculated sites forming galls above ground was significantly greater in Mark and Mailing 9 (M.9 EMLA) than in all other rootstocks except M.26 EMLA at 18 months after inoculation”
e1“Agrobacterium tumefaciens”
e7“five apple ( Malus × domestica Borkh.) rootstocks”
Claim · model-written summary
M.7A had twice as much gall formation below ground as above ground.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae7
- Material
- M.7Ae0
- Outcome
- gall formation below grounde0
- Direction
- twice as highe0
- Qualifier
- At both 4 and 18 months after inoculatione0
- Comparator
- above grounde0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“At both 4 and 18 months after inoculation, gall formation below ground on M.7A was twice as high as above ground”
e7“five apple ( Malus × domestica Borkh.) rootstocks”
Claim · model-written summary
Above- and below-ground crown gall susceptibility measures correlated for rootstock by strain combinations.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae7
- Outcome
- crown gall susceptibility above grounde0
- Comparator
- corresponding below-ground datae0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“each measure of crown gall susceptibility above ground was significantly correlated with corresponding below-ground data at P ≤ 0.01”
e7“five apple ( Malus × domestica Borkh.) rootstocks”
Claim · model-written summary
Above-ground inoculations were judged suitable for evaluating apple rootstock crown gall susceptibility.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Outcome
- above-ground inoculations are suitable for evaluating crown gall susceptibilitye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“above-ground inoculations are suitable for evaluating crown gall susceptibility in apple rootstocks”
Claim · model-written summary
Most Mark trees developed root mass proliferation by 18 months.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae7
- Material
- Marke0
- Outcome
- root mass proliferation (RMP)e0
- Qualifier
- Eighteen months after inoculatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Eighteen months after inoculation most of the Mark trees had developed characteristic root mass proliferation (RMP)”
e7“five apple ( Malus × domestica Borkh.) rootstocks”
Claim · model-written summary
At three years, few Mark crown galls were apparent below ground.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae7
- Material
- Marke0
- Outcome
- crown gallse0
- Qualifier
- Three years after inoculatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Three years after inoculation few crown galls were apparent below ground in Mark rootstock”
e7“five apple ( Malus × domestica Borkh.) rootstocks”
Claim · model-written summary
At three years, all but one examined Mark tree had root mass proliferation.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae7
- Material
- Marke0
- Outcome
- RMPe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Three years after inoculation few crown galls were apparent below ground in Mark rootstock, but all but one of trees examined had developed RMP”
e7“five apple ( Malus × domestica Borkh.) rootstocks”
Claim · model-written summary
Root mass proliferation occurred in three M.9 EMLA trees.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae7
- Material
- M.9 EMLAe0
- Outcome
- swellings identified as RMPe0
- Value
- 38%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“only three (38%) M.9 EMLA trees and one (8%) M.7A tree produced swellings identified as RMP”
e7“five apple ( Malus × domestica Borkh.) rootstocks”
Claim · model-written summary
Root mass proliferation occurred in one M.7A tree.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae7
- Material
- M.7Ae0
- Outcome
- swellings identified as RMPe0
- Value
- 8%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“only three (38%) M.9 EMLA trees and one (8%) M.7A tree produced swellings identified as RMP”
e7“five apple ( Malus × domestica Borkh.) rootstocks”
Claim · model-written summary
Mark root mass proliferations contained scattered xylem callus pockets.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae7
- Material
- Marke0
- Outcome
- Pockets of callus scattered throughout the xyleme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Pockets of callus scattered throughout the xylem were observed when Mark RMP were examined microscopically”
e7“five apple ( Malus × domestica Borkh.) rootstocks”
Claim · model-written summary
Other rootstock proliferations and most crown galls contained similar callus pockets.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae7
- Outcome
- similar pockets of calluse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“RMP from other rootstocks and most crown galls contained similar pockets of callus”
e7“five apple ( Malus × domestica Borkh.) rootstocks”
Claim · model-written summary
AT inoculation did not enhance Mark root mass proliferation.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae7
- Material
- Marke0
- Treatment
- inoculation with ATe0
- Interactor
- ATe0pathogen
- Outcome
- RMP developmente0
- Direction
- did not enhancee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“inoculation with AT did not enhance RMP development in Mark”
e7“five apple ( Malus × domestica Borkh.) rootstocks”
Claim · model-written summary
Mark root mass proliferation was more extensive than in inoculated M.9 EMLA and M.7A.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae7
- Material
- Marke0
- Outcome
- RMPe0
- Direction
- more extensivee0
- Comparator
- M.9 EMLA and M.7Ae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mark RMP is more extensive but not qualitatively different from structures formed at a lower frequency in M.9 EMLA and M.7A inoculated with AT”
e7“five apple ( Malus × domestica Borkh.) rootstocks”
The same questions in other papers
inoculation · growth · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 31 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
38 papers more in this group
See all 42 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.