Abstract
Management of grape powdery mildew (Erysiphe necator) and other polycyclic diseases relies on numerous fungicide applications that follow calendar or model-based application intervals, both of which assume that inoculum is always present. Quantitative molecular assays have been previously developed to initiate fungicide applications, and could be used to optimize fungicide application intervals throughout the growing season based on inoculum concentration. Airborne inoculum samplers were placed at one research and six commercial vineyards in the Willamette Valley of Oregon. Fungicide applications in all plots were initiated at the first detection of E. necator inoculum, and all subsequent fungicide application intervals were made based the grower' standard calendar program or based on inoculum concentration. In adjusted-interval plots, fungicides were applied at the shortest labeled application interval when >10 spores were detected and the longest labeled application interval when <10 spores were detected. Fungicide applications in control plots consisted of the growers' standard management practice. An average of 2.3 fewer fungicide applications in 2013 and 1.6 fewer fungicide applications in 2014 were used in the adjusted fungicide application intervals treatment in grower fields without significant differences in berry or leaf disease incidence between treatments.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed public-domain. 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 3
Claim · model-written summary
Adjusted inoculum-based intervals used 2.3 fewer fungicide applications in 2013 than grower management.
- Taxon
- grower fieldse0
- Treatment
- adjusted fungicide application intervals treatmente0
- Outcome
- fungicide applicationse0
- Direction
- fewere0
- Value
- 2.3 fewer fungicide applicationse0
- Setting
- grower fieldse0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“An average of 2.3 fewer fungicide applications in 2013 and 1.6 fewer fungicide applications in 2014 were used in the adjusted fungicide application intervals treatment in grower fields”
t0“Erysiphe necator”
e1“grape powdery mildew (Erysiphe necator)”
e2“adjusted fungicide application intervals treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
Adjusted intervals used 1.6 fewer fungicide applications in 2014.
- Taxon
- grapee1
- Treatment
- adjusted fungicide application intervals treatmente0
- Outcome
- fungicide applicationse0
- Direction
- fewere0
- Value
- 1.6 fewer fungicide applicationse0
- Setting
- grower fieldse0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“An average of 2.3 fewer fungicide applications in 2013 and 1.6 fewer fungicide applications in 2014 were used in the adjusted fungicide application intervals treatment in grower fields”
t0“Erysiphe necator”
e1“grape powdery mildew (Erysiphe necator)”
e2“adjusted fungicide application intervals treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
Berry and leaf disease incidence did not differ significantly between treatments.
- Taxon
- grapee1
- Treatment
- adjusted fungicide application intervals treatmente2
- Interactor
- Erysiphe necator
Erysiphe necatort0pathogen - Outcome
- berry or leaf disease incidencee0
- Direction
- without significant differencese0
- Comparator
- between treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“without significant differences in berry or leaf disease incidence between treatments”
t0“Erysiphe necator”
e1“grape powdery mildew (Erysiphe necator)”
e2“adjusted fungicide application intervals treatment”
The same questions in other papers
fungicide · Erysiphe necator · VitisPositive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →fungicide · molecular: metabolites · VitisResults agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
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.