Abstract
SUMMARYSeedlings of Newton Wonder apple multiplied vegetatively on Malus sikkimensis rootstocks and inoculated with a mixture of chlorotic leaf spot, scaly bark and dwarf viruses showed varying degrees of sensitivity to these infections. Although none of the seedlings showed clearly recognizable virus symptoms, many showed a very significant reduction in vigour; the girth differences between the infected and control trees were still increasing three years after inoculation.The infected trees showed signs of nitrogen deficiency, which were confirmed by foliar analysis ; leaf nitrogen as percentage of dry weight was 10% lower than that of the controls. Four years after inoculation 43% of the infected trees had cropped, compared with 58% of the controls.The results suggest that some selection of varieties and rootstocks for virus tolerance has taken place and that the evaluation of new seedlings on their own roots may not be a true indication of their performance on infected rootstocks.
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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Seedlings varied in sensitivity to the virus mixture.
Verbatim
e0“Seedlings of Newton Wonder apple multiplied vegetatively on Malus sikkimensis rootstocks and inoculated with a mixture of chlorotic leaf spot, scaly bark and dwarf viruses showed varying degrees of sensitivity to these infections”
Claim · model-written summary
No seedlings showed clearly recognizable virus symptoms.
- Taxon
- Apples
Malus domesticat0 - Outcome
- none of the seedlings showed clearly recognizable virus symptomse0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“none of the seedlings showed clearly recognizable virus symptoms”
t0“Apples”
Claim · model-written summary
Many infected seedlings had significantly reduced vigour.
- Taxon
- ApplesMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- inoculated with a mixture of chlorotic leaf spot, scaly bark and dwarf virusese1
- Interactor
- chlorotic leaf spot, scaly bark and dwarf virusese1pathogen
- Outcome
- vigoure0
- Direction
- reductione0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“many showed a very significant reduction in vigour”
t0“Apples”
e1“inoculated with a mixture of chlorotic leaf spot, scaly bark and dwarf viruses”
Claim · model-written summary
Girth differences between infected and control trees continued increasing three years after inoculation.
- Taxon
- ApplesMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- infectede0
- Outcome
- girth differencese0
- Direction
- increasinge0
- Qualifier
- three years after inoculatione0
- Comparator
- control treese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the girth differences between the infected and control trees were still increasing three years after inoculation”
t0“Apples”
Claim · model-written summary
Infected trees showed nitrogen deficiency.
- Taxon
- ApplesMalus domesticat0
- Outcome
- signs of nitrogen deficiencye0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The infected trees showed signs of nitrogen deficiency”
t0“Apples”
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf nitrogen percentage was 10% lower in infected trees than controls.
- Taxon
- ApplesMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- infectede1
- Outcome
- leaf nitrogen as percentage of dry weighte0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Value
- 10%e0
- Comparator
- controlse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“leaf nitrogen as percentage of dry weight was 10% lower than that of the controls”
t0“Apples”
e1“The infected trees showed signs of nitrogen deficiency”
Claim · model-written summary
Four years after inoculation, 43% of infected trees had cropped versus 58% of controls.
- Taxon
- ApplesMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- infectede0
- Outcome
- infected trees had croppede0
- Value
- 43%e0
- Qualifier
- 58%e0
- Comparator
- controlse0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Four years after inoculation 43% of the infected trees had cropped, compared with 58% of the controls”
t0“Apples”
Claim · model-written summary
The results suggest prior selection of varieties and rootstocks for virus tolerance.
- Taxon
- ApplesMalus domesticat0
- Outcome
- some selection of varieties and rootstocks for virus tolerance has taken placee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“some selection of varieties and rootstocks for virus tolerance has taken place”
t0“Apples”
Claim · model-written summary
Evaluation of new seedlings on their own roots may misrepresent performance on infected rootstocks.
- Taxon
- ApplesMalus domesticat0
- Outcome
- evaluation of new seedlings on their own roots may not be a true indication of their performance on infected rootstockse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the evaluation of new seedlings on their own roots may not be a true indication of their performance on infected rootstocks”
t0“Apples”
The same questions in other papers
infection · growth · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 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.