Paper · 2022 · Vestnik of Ulyanovsk state agricultural academy

CONTAMINATION OF SEEDS AND PLANTS OF WHEAT WITH PHYTOPATOGENES OF FUSARIUM GENUS, METHODS OF RECOVERY

Federal State Budgetary Scientific Institution "; N. Yu. Zargaryan; A. Yu. Kekalo; et al.

7
claims
15
verbatim quotes
2
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Widespread production of grain crops and rejection of classical tillage technology have led to a noticeable increase of harmfulness of phytopathogens. First of all, this appertains to facultative parasites with a wide specialization - Bipolaris spp., Fusarium spp., as well as to secondary fungi from Alternaria spp., Cladosporium spp., Penicillium spp. genera and others. There is a simultaneous change of dominance in microbial community of seeds obtained in the Trans-Urals. Fungi of Fusarium spp. genus occupied the leading place among the most harmful pathogens, placing Bipolaris sorokiniana Sacc. Shoem. to the background. F. oxysporum (Schleht) Snyd, F. graminearum Schwabe, F. sporotrichoides Sherb are most spread on spring wheat, both in the tillering phase and at milk-wax stage of grain ripeness. The abundance and diversity of species was significantly higher in the tillering phase than when counted at the end of the vegetation season. To reduce the spread and development of any phytopathogen, it is necessary to apply a set of measures. One of the most effective measures is pre-sowing disinfection of seeds. However, the proposed preparations are not all equally effective in suppressing the development of the fungus of Fusarium spp. genus. During the experiment, it was found that seed treatment fungicides from the class of benzimidazoles - Zim (carbendazim), mixtures of active substances from the classes of triazoles with imidazole - HYIP (triticonazole + prochloraz), and also two triazoles - Oplot (difenoconazole + tebuconazole) were distinguished by high activity from 5.2 to 7.5 units. Application of a microbiological preparation (Bacillus subtilis), as well as its mixtures with a reduced application rate of a chemical disinfectant, showed the absence or low inhibition of fungus mycelium development.

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 7

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Seed treatment fungicides were distinguished by high activity against Fusarium spp., from 5.2 to 7.5 units.

Treatment
seed treatment fungicidese1
Interactor
Fusarium spp.Fusariume3pathogen
Outcome
activitye2
Direction
highe2
Value
from 5.2 to 7.5 unitse2

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Fusarium
Fusarium · Interactor · picture of the genus (one of its species)Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“PLANTS OF WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 27–42 · show in text ↑
e1

“seed treatment fungicides from the class of benzimidazoles”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1302–1360 · show in text ↑
e2

“were distinguished by high activity from 5.2 to 7.5 units”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1557–1614 · show in text ↑
e3

“the proposed preparations are not all equally effective in suppressing the development of the fungus of Fusarium spp. genus”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1136–1259 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bacillus subtilis preparation, alone or mixed with a reduced rate of chemical disinfectant, showed absence or low inhibition of fungus mycelium development.

Treatment
microbiological preparation (Bacillus subtilis)e1
Interactor
funguse1pathogen
Second interactor
Bacillus subtilisBacillus subtilise1biocontrol_agent
Outcome
inhibition of fungus mycelium developmente1
Direction
lowe1

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Bacillus subtilis
Bacillus subtilis · Second interactorY tambe (original uploader) · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“PLANTS OF WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 27–42 · show in text ↑
e1

“Application of a microbiological preparation (Bacillus subtilis), as well as its mixtures with a reduced application rate of a chemical disinfectant, showed the absence or low inhibition of fungus mycelium development”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1616–1833 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fusarium oxysporum, F. graminearum and F. sporotrichoides were most spread on spring wheat in the tillering phase and at milk-wax stage.

Taxon
spring wheatTriticum aestivume1
Organ / stage
tillering phasee1
Interactor
F. oxysporumFusarium oxysporume1pathogen
Second interactor
F. graminearumFusarium graminearume1pathogen
Outcome
most spreade1
Qualifier
F. sporotrichoidese1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Fusarium oxysporum
Fusarium oxysporum · InteractorClemson University - USDA Cooperative Extension Slide Series · CC BY 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Fusarium graminearum
Fusarium graminearum · Second interactorScot Nelson from Honolulu, USA · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“F. oxysporum (Schleht) Snyd, F. graminearum Schwabe, F. sporotrichoides Sherb are most spread on spring wheat, both in the tillering phase and at milk-wax stage of grain ripeness”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 630–808 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fungi of Fusarium spp. occupied the leading place among the most harmful wheat pathogens, ahead of Bipolaris sorokiniana.

Interactor
Fusarium spp.Fusariume1pathogen
Second interactor
Bipolaris sorokinianaBipolaris sorokinianae1pathogen
Outcome
leading place among the most harmful pathogense1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Fusarium
Fusarium · Interactor · picture of the genus (one of its species)Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Bipolaris sorokiniana
Bipolaris sorokiniana · Second interactorJie-Hao Ou · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

t0

“PLANTS OF WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 27–42 · show in text ↑
e1

“Fungi of Fusarium spp. genus occupied the leading place among the most harmful pathogens, placing Bipolaris sorokiniana Sacc. Shoem. to the background”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 478–628 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The microbial community of wheat seeds in the Trans-Urals changed in dominance.

Organ / stage
seedse1
Outcome
change of dominance in microbial communitye1
Setting
Trans-Uralse1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“PLANTS OF WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 27–42 · show in text ↑
e1

“There is a simultaneous change of dominance in microbial community of seeds obtained in the Trans-Urals”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 373–476 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Abundance and diversity of fungal species on wheat were higher in the tillering phase than at the end of the vegetation season.

Organ / stage
tillering phasee1
Outcome
abundance and diversity of speciese1
Direction
highere1
Comparator
end of the vegetation seasone1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“PLANTS OF WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 27–42 · show in text ↑
e1

“The abundance and diversity of species was significantly higher in the tillering phase than when counted at the end of the vegetation season”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 810–950 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Pre-sowing seed disinfection is one of the most effective measures against wheat phytopathogens.

Outcome
pre-sowing disinfection of seedse1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“PLANTS OF WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 27–42 · show in text ↑
e1

“One of the most effective measures is pre-sowing disinfection of seeds”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1055–1125 · show in text ↑

Bacillus subtilis · disease · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

21 papers: 20 positive, 1 negative or no effect

20 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

17 papers more in this group

See all 21 papers →

fungicide · Fusarium · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

28 papers: 22 positive, 6 negative or no effect

21 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

24 papers more in this group

See all 28 papers →

seed treatment · Fusarium · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

12 papers: 11 positive, 1 negative or no effect

10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

8 papers more in this group

See all 12 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.