Claim · model-written summary
Similarly treated plants had the same leaf-area reduction across two years but a much greater net-assimilation decrease in the second year.
- Taxon
- sugar‐beet
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise1 - Interactor
- beet yellows virusBeet yellows viruse1pathogen
- Outcome
- reduction of leaf areae0
- Direction
- samee0
- Qualifier
- but the decrease in N.A.R. was much greater in the seconde0
Verbatim
e0“similarly treated plants showed the same reduction of leaf area in two successive years, but the decrease in N.A.R. was much greater in the second.”
e1“Infection with beet yellows virus depressed the dry‐matter yield of sugar‐beet plants”
Title
COMPARATIVE PHYSIOLOGICAL STUDIES ON THE GROWTH OF FIELD CROPS
D. J. WATSON; MARION A. WATSON Annals of Applied Biology 1953. doi:10.1111/j.1744-7348.1953.tb02364.x
Other claims from this paper (18)
- Intervention effect Beet yellows infection depressed sugar-beet dry-matter yield by decreasing leaf area and net assimilation rate, without reducing leaf number.
- Intervention effect End-of-June yellows infection yellowed 30‐50% of leaf area from mid-August; later infection caused less yellowing.
- Mechanism Yellowing nearly explained the decrease in net assimilation if yellowed leaf parts do not photosynthesize, although similar carbohydrate fluctuations suggest photosynthesis may be little slowed and respiration may instead increase.
- Intervention effect Late-sown infected plants had a greater leaf-area reduction but a smaller net-assimilation reduction than early-sown plants.
- Intervention effect Yellows dry-matter losses were mostly in roots, petiole dry weight also decreased, and leaf-lamina dry weight was little affected.
- Intervention effect Yellows greatly increased reducing sugars and caused smaller sucrose and starch increases in leaf laminae, beginning with etch symptoms; starch effects peaked then while sugar effects increased with yellowing.
- Intervention effect Yellows reduced leaf-lamina water content, nitrogen content and arealweight ratio.
- Mechanism The carbohydrate rise could explain the nitrogen-content change but not the other leaf-lamina changes.
- Intervention effect Yellows did not affect petiole and root water content but increased their nitrogen content.
- Mechanism Yellows reduced root sucrose content, while decreased root weight accounted for most sugar-yield loss.
- Intervention effect Beet mosaic infection decreased sugar-beet dry weight only with nitrogenous fertilizer, through reduced leaf area and net assimilation.
- Intervention effect Mosaic depressed dry weights of leaf lamina, petiole and root.
- Intervention effect Mosaic did not affect leaf-lamina carbohydrate content, water content or arealweight ratio.
- Intervention effect Mosaic did not affect petiole and root water content.
- Intervention effect Mosaic increased nitrogen content throughout plants receiving no nitrogenous fertilizer, but not in nitrogen-treated plants.
- Intervention effect Mosaic slightly increased root sucrose content.
- Intervention effect End-of-June mosaic infection caused a 20 yo sugar-yield loss in nitrogen-fertilized plants.
- Intervention effect Yellows infection of similar plants at the same date reduced sugar yield by 50%.