Pasteuriaceae 411 claims

family · order Caryophanales · 3 taxa · NCBI Taxonomy ↗

3 entries

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pasteuria spores remained viable after 60 days.

Taxon
Coleus forskohliiPlectranthus barbatust0
Interactor
Pasteuria penetransPasteuria penetranst1biocontrol_agent
Outcome
spores were viablee0
Value
60 dayse0

Verbatim

t0

“Coleus forskohlii”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–68
t1

“Pasteuria penetrans”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 75–94
e0

“the spores were viable even after 60 days of incubation, as confirmed through juvenile parasitisation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 776–877

Title

Biological suppression of Meloidogyne incognita in Coleus forskohlii using Pasteuria penetrans oil dispersion formulation

N Swarnakumari; I Geethalakshmi; S Dharani; et al. Plant Science Today 2025. doi:10.14719/pst.7135

Other claims from this paper (6)
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pasteuria endospores were recovered from treated plants.

Taxon
Coleus forskohliiPlectranthus barbatust0
Interactor
P. penetransPasteuria penetranse0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
P. penetrans endospores were recoverede0

Verbatim

t0

“Coleus forskohlii”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–68
e0

“P. penetrans endospores were recovered from treated plants.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1155–1214

Title

Biological suppression of Meloidogyne incognita in Coleus forskohlii using Pasteuria penetrans oil dispersion formulation

N Swarnakumari; I Geethalakshmi; S Dharani; et al. Plant Science Today 2025. doi:10.14719/pst.7135

Other claims from this paper (6)
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pasteuria penetrans multiplied in tomato roots and tubers under controlled conditions.

Organ / stage
roots and tuberse0
Interactor
P. penetransPasteuria penetranse0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
successful multiplication of P. penetranse0
Value
successfule0
Setting
controlled conditionse0

Verbatim

e0

“Results showed successful multiplication of P. penetrans in tomato roots and tubers under controlled conditions by highlighting the potential for scalable production.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 873–1039

Title

Unraveling a novel strategy on mass multiplication of Pasteuria penetrans against Meloidogyne incognita on tomato, potato, and tuberose

Janani Mani; Shanthi Annaiyan Annals of Plant Protection Sciences 2024. doi:10.5958/0974-0163.2024.00024.0

Observationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Pasteuria endospore production varied across crop cycles.

Interactor
MeloidogyneMeloidogynee0
Second interactor
PasteuriaPasteuriae0
Outcome
production of Pasteuria endospores in Meloidogyne femalese0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“The production of Pasteuria endospores in Meloidogyne females also showed significant variability across crop cycles (P0.01)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 968–1092
t0

“Meloidogyne spp.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 26–42
e1

“tomato plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 716–729

Title

Differential responses of Meloidogyne spp. to Pasteuria isolates over crop cycles

Muhammad Shahid; Simon. R Gowen; Muhammad Burhan; et al. Plant Protection 2024. doi:10.33804/pp.008.02.5192

Other claims from this paper (15)
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Pasteuria parasitism of Meloidogyne females varied with nematode population and isolate presence.

Interactor
MeloidogyneMeloidogynee0
Second interactor
PasteuriaPasteuriae0
Outcome
parasitism of Meloidogyne females by Pasteuriae0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“parasitism of Meloidogyne females by Pasteuria was significantly influenced by nematode population and isolate presence (P0.01)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1183–1310
t0

“Meloidogyne spp.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 26–42
e1

“tomato plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 716–729

Title

Differential responses of Meloidogyne spp. to Pasteuria isolates over crop cycles

Muhammad Shahid; Simon. R Gowen; Muhammad Burhan; et al. Plant Protection 2024. doi:10.33804/pp.008.02.5192

Other claims from this paper (15)
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Meloidogyne female populations varied under Pasteuria influence.

Interactor
Meloidogyne spp.Meloidogynee0
Second interactor
PasteuriaPasteuriae0
Outcome
Final female populations of Meloidogyne spp.e0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“Final female populations of Meloidogyne spp. varied significantly under Pasteuria influence”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1392–1483
t0

“Meloidogyne spp.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 26–42
e1

“tomato plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 716–729

Title

Differential responses of Meloidogyne spp. to Pasteuria isolates over crop cycles

Muhammad Shahid; Simon. R Gowen; Muhammad Burhan; et al. Plant Protection 2024. doi:10.33804/pp.008.02.5192

Other claims from this paper (15)
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bacteria, mainly Bacillus penetrans, colonized 12-20% of Paratylenchus specimens.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Interactor
Paratylenchus sp.Paratylenchuse0pest
Second interactor
Bacillus penetransPasteuria penetranse0other
Outcome
Paratylenchus sp. specimens were colonized by bacteriae0
Value
12-20%e0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

t0

“winter wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–63
e0

“12-20% of Paratylenchus sp. specimens were colonized by bacteria, mainly by Bacillus penetrans”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 510–604

Title

Plant parasitic nematodes in the soil and roots of winter wheat grown in crop rotation and long-term monoculture

Kinga Katarzyna Zatoń; Andrzej Tomasz Skwiercz; Ewa Adamiak; et al. Journal of Plant Protection Research 2023. doi:10.24425/122934

Other claims from this paper (2)
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Plant hosts and Pasteuria interacted strongly on egg masses, root galling and eggs per egg mass of Meloidogyne javanica.

Taxon
plant-hostse0
Treatment
Pasteuriae0
Interactor
Meloidogyne javanicaMeloidogyne javanicae0pest
Second interactor
PasteuriaPasteuriae0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
numbers of eggmasses, root galling and numbers of eggs/eggmasse0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“There were strong interactions between plant-hosts and Pasteuria (P0.01) on numbers of eggmasses, root galling and numbers of eggs/eggmass produced by females of Meloidogyne javanica after 422, 595 and 767 degree days after first, second and third harvests”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–256

Title

STUDIES ON THE POSSIBLE ROLE OF PLANT HOST ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF ROOT-KNOT NEMATODE, MELOIDOGYNE JAVANICA AND PASTEURIA PENETRANS AS AFFECTED BY DIFFERENT HARVESTING DATES

Muhammad Shahid; Simon R. Gowen; Muhammad Burhan Plant Protection 2022. doi:10.33804/pp.006.02.4207

Other claims from this paper (17)
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

After the first harvest, Pasteuria penetrans application reduced root galling of Meloidogyne javanica relative to untreated control.

Taxon
plant-hostse0
Treatment
P. penetrans was appliede1
Interactor
Meloidogyne javanicaMeloidogyne javanicae0pest
Second interactor
P. penetransPasteuria penetranse1biocontrol_agent
Outcome
root gallinge1
Direction
lessere1
Value
3.13e1
Qualifier
5.53e1
Comparator
untreated controle1

Verbatim

e0

“There were strong interactions between plant-hosts and Pasteuria (P0.01) on numbers of eggmasses, root galling and numbers of eggs/eggmass produced by females of Meloidogyne javanica after 422, 595 and 767 degree days after first, second and third harvests”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–256
e1

“After the first harvest, there were significant differences in the above-mentioned parameters between P. penetrans and control treatments (P0.01). There was lesser root galling (3.13) in the treatments where P. penetrans was applied compared with untreated control (5.53)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 418–689

Title

STUDIES ON THE POSSIBLE ROLE OF PLANT HOST ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF ROOT-KNOT NEMATODE, MELOIDOGYNE JAVANICA AND PASTEURIA PENETRANS AS AFFECTED BY DIFFERENT HARVESTING DATES

Muhammad Shahid; Simon R. Gowen; Muhammad Burhan Plant Protection 2022. doi:10.33804/pp.006.02.4207

Other claims from this paper (17)
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pasteuria penetrans application gave fewer egg masses (379) of Meloidogyne javanica after the third harvest.

Taxon
plant-hostse0
Treatment
P. penetrans was appliede1
Interactor
Meloidogyne javanicaMeloidogyne javanicae0pest
Second interactor
P. penetransPasteuria penetranse1biocontrol_agent
Outcome
eggmassese1
Direction
fewere1
Value
379e1

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“There were strong interactions between plant-hosts and Pasteuria (P0.01) on numbers of eggmasses, root galling and numbers of eggs/eggmass produced by females of Meloidogyne javanica after 422, 595 and 767 degree days after first, second and third harvests”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–256
e1

“There were fewer eggmasses (379) and lesser galling (5.1) in the treatments where P. penetrans was applied”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1347–1453

Title

STUDIES ON THE POSSIBLE ROLE OF PLANT HOST ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF ROOT-KNOT NEMATODE, MELOIDOGYNE JAVANICA AND PASTEURIA PENETRANS AS AFFECTED BY DIFFERENT HARVESTING DATES

Muhammad Shahid; Simon R. Gowen; Muhammad Burhan Plant Protection 2022. doi:10.33804/pp.006.02.4207

Other claims from this paper (17)