By interacting organism as written › A. pinodes

Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fallon was not immune to A. pinodes.

Taxon: field pea (Pisum sativum L.)Lathyrus oleraceust0
Material: Fallone0
Interactor: A. pinodesDidymella pinodese0pathogen
Outcome: not to A. pinodese0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0
“cultivar Fallon was immune to A. pisi but not to A. pinodes or the mixture of the two species.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 768–862

t0
“field pea (Pisum sativum L.)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 54–82

Title

Optimized High Throughput Ascochyta Blight Screening Protocols and Immunity to A. pisi in Pea

Emmanuel N. Annan; Bernard Nyamesorto; Qing Yan; et al. Pathogens 2023. doi:10.3390/pathogens12030494

Other claims from this paper (8)

Association Plant developmental stage did not affect Ascochyta blight infection type.
Intervention effect Inoculation timing affected infection type in detached leaves.
Observation Fallon was immune to A. pisi.
Observation Fallon was not immune to the two-species mixture.
Method / resource Any of the three protocols can be used for AB screening.
Recommendation Whole-plant inoculation is necessary to identify resistance to stem and node infection.
Recommendation For detached-leaf assays, inoculation must occur within 1.5 hours after detachment.
Recommendation Purified single-species inoculum is essential to screen resistance to individual species.

Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

A. pinodes isolates were significantly more aggressive than A. pinodella isolates.

Taxon: peaLathyrus oleraceuse1
Interactor: A. pinodesDidymella pinodese0pathogen
Outcome: A. pinodes isolates being significantly more aggressivee0
Direction: more aggressivee0
Comparator: A. pinodella isolatese0

Verbatim

e0
“A. pinodes isolates being significantly more aggressive on average than A. pinodella isolates.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1334–1428

e1
“Ascochyta blight of pea”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–23

Title

Spatiotemporal distribution of Ascochyta pinodes and Ascochyta pinodella during the winter growing season in France

C. Le May; M. I. Chilvers; A. L. Saucereau; et al. Plant Pathology 2017. doi:10.1111/ppa.12823

Other claims from this paper (8)

Observation Disease was low during the sampling period.
Observation Within-population variation accounted for 99% of observed genetic variation.
Observation Among-population variation accounted for 1% of observed genetic variation.
Observation Both species occurred at each sampled location.
Observation A. pinodella had a lower frequency of 6–32%.
Observation Both species developed on different pea nodes.
Observation Aggressiveness differed significantly between the two species.
Observation Aggressiveness differed significantly among isolates within species.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

A. pinodes inoculation produced the highest infection.

Taxon: peaLathyrus oleraceust0
Treatment: inoculation with A. pinodese0
Interactor: A. pinodesDidymella pinodese0pathogen
Outcome: infectione0
Direction: higheste0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“Mean infection ratings of all inoculation treatments were significantly higher compared to controls, with the highest infection for inoculation with A. pinodes.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 342–502

t0
“Pea”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 23–26

Title

Assessment of Selected Pea Genotypes Reaction to Ascochyta Blight under Field Conditions and the Impact of Disease Severity on Yield Components

Lech BOROS; Joanna Marcinkowska Journal of Agricultural Science 2010. doi:10.5539/jas.v2n3p84

Other claims from this paper (12)

Intervention effect Inoculation treatments increased pea infection ratings relative to controls.
Observation Pea genotypes differed significantly in blight severity.
Observation Differences between the least and most infected genotypes remained consistent over the study.
Association Recovery frequencies of A. pinodes and P. pinodella from diseased leaves depended on growing season.
Intervention effect Ascochyta inoculation had deleterious effects on agronomic parameters.
Intervention effect Phoma inoculation had deleterious effects on agronomic parameters.
Intervention effect Ascochyta+Phoma inoculation had deleterious effects on agronomic parameters.
Intervention effect Fungal inoculation increased lodging.
Intervention effect Inoculation reduced pods per plant by 12% to 19%.
Intervention effect Inoculation reduced seed per plant by 18,5 to 22%.
Intervention effect Inoculation reduced seed weight per plant by 18% to 27,7% versus controls.
Observation Genotypes varied substantially in reductions of yield components.

Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Recovery frequencies of A. pinodes and P. pinodella from diseased leaves depended on growing season.

Taxon: peaLathyrus oleraceuse0
Organ / stage: diseased leaf fragmentse0
Interactor: A. pinodesDidymella pinodese0pathogen
Second interactor: P. pinodellaDidymella pinodellae0pathogen
Outcome: Frequencies of A. pinodes and P. pinodellae0
Setting: growing seasone0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0
“Frequencies of A. pinodes and P. pinodella isolated from diseased leaf fragments of ten pea genotypes depended on growing season.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 699–828

Title

Assessment of Selected Pea Genotypes Reaction to Ascochyta Blight under Field Conditions and the Impact of Disease Severity on Yield Components

Lech BOROS; Joanna Marcinkowska Journal of Agricultural Science 2010. doi:10.5539/jas.v2n3p84

Other claims from this paper (12)

Intervention effect Inoculation treatments increased pea infection ratings relative to controls.
Intervention effect A. pinodes inoculation produced the highest infection.
Observation Pea genotypes differed significantly in blight severity.
Observation Differences between the least and most infected genotypes remained consistent over the study.
Intervention effect Ascochyta inoculation had deleterious effects on agronomic parameters.
Intervention effect Phoma inoculation had deleterious effects on agronomic parameters.
Intervention effect Ascochyta+Phoma inoculation had deleterious effects on agronomic parameters.
Intervention effect Fungal inoculation increased lodging.
Intervention effect Inoculation reduced pods per plant by 12% to 19%.
Intervention effect Inoculation reduced seed per plant by 18,5 to 22%.
Intervention effect Inoculation reduced seed weight per plant by 18% to 27,7% versus controls.
Observation Genotypes varied substantially in reductions of yield components.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Seed treatment with Thiram followed by a Chlorothalonil spray reduced the percent disease index of Ascochyta blight in peas to 21.5, compared with 82.0 in the control.

Taxon: peasLathyrus oleraceust0
Treatment: seed treatment of Thiram followed by Chlorothalonil spraye0
Interactor: A. pinodesDidymella pinodese0pathogen
Outcome: PDIe0
Direction: reducede0
Value: 21.5e0
Qualifier: 82.0 in controle0
Comparator: controle0

Verbatim

t0
“peas (Pisum sativum L)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 63–85

e0
“Among the different chemicals tested against A. pinodes, seed treatment of Thiram followed by Chlorothalonil spray reduced the PDI to 21.5 compared to 82.0 in control”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 699–865

Title

Studies on the epidemiology and control of Ascochyta blight of peas (Pisum sativum L) caused byAscochyta pinodes

Sangeetha Panicker; B. Ramraj Archives of Phytopathology and Plant Protection 2008. doi:10.1080/03235400701652417

Other claims from this paper (3)

Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

A. pinodes infected 90% of commercial field pea seed samples, with 1-45% infection levels.

Taxon: peaLathyrus oleraceuse1
Interactor: A. pinodesDidymella pinodese0pathogen
Outcome: infection with A. pinodese0
Value: Ninety per cente0
Qualifier: 1-45%e0
Setting: South Australiae1

Verbatim

e0
“Ninety per cent of samples had infection with A. pinodes with levels of infection ranging from 1-45%, making it the most important seed-borne pathogen”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 472–622

e1
“commercial field pea seed from all parts of South Australia”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 411–470

Title

A standard technique for detecting seed-borne pathogens in peas, chemical control, and testing commercial seed in South Australia

SM Ali; J Paterson; J Crosby Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 1982. doi:10.1071/ea9820348

Other claims from this paper (7)

Method / resource The modified agar plate method reliably detected four seed-borne pathogens on pea seed.
Observation M. phaseolina infected 72% of seed samples, with 1-35% infection levels.
Observation Phoma medicaginis infected 31% of seed samples.
Observation F. oxysporum infected 24% of seed samples.
Observation Only 10% of pea seed samples were free from infection.
Intervention effect Thiram completely controlled the seed-borne pathogens in vitro at high and low dose rates.
Intervention effect Benlate completely controlled the seed-borne pathogens in vitro at high and low dose rates.

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Twenty-six A. pinodes isolates were differentiated into 15 pathotypes.

Taxon: peaLathyrus oleraceust0
Interactor: A. pinodesDidymella pinodese0pathogen
Outcome: 15 pathotypese0
Value: 15 pathotypese0

Verbatim

e0
“Twenty-six isolates of A. pinodes were differentiated into 15 pathotypes”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 177–249

t0
“Selection of pea lines for resistance to pathotypes of Ascochyta pinodes, A. pisi and Phoma medicaginis var. pinodella”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–118

Title

Selection of pea lines for resistance to pathotypes of Ascochyta pinodes, A. pisi and Phoma medicaginis var. pinodella

SM Ali; LF Nitschke; AJ Dube; et al. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 1978. doi:10.1071/ar9780841

Other claims from this paper (3)

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

A. pinodella and A. pinodes survived 12 months in inoculated sterile soil at −20 to 25 °C.

Taxon: peasLathyrus oleraceust0
Interactor: A. pinodellaDidymella pinodellae1pathogen
Second interactor: A. pinodesDidymella pinodese1pathogen
Outcome: survivede1
Setting: inoculated sterile soile1

Verbatim

t0
“Ascochyta spp. of peas in soil”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 33–63

e1
“A. pinodella and A. pinodes survived over a 12-month period in inoculated sterile soil maintained at a temperature range of −20 to 25 °C”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–136

Title

Factors limiting the survival of Ascochyta spp. of peas in soil

V. R. Wallen; Julie Jeun Canadian Journal of Botany 1968. doi:10.1139/b68-170

Other claims from this paper (12)

Observation Cultures isolated from soil at −20 °C to 15 °C were pathogenic.
Association Cultures isolated from soil at 5 and 10 °C were more virulent.
Observation A. pisi survived 12 months in soil at −20 and 5 °C.
Observation Only cultures of A. pisi isolated from −20 °C soil were pathogenic.
Mechanism Chlamydospore formation is considered a factor in the survival of A. pinodella and A. pinodes.
Observation No chlamydospores were formed in soil cultures of A. pisi.
Observation A. pinodella was antagonistic to A. pisi.
Observation A. pinodes was antagonistic to A. pisi.
Observation A. pinodella was antagonistic to A. pinodes.
Observation Ascochyta spp. (A. pinodella or A. pinodes) were isolated from 18 of 46 soil samples across Canada.
Association Soil cropped to corn contained fewer Ascochyta propagules than soil cropped to beans, turnips or peas.
Association Soil cropped to beans, turnips or peas contained the most Ascochyta propagules.

Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Chlamydospore formation is considered a factor in the survival of A. pinodella and A. pinodes.

Taxon: peasLathyrus oleraceust0
Interactor: A. pinodellaDidymella pinodellae4pathogen
Second interactor: A. pinodesDidymella pinodese4pathogen
Outcome: survivale4
Qualifier: to form chlamydosporese4

Verbatim

t0
“Ascochyta spp. of peas in soil”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 33–63

e4
“The ability of soil cultures A. pinodella and A. pinodes to form chlamydospores is considered to a be a factor in their survival over this period of time and temperature range”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 392–567

Title

Factors limiting the survival of Ascochyta spp. of peas in soil

V. R. Wallen; Julie Jeun Canadian Journal of Botany 1968. doi:10.1139/b68-170

Other claims from this paper (12)

Observation A. pinodella and A. pinodes survived 12 months in inoculated sterile soil at −20 to 25 °C.
Observation Cultures isolated from soil at −20 °C to 15 °C were pathogenic.
Association Cultures isolated from soil at 5 and 10 °C were more virulent.
Observation A. pisi survived 12 months in soil at −20 and 5 °C.
Observation Only cultures of A. pisi isolated from −20 °C soil were pathogenic.
Observation No chlamydospores were formed in soil cultures of A. pisi.
Observation A. pinodella was antagonistic to A. pisi.
Observation A. pinodes was antagonistic to A. pisi.
Observation A. pinodella was antagonistic to A. pinodes.
Observation Ascochyta spp. (A. pinodella or A. pinodes) were isolated from 18 of 46 soil samples across Canada.
Association Soil cropped to corn contained fewer Ascochyta propagules than soil cropped to beans, turnips or peas.
Association Soil cropped to beans, turnips or peas contained the most Ascochyta propagules.

Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

A. pinodes was antagonistic to A. pisi.

Taxon: peasLathyrus oleraceust0
Interactor: A. pisiAscochyta pisie6pathogen
Second interactor: A. pinodesDidymella pinodese6biocontrol_agent
Outcome: antagonistice6

Verbatim

t0
“Ascochyta spp. of peas in soil”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 33–63

e6
“A. pinodella and A. pinodes were both antagonistic to A. pisi in sterile soil plates and A. pinodella was antagonistic to A. pinodes”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 628–760

Title

Factors limiting the survival of Ascochyta spp. of peas in soil

V. R. Wallen; Julie Jeun Canadian Journal of Botany 1968. doi:10.1139/b68-170

Other claims from this paper (12)

A. pinodes 19 claims

19 claims