Claim · model-written summary
Mil-16 inoculation gave no benefit to cv. Cudlow Cross in a one-year test.
- Taxon
- tomato crops
Solanum lycopersicumt0 - Material
- cv. Cudlow Crosse6
- Treatment
- inoculation with Mil‐16e6
- Outcome
- benefite6
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede6
- Qualifier
- 1 year's teste6
Not reportedGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValue
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e6“In 1 year's test no benefit from inoculation with Mil‐16 was recorded in cv. Cudlow Cross”
t0“early glasshouse tomato crops”
Title
A. G. CHANNON; N. J. CHEFFINS; G. M. HITCHON; et al. Annals of Applied Biology 1978. doi:10.1111/j.1744-7348.1978.tb00686.x
Other claims from this paper (5)
- Intervention effect Inoculation with the Mil-16 attenuated TMV strain at seedling stage raised tomato fruit yield by 5-8-9-4% over uninoculated plants that became naturally infected.
- Intervention effect Inoculation with Mil-16 gave higher gross financial returns from tomato (up to 25p per plant) than uninoculated plants.
- Intervention effect Tomato plants protected by Mil-16 yielded up to 14% more than plants artificially inoculated with the indigenous severe virus.
- Intervention effect Mil-16 inoculation had little adverse effect on early growth or fruit development rate over the first five trusses.
- Intervention effect In 1973 the final yield of Mil-16 inoculated tomato plants was about 5% lower than that of plants substantially free from infection for 14 weeks after planting.