Claim · model-written summary
Group V came from apomictic rootstock selections crossing M. sieboldii and M. sargentii with M. pumila.
- Taxon
- M. sieboldii and M. sargentii with M. pumila
Malus sargentii
Malus sieboldiie0 - Material
- Group Ve0
- Outcome
- apomictic rootstock selectionse0
Not reportedGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleTreatmentComparatorSettingDirectionValueQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Group V consists of apomictic rootstock selections deriving from crosses of M. sieboldii and M. sargentii with M. pumila”
Title
Susceptibility of Grafted Malus Taxa and Hybrids to Apple Proliferation Disease
Sylvia Kartte; E. Seemüller Journal of Phytopathology 1991. doi:10.1111/j.1439-0434.1991.tb04739.x
Other claims from this paper (11)
- Observation Grafted Malus trees differed in response to apple proliferation infection.
- Observation The tested material was divided into five groups by recovery, witches broom, mortality and MLO population.
- Observation Group I domestic apple had low recovery and mortality, frequent witches broom, and high MLO titer.
- Observation Group II had higher mortality than group I.
- Observation Group III mortality resembled group II while recovery was higher and witches broom and MLO titer were significantly lower.
- Observation Group IV mortality exceeded 50%.
- Observation Group IV usually had low witches broom formation and MLO numbers in phloem.
- Observation Most group V trees recovered or never showed symptoms and had low mortality.
- Observation After inoculation, group V MLO populations were low or degenerate.
- Observation MLO-positive samples decreased during recovery until the organism was undetectable in most cases.
- Recommendation The authors judged group V suitable as resistant rootstocks for controlling apple proliferation.