Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Flush pruning gave tomato stem wounds absolute resistance.

A claim from Resistance against B otrytis cinerea in smooth leaf pruning wounds of tomato does not depend on major disease signalling pathways · 2013

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Flush pruning gave tomato stem wounds absolute resistance.

Treatment
pruning leaves flush to the steme0
Interactor
B . cinereae0pathogen
Outcome
resistance of the stem woundse0
Direction
absolute resistancee0
Comparator
petiole stubse0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingValueQualifier

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“pruning leaves flush to the stem resulted in absolute resistance of the stem wounds, whereas petiole stubs displayed a high level of susceptibility to B . cinerea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 532–694
t0

“tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 70–76

Title

Resistance against B otrytis cinerea in smooth leaf pruning wounds of tomato does not depend on major disease signalling pathways

T. Beyers; C. Vos; R. Aerts; et al. Plant Pathology 2013. doi:10.1111/ppa.12075

Other claims from this paper (9)

Record rev-c5ce8c70b8a435d3d2865677e73a0ec719d522ee9963d15400cb73b50ee54590 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 1 in the model’s answer

pruning · disease · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

14 papers: 8 positive, 6 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this claim · 6 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
    Fruit pruning significantly increased tomato fruit cracking incidence.

    Cuticle cracking in tomato fruit · 1993 · compared with standard practice

    Opposite direction

  2. no effect
    Pruning had no effect on disease development or yield in noninoculated tomato plants.

    Effects of Pruning on Tomato Plants Supporting Epiphytic Populations ofClavibacter michiganensissubsp.michiganensis · 1994

    Opposite direction

  3. negative
    Inflorescence thinning tended to promote blossom-end rot and fruit cracking, significantly for blossom-end rot in the rainy season.

    Effects of shoot pruning and inflorescence thinning on plant growth, yield and fruit quality of greenhouse tomatoes in a tropical climate · 2016

    Opposite direction

  4. negative
    Subsequent tomato trusses became severely affected by blossom-end rot after thinning.

    Blossom‐end rot of tomato as influenced by truss size · 1982

    Opposite direction

  5. negative
    Single-stem pruning increased cracking incidence.

    Effect of stem and fruit pruning on yield and quality of hydroponically grown tomato. · 2009

    Opposite direction

  6. no effect
    Early pruning did not influence tomato foliar disease incidence.

    Early Pruning Effects on ‘Florida-47’ and ‘Sungard’ Tomato · 2008 · compared with nonpruned control

    Opposite direction

  7. positive
    Cutting cucumber shoots mitigated phosphorus deficiency symptoms in tomato seedlings.

    Common arbuscular mycorrhizal networks amplify competition for phosphorus between seedlings and established plants · 2013

    Same direction

  8. positive
    Waiting until afternoon to thin dry tomato plants reduced bacterial spot incidence from 55% to 0% in fall 1988.

    Dispersal and Management of Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria During Thinning of Direct-Seeded Tomato · 1990 · compared with 55%

    Same direction

5 papers more in this group

See all 14 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.