Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Strains LCB03, LCB28 and LCB30 showed greenhouse control efficiency above 80%, statistically similar to a commercial Bacillus amyloliquefaciens QST713 formulation.

A claim from Selecting Bacillus strains antagonist to Erysiphe necator (Schw.) Burr. the causal agent of grape powdery mildew · 2024

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Strains LCB03, LCB28 and LCB30 showed greenhouse control efficiency above 80%, statistically similar to a commercial Bacillus amyloliquefaciens QST713 formulation.

Taxon
grapet0
Treatment
bacterial strains LCB03, LCB28, and LCB30e2
Interactor
Erysiphe necatorErysiphe necatort0pathogen
Second interactor
LCB03, LCB28, and LCB30e2biocontrol_agent
Outcome
control efficiencye2
Direction
statistically similare2
Value
>80%e2
Comparator
commercial formulation with Bacillus amyloliquefaciens QST713e2
Setting
greenhousee2

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageQualifier

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

Erysiphe necator
Erysiphe necator · Interactor · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryBenjamin Vanegtern · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Selecting Bacillus strains antagonist to Erysiphe necator (Schw.) Burr. the causal agent of grape powdery mildew”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–112
e2

“Two greenhouse experiments showed that the bacterial strains LCB03, LCB28, and LCB30 showed control efficiency >80%, statistically similar to a commercial formulation with Bacillus amyloliquefaciens QST713”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 522–727

Title

Selecting Bacillus strains antagonist to Erysiphe necator (Schw.) Burr. the causal agent of grape powdery mildew

John Lennon Ferreira dos Santos; Delson Laranjeira; Carlos Alberto Tuão Gava Biocontrol Science and Technology 2024. doi:10.1080/09583157.2024.2402394

Other claims from this paper (6)

Record rev-e246556c6a595aa185e035c4d4dcaa6d8c8eee984b02e05ebe5b6b30c78a4b16 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 2 in the model’s answer

inoculation · Erysiphe necator · VitisPositive and negative results

3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this claim · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
See all 3 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.