Paper · 2013 · Acta Phytopathologica et Entomologica Hungarica

Cross-protection test with ‘CandidatusPhytoplasma mali’ 1/93 strain against closely and distantly related phytoplasma strains

E. Kiss; E. Seemüller; S. Süle

4
claims
7
verbatim quotes
0
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Putative inhibitory effect of ‘Candidatus Phytoplasma mali’ 1/93 mild strain was tested under greenhouse conditions against the related ESFY and the distantly related STOL and AAY strains of ‘Candidatus Phytoplasma prunorum’, ‘Candidatus Phytoplasma solani’ and ‘Candidatus Phytoplasma asteris’, respectively, which are responsible for serious damages and yield losses in fruit orchards across Europe. A consequent decrease of the DNA amount of the virulent GSFY strain analysed by PCR and Real-Time PCR could be observed when the plants were preliminary immunised by 1/93 strain. The cross-protection phenomenon proved to be effective between closely related strains, but no inhibition occurred among distantly related strains due to preliminary infection. Our results support that immunization with a mild, antagonist strain can be of phytopathological relevance in phytoplasmal researches.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Preliminary immunization with strain 1/93 decreased DNA of virulent GSFY.

Taxon
plantsViridiplantaee0
Treatment
preliminary immunised by 1/93 straine0
Interactor
GSFY straine0pathogen
Second interactor
1/93 straine0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
DNA amount of the virulent GSFY straine0
Direction
decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“A consequent decrease of the DNA amount of the virulent GSFY strain analysed by PCR and Real-Time PCR could be observed when the plants were preliminary immunised by 1/93 strain.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 402–580 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cross-protection was effective between closely related phytoplasma strains.

Taxon
plantsViridiplantaee1
Interactor
1/93 straine1biocontrol_agent
Outcome
cross-protection phenomenon proved to be effectivee0
Qualifier
closely related strainse0

Verbatim

e0

“The cross-protection phenomenon proved to be effective between closely related strains”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 581–667 · show in text ↑
e1

“the plants were preliminary immunised by 1/93 strain”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 527–579 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Preliminary infection did not inhibit distantly related phytoplasma strains.

Taxon
plantsViridiplantaee1
Treatment
preliminary infectione0
Interactor
1/93 straine1biocontrol_agent
Outcome
inhibitione0
Direction
no inhibitione0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“no inhibition occurred among distantly related strains due to preliminary infection”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 673–756 · show in text ↑
e1

“the plants were preliminary immunised by 1/93 strain”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 527–579 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors conclude that immunization with a mild antagonist strain could be relevant to phytoplasma research.

Taxon
plantsViridiplantaee1
Interactor
1/93 straine1biocontrol_agent
Outcome
immunization with a mild, antagonist straine0

Verbatim

e0

“immunization with a mild, antagonist strain can be of phytopathological relevance in phytoplasmal researches”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 783–891 · show in text ↑
e1

“the plants were preliminary immunised by 1/93 strain”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 527–579 · show in text ↑

infection · disease · Viridiplantae (plants)Positive and negative results

9 papers: 5 positive, 4 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

5 papers more in this group

See all 9 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.