Abstract
Abstract Striga hermonthica is the most widespread and destructive obligate root parasite infecting maize and other cereals in Africa. Maize inbred lines supporting reduced S. hermonthica emergence can form an important basis for developing Striga ‐resistant maize cultivars. Twenty new inbred lines selected for field resistance to S. hermonthica , and five inbred checks with known resitance, tolerance and susceptibility reactions to S. hermonthica were evaluated in pots, greenhouse and field experiments under artificial Striga infestation for 3 years. The experiments were conducted to determine the extent of variation in parasite attachment to the roots of these lines and its relationship with emerged Striga plants and other traits. Significant differences (P < 0.0001) were detected among the inbred lines for the numbers of attached and emerged Striga plants and the results were consistent across test environments. Also, the lines exhibited significant differences for Striga damage symptom ratings and other traits recorded in the field. Parasite attachment to the roots was significantly correlated with emerged Striga count in the screenhouse ( r = 0.67–0.68, P < 0.001) and in the field ( r = 0.82–0.84, P < 0.0001) and with levels of grain yield reduction due to Striga ( r = 0.71, P < 0.0001). Regression analysis of the numbers of attached parasites on the first principal component axis scores that integrated several traits recorded in the field was significant (P < 0.0001) and accounted for 62% of the total variation in numbers of attached parasites. The new inbred lines and the resistant inbred check were the least affected by S. hermonthica and exhibited yield losses of 0–37% compared with the yields of the tolerant and the susceptible inbred checks, which were reduced by 40–85%. Sixteen new inbred lines supported significantly fewer attached parasites compared with the susceptible inbred check. Some of these lines also supported significantly fewer emerged parasites and sustained lower damage symptoms and percentage yield losses due to Striga compared with the susceptible inbred check. These inbred lines would be useful in breeding programmes for developing resistant maize cultivars.
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 13
Claim · model-written summary
Inbred lines differed significantly in attached Striga count.
Zea mays
StrigaOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Significant differences (P < 0.0001) were detected among the inbred lines for the numbers of attached and emerged Striga plants”
t0“maize inbred lines to Striga hermonthica”
Claim · model-written summary
Inbred lines differed significantly in emerged Striga count.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Significant differences (P < 0.0001) were detected among the inbred lines for the numbers of attached and emerged Striga plants”
t0“maize inbred lines to Striga hermonthica”
Claim · model-written summary
Lines differed significantly in Striga damage symptoms and other field traits.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the lines exhibited significant differences for Striga damage symptom ratings and other traits recorded in the field”
t0“maize inbred lines to Striga hermonthica”
Claim · model-written summary
Parasite attachment correlated with emerged Striga in the screenhouse.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Parasite attachment to the roots was significantly correlated with emerged Striga count in the screenhouse ( r = 0.67–0.68, P < 0.001)”
t0“maize inbred lines to Striga hermonthica”
Claim · model-written summary
Parasite attachment correlated with emerged Striga in the field.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Parasite attachment to the roots was significantly correlated with emerged Striga count in the screenhouse ( r = 0.67–0.68, P < 0.001) and in the field ( r = 0.82–0.84, P < 0.0001)”
t0“maize inbred lines to Striga hermonthica”
Claim · model-written summary
Parasite attachment correlated with Striga-related grain yield reduction.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“levels of grain yield reduction due to Striga ( r = 0.71, P < 0.0001)”
t0“maize inbred lines to Striga hermonthica”
Claim · model-written summary
Regression on field trait scores accounted for 62% of variation in attached parasite count.
- Interactor
- Striga hermonthica
Striga hermonthicat0parasite - Outcome
- variation in numbers of attached parasitese0
- Value
- 62%e0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“accounted for 62% of the total variation in numbers of attached parasites”
t0“maize inbred lines to Striga hermonthica”
Claim · model-written summary
New lines and the resistant check had yield losses of 0–37%.
- Material
- new inbred linese0
- Interactor
- S. hermonthicaStriga hermonthicae0parasitet0
- Outcome
- yield lossese0
- Value
- 0–37%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The new inbred lines and the resistant inbred check were the least affected by S. hermonthica and exhibited yield losses of 0–37%”
t0“maize inbred lines to Striga hermonthica”
Claim · model-written summary
Tolerant and susceptible checks had yield reductions of 40–85%.
- Material
- inbred checkse0
- Interactor
- Striga hermonthicaStriga hermonthicat0parasite
- Outcome
- reducede0
- Value
- 40–85%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the tolerant and the susceptible inbred checks, which were reduced by 40–85%”
t0“maize inbred lines to Striga hermonthica”
Claim · model-written summary
Sixteen new lines supported fewer attached parasites than the susceptible check.
- Material
- new inbred linese0
- Interactor
- Striga hermonthicaStriga hermonthicat0parasite
- Outcome
- attached parasitese0
- Direction
- fewere0
- Value
- Sixteene0
- Comparator
- susceptible inbred checke0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sixteen new inbred lines supported significantly fewer attached parasites compared with the susceptible inbred check”
t0“maize inbred lines to Striga hermonthica”
Claim · model-written summary
Some lines had fewer emerged parasites than the susceptible check.
- Material
- linese0
- Interactor
- Striga hermonthicaStriga hermonthicat0parasite
- Outcome
- emerged parasitese0
- Direction
- fewere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Some of these lines also supported significantly fewer emerged parasites”
t0“maize inbred lines to Striga hermonthica”
Claim · model-written summary
Some lines had lower damage symptoms and yield losses.
- Material
- inbred linest0
- Outcome
- damage symptoms and percentage yield lossese0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- susceptible inbred checke0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“sustained lower damage symptoms and percentage yield losses due to Striga compared with the susceptible inbred check”
t0“maize inbred lines to Striga hermonthica”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors propose these lines for breeding resistant maize.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“These inbred lines would be useful in breeding programmes for developing resistant maize cultivars”