Paper · 1999 · Plant Disease

First Report of Powdery Mildew of Pepper in North-Central Mexico

R. Velásquez-Valle; P. Valle-Garcia

10
claims
20
verbatim quotes
9
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Pepper plants showing general yellowing and white spots on the lower surface as well as brown spots on the upper surface of the lowest leaves were observed during the 1998 crop season in the states of Chihuahua, Zacatecas, and Aguascalientes (north central area of México). Light defoliation was observed. Samples were collected in Chihuahua and Zacatecas to identify the pathogen, which showed navicular conidia. A conidial suspension was sprayed on pepper varieties, but only Hungarian Yellow Wax showed powdery mildew lesions. The average size of the conidia from Zacatecas was 61.2 × 18.2 μm while those from Chihuahua measured 58.2 × 17.6 μm, which is coincident with the description given for an Oidiopsis sp. The perfect stage is Leveillula taurica (1). Cleistothecia were not observed. In Zacatecas the disease was not detected in tomato fields or in sowthistle (Sonchus oleraceae) plants contiguous to, or within, infected pepper fields. Powdery mildew incidence ranged from 35 to 80% in Ancho type and from 0 to 55% in Mirasol type pepper fields in Zacatecas. The number of powdery mildew lesions per leaf in most cases varied from 1 to 3. Incidence was higher in fields where the canopy was closed and warmer and wetter conditions may have allowed the disease to progress. Reference: (1) J. B. Jones et al. 1991. Compendium of Tomato Diseases. American Phytopathological Society, St. Paul, MN.

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 10

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pepper plants showed general yellowing and white spots on the lower leaf surface in the 1998 season in Chihuahua, Zacatecas and Aguascalientes.

Taxon
Peppert0
Outcome
white spots on the lower surfacee1
Setting
Chihuahua, Zacatecas, and Aguascalientese1

Verbatim

t0

“Powdery Mildew of Pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–40 · show in text ↑
e1

“Pepper plants showing general yellowing and white spots on the lower surface as well as brown spots on the upper surface of the lowest leaves were observed during the 1998 crop season in the states of Chihuahua, Zacatecas, and Aguascalientes”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–241 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Conidia from Zacatecas averaged 61.2 × 18.2 μm, coincident with an Oidiopsis sp. description.

Taxon
Peppert0
Interactor
Oidiopsis sp.Oidiopsise4pathogen
Outcome
average size of the conidiae3
Value
61.2 × 18.2 μme3
Setting
Zacatecase3

Verbatim

t0

“Powdery Mildew of Pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–40 · show in text ↑
e3

“The average size of the conidia from Zacatecas was 61.2 × 18.2 μm while those from Chihuahua measured 58.2 × 17.6 μm”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 530–646 · show in text ↑
e4

“which is coincident with the description given for an Oidiopsis sp.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 648–715 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Conidia from Chihuahua averaged 58.2 × 17.6 μm, coincident with an Oidiopsis sp. description.

Taxon
Peppert0
Interactor
Oidiopsis sp.Oidiopsise4pathogen
Outcome
average size of the conidiae3
Value
58.2 × 17.6 μme3
Setting
Chihuahuae3

Verbatim

t0

“Powdery Mildew of Pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–40 · show in text ↑
e3

“The average size of the conidia from Zacatecas was 61.2 × 18.2 μm while those from Chihuahua measured 58.2 × 17.6 μm”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 530–646 · show in text ↑
e4

“which is coincident with the description given for an Oidiopsis sp.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 648–715 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Only the Hungarian Yellow Wax pepper variety showed powdery mildew lesions after conidial suspension was sprayed on pepper varieties.

Taxon
peppere6
Material
Hungarian Yellow Waxe6
Treatment
conidial suspensione6
Outcome
powdery mildew lesionse6
Direction
showede6

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e6

“A conidial suspension was sprayed on pepper varieties, but only Hungarian Yellow Wax showed powdery mildew lesions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 414–528 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Powdery mildew incidence in Ancho type pepper fields in Zacatecas ranged from 35 to 80%.

Taxon
Peppert0
Material
Ancho typee7
Outcome
Powdery mildew incidencee7
Value
35 to 80%e7
Setting
Zacatecase7

Verbatim

t0

“Powdery Mildew of Pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–40 · show in text ↑
e7

“Powdery mildew incidence ranged from 35 to 80% in Ancho type and from 0 to 55% in Mirasol type pepper fields in Zacatecas”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 947–1068 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Powdery mildew incidence in Mirasol type pepper fields in Zacatecas ranged from 0 to 55%.

Taxon
Peppert0
Material
Mirasol typee7
Outcome
Powdery mildew incidencee7
Value
0 to 55%e7
Setting
Zacatecase7

Verbatim

t0

“Powdery Mildew of Pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–40 · show in text ↑
e7

“Powdery mildew incidence ranged from 35 to 80% in Ancho type and from 0 to 55% in Mirasol type pepper fields in Zacatecas”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 947–1068 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Powdery mildew lesions per leaf in most cases varied from 1 to 3.

Taxon
Peppert0
Outcome
number of powdery mildew lesions per leafe0
Value
1 to 3e0
Qualifier
in most casese0

Verbatim

t0

“Powdery Mildew of Pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–40 · show in text ↑
e0

“The number of powdery mildew lesions per leaf in most cases varied from 1 to 3”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1070–1148 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Powdery mildew incidence was higher in pepper fields with a closed canopy.

Taxon
Peppert0
Outcome
Incidencee0
Direction
highere0
Setting
fields where the canopy was closede0

Verbatim

t0

“Powdery Mildew of Pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–40 · show in text ↑
e0

“Incidence was higher in fields where the canopy was closed”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1150–1208 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The disease was not detected in tomato fields or in sowthistle plants near infected pepper fields in Zacatecas.

Taxon
peppere0
Outcome
disease was not detectede0
Qualifier
in tomato fields or in sowthistle (Sonchus oleraceae) plantse0
Setting
Zacatecase0

Verbatim

e0

“In Zacatecas the disease was not detected in tomato fields or in sowthistle (Sonchus oleraceae) plants contiguous to, or within, infected pepper fields”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 794–945 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Light defoliation was observed on pepper plants.

Taxon
Peppert0
Outcome
defoliatione2
Qualifier
Lighte2

Verbatim

t0

“Powdery Mildew of Pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–40 · show in text ↑
e2

“Light defoliation was observed”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 274–304 · show in text ↑