Paper · 1957 · Canadian Journal of Plant Science

SAWFLY RESISTANCE IN WHEAT: II. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN WHEAT GROWN IN THE GREENHOUSE AND ON IRRIGATED LAND

D. W. A. Roberts

11
claims
23
verbatim quotes
2
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

The resistance of seven varieties of wheat to the wheat stem sawfly (Cephus cinctus Nort.) was tested in the greenhouse and on irrigated plots. In five of the seven varieties tested, namely, Rescue, H46146, Golden Ball, Red Bobs and Thatcher, the percentage of infested stems that were cut by sawflies was significantly higher in plants grown in the greenhouse in either summer or winter than in plants grown under irrigation in the field. In the other two varieties, H4191 and Melanopus, results were similar but the differences were not significant. This lower resistance of plants grown in the greenhouse was associated with a decrease in the percentage of tunnelled stems in which the older larvae had died. In percentage of infested stems cut, no significant differences were found between the varieties grown in the outdoor soil bins and those on adjacent irrigated land. In other 2-year tests on irrigated land, the variable resistance of wheat was apparently associated with variations in percentage of tunnelled stems in which the older larvae had died. Although stem solidness is usually associated with resistance on dry land, it appears that this characteristic alone cannot be relied on as a measure of sawfly resistance in a given variety when grown in diverse environments.

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 11

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Variety Rescue had a higher percentage of stems cut by sawflies when grown in the greenhouse than under irrigation in the field

Material
Rescuee1
Treatment
plants grown in the greenhousee1
Interactor
sawfliese1pest
Outcome
percentage of infested stems that were cut by sawfliese1
Direction
highere1
Qualifier
summer or wintere1
Comparator
plants grown under irrigation in the fielde1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“In five of the seven varieties tested, namely, Rescue, H46146, Golden Ball, Red Bobs and Thatcher, the percentage of infested stems that were cut by sawflies was significantly higher in plants grown in the greenhouse in either summer or winter than in plants grown under irrigation in the field”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 144–438 · show in text ↑
t0

“SAWFLY RESISTANCE IN WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–26 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Variety H46146 had a higher percentage of stems cut by sawflies when grown in the greenhouse than under irrigation in the field

Material
H46146e1
Treatment
plants grown in the greenhousee1
Interactor
sawfliese1pest
Outcome
percentage of infested stems that were cut by sawfliese1
Direction
highere1
Qualifier
summer or wintere1
Comparator
plants grown under irrigation in the fielde1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“In five of the seven varieties tested, namely, Rescue, H46146, Golden Ball, Red Bobs and Thatcher, the percentage of infested stems that were cut by sawflies was significantly higher in plants grown in the greenhouse in either summer or winter than in plants grown under irrigation in the field”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 144–438 · show in text ↑
t0

“SAWFLY RESISTANCE IN WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–26 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Variety Golden Ball had a higher percentage of stems cut by sawflies when grown in the greenhouse than under irrigation in the field

Material
Golden Balle1
Treatment
plants grown in the greenhousee1
Interactor
sawfliese1pest
Outcome
percentage of infested stems that were cut by sawfliese1
Direction
highere1
Qualifier
summer or wintere1
Comparator
plants grown under irrigation in the fielde1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“In five of the seven varieties tested, namely, Rescue, H46146, Golden Ball, Red Bobs and Thatcher, the percentage of infested stems that were cut by sawflies was significantly higher in plants grown in the greenhouse in either summer or winter than in plants grown under irrigation in the field”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 144–438 · show in text ↑
t0

“SAWFLY RESISTANCE IN WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–26 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Variety Red Bobs had a higher percentage of stems cut by sawflies when grown in the greenhouse than under irrigation in the field

Material
Red Bobse1
Treatment
plants grown in the greenhousee1
Interactor
sawfliese1pest
Outcome
percentage of infested stems that were cut by sawfliese1
Direction
highere1
Qualifier
summer or wintere1
Comparator
plants grown under irrigation in the fielde1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“In five of the seven varieties tested, namely, Rescue, H46146, Golden Ball, Red Bobs and Thatcher, the percentage of infested stems that were cut by sawflies was significantly higher in plants grown in the greenhouse in either summer or winter than in plants grown under irrigation in the field”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 144–438 · show in text ↑
t0

“SAWFLY RESISTANCE IN WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–26 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Variety Thatcher had a higher percentage of stems cut by sawflies when grown in the greenhouse than under irrigation in the field

Material
Thatchere1
Treatment
plants grown in the greenhousee1
Interactor
sawfliese1pest
Outcome
percentage of infested stems that were cut by sawfliese1
Direction
highere1
Qualifier
summer or wintere1
Comparator
plants grown under irrigation in the fielde1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“In five of the seven varieties tested, namely, Rescue, H46146, Golden Ball, Red Bobs and Thatcher, the percentage of infested stems that were cut by sawflies was significantly higher in plants grown in the greenhouse in either summer or winter than in plants grown under irrigation in the field”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 144–438 · show in text ↑
t0

“SAWFLY RESISTANCE IN WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–26 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Variety H4191 showed similar, non-significant stems cut by sawflies in greenhouse and field plants

Material
H4191e2
Treatment
plants grown in the greenhousee1
Interactor
sawfliese1pest
Outcome
percentage of infested stems that were cut by sawfliese1
Direction
similare2
Comparator
plants grown under irrigation in the fielde1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e2

“In the other two varieties, H4191 and Melanopus, results were similar but the differences were not significant”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 440–550 · show in text ↑
e1

“In five of the seven varieties tested, namely, Rescue, H46146, Golden Ball, Red Bobs and Thatcher, the percentage of infested stems that were cut by sawflies was significantly higher in plants grown in the greenhouse in either summer or winter than in plants grown under irrigation in the field”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 144–438 · show in text ↑
t0

“SAWFLY RESISTANCE IN WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–26 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Variety Melanopus showed similar, non-significant stems cut by sawflies in greenhouse and field plants

Material
Melanopuse2
Treatment
plants grown in the greenhousee1
Interactor
sawfliese1pest
Outcome
percentage of infested stems that were cut by sawfliese1
Direction
similare2
Comparator
plants grown under irrigation in the fielde1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e2

“In the other two varieties, H4191 and Melanopus, results were similar but the differences were not significant”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 440–550 · show in text ↑
e1

“In five of the seven varieties tested, namely, Rescue, H46146, Golden Ball, Red Bobs and Thatcher, the percentage of infested stems that were cut by sawflies was significantly higher in plants grown in the greenhouse in either summer or winter than in plants grown under irrigation in the field”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 144–438 · show in text ↑
t0

“SAWFLY RESISTANCE IN WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–26 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Lower resistance in greenhouse plants was associated with a decrease in tunnelled stems with dead older larvae

Outcome
percentage of tunnelled stems in which the older larvae had diede3
Direction
decreasee3
Setting
greenhousee3

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e3

“This lower resistance of plants grown in the greenhouse was associated with a decrease in the percentage of tunnelled stems in which the older larvae had died”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 552–710 · show in text ↑
t0

“SAWFLY RESISTANCE IN WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–26 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

No significant difference in percentage of infested stems cut between outdoor soil bin and adjacent irrigated land varieties

Treatment
varieties grown in the outdoor soil binse4
Outcome
percentage of infested stems cute4
Direction
no_changeinferrede4
Comparator
those on adjacent irrigated lande4
Setting
outdoor soil binse4

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e4

“In percentage of infested stems cut, no significant differences were found between the varieties grown in the outdoor soil bins and those on adjacent irrigated land”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 712–876 · show in text ↑
t0

“SAWFLY RESISTANCE IN WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–26 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Wheat resistance on irrigated land was apparently associated with variation in tunnelled stems with dead older larvae

Outcome
percentage of tunnelled stems in which the older larvae had diede5
Setting
irrigated lande5

Not reportedDirection

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e5

“In other 2-year tests on irrigated land, the variable resistance of wheat was apparently associated with variations in percentage of tunnelled stems in which the older larvae had died”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 878–1061 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Stem solidness alone cannot be relied on as a measure of sawfly resistance in diverse environments

Outcome
measure of sawfly resistancee6

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e6

“Although stem solidness is usually associated with resistance on dry land, it appears that this characteristic alone cannot be relied on as a measure of sawfly resistance in a given variety when grown in diverse environments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1063–1287 · show in text ↑
t0

“SAWFLY RESISTANCE IN WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–26 · show in text ↑