Abstract
Apple and pear produced organically under the U.S. National Organic Program (NOP) standard can be treated with antibiotics for suppression of fire blight caused by Erwinia amylovora. Recent regulatory actions by the NOP, however, have lessened the likelihood of antibiotic use after the 2014 season. In response, western U.S. organic apple and pear stakeholders identified two immediate-need research objectives related to fire blight control: development of effective non-antibiotic control programs based on combinations of registered biological products; and, in apple, integration of these products with lime sulfur, which is sprayed at early bloom to reduce fruit load. In orchard trials in Oregon, increasing the frequency of treatment with biological products improved suppression of floral infection. In apple, fruit load thinning with 2% lime sulfur plus 2% fish oil (LS+FO) at 30 and 70% bloom significantly (P ≤ 0.05) reduced the proportion of blighted flower clusters in four of five orchard trials. Moreover, lime sulfur significantly (P ≤ 0.05) suppressed epiphytic populations of E. amylovora after their establishment on apple flowers. Over four trials, treatment with Aureobasidium pullulans (Blossom Protect) after LS+FO reduced the incidence of fire blight by an average of 92% compared with water only; this level of control was similar to treatment with streptomycin. In three seasons, a spray of a Pantoea agglomerans product after the 70% bloom treatment of LS+FO established the antagonist on a significantly (P ≤ 0.05) higher proportion of flowers compared with a spray of this bacterium before the thinning treatment. Consequently, in apple, biological treatments for fire blight control are not advised until after lime sulfur treatments for fruit load thinning are completed.
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 7
Claim · model-written summary
In orchard trials in Oregon, increasing the frequency of treatment with biological products improved suppression of floral infection in pome fruit.
- Taxon
- Pome Fruitt0
- Treatment
- increasing the frequency of treatment with biological productse1
- Outcome
- suppression of floral infectione1
- Direction
- improvede1
- Setting
- Oregone1
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e1“In orchard trials in Oregon, increasing the frequency of treatment with biological products improved suppression of floral infection”
t0“Pome Fruit”
Claim · model-written summary
In apple, fruit load thinning with 2% lime sulfur plus 2% fish oil at 30 and 70% bloom significantly reduced the proportion of blighted flower clusters in four of five orchard trials.
- Taxon
- apple
Malus domesticae1 - Treatment
- fruit load thinning with 2% lime sulfur plus 2% fish oil (LS+FO) at 30 and 70% bloome1
- Outcome
- proportion of blighted flower clusterse1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Qualifier
- four of five orchard trialse1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“In apple, fruit load thinning with 2% lime sulfur plus 2% fish oil (LS+FO) at 30 and 70% bloom significantly (P ≤ 0.05) reduced the proportion of blighted flower clusters in four of five orchard trials”
Claim · model-written summary
Lime sulfur significantly suppressed epiphytic populations of E. amylovora after their establishment on apple flowers.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae1
- Organ / stage
- flowerse1
- Treatment
- lime sulfure1
- Interactor
- E. amylovora
Erwinia amylovorae1pathogen - Outcome
- epiphytic populations of E. amylovorae1
- Direction
- suppressede1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“lime sulfur significantly (P ≤ 0.05) suppressed epiphytic populations of E. amylovora after their establishment on apple flowers”
Claim · model-written summary
Over four trials, treatment with Aureobasidium pullulans (Blossom Protect) after LS+FO reduced fire blight incidence in pome fruit by an average of 92% compared with water only.
- Taxon
- Pome Fruitt0
- Treatment
- treatment with Aureobasidium pullulans (Blossom Protect) after LS+FOe1
- Interactor
- Erwinia amylovoraErwinia amylovorae2pathogen
- Second interactor
- Aureobasidium pullulans
Aureobasidium pullulanse1biocontrol_agent - Outcome
- incidence of fire blighte1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- 92%e1
- Qualifier
- Over four trialse1
- Comparator
- water onlye1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Over four trials, treatment with Aureobasidium pullulans (Blossom Protect) after LS+FO reduced the incidence of fire blight by an average of 92% compared with water only”
e2“suppression of fire blight caused by Erwinia amylovora”
t0“Pome Fruit”
Claim · model-written summary
The level of fire blight control from A. pullulans after LS+FO was similar to treatment with streptomycin.
- Taxon
- Pome Fruitt0
- Treatment
- treatment with Aureobasidium pullulans (Blossom Protect) after LS+FOe1
- Interactor
- Erwinia amylovoraErwinia amylovorae2pathogen
- Second interactor
- Aureobasidium pullulansAureobasidium pullulanse1biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- level of controle1
- Direction
- similare1
- Comparator
- streptomycine1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“treatment with Aureobasidium pullulans (Blossom Protect) after LS+FO reduced the incidence of fire blight by an average of 92% compared with water only; this level of control was similar to treatment with streptomycin”
e2“suppression of fire blight caused by Erwinia amylovora”
t0“Pome Fruit”
Claim · model-written summary
In three seasons, a spray of a Pantoea agglomerans product after the 70% bloom LS+FO treatment established the antagonist on a significantly higher proportion of flowers than a spray before the thinning treatment.
- Taxon
- Pome Fruitt0
- Organ / stage
- flowerse1
- Treatment
- a spray of a Pantoea agglomerans product after the 70% bloom treatment of LS+FOe1
- Interactor
- Pantoea agglomerans
Pantoea agglomeranse1biocontrol_agent - Outcome
- proportion of flowerse1
- Direction
- highere1
- Qualifier
- In three seasonse1
- Comparator
- a spray of this bacterium before the thinning treatmente1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“In three seasons, a spray of a Pantoea agglomerans product after the 70% bloom treatment of LS+FO established the antagonist on a significantly (P ≤ 0.05) higher proportion of flowers compared with a spray of this bacterium before the thinning treatment”
t0“Pome Fruit”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors advise that in apple, biological treatments for fire blight control not be used until after lime sulfur treatments for fruit load thinning are completed.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae1
- Outcome
- not advised until after lime sulfur treatments for fruit load thinning are completede1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“in apple, biological treatments for fire blight control are not advised until after lime sulfur treatments for fruit load thinning are completed”
The same questions in other papers
sulfur atom · molecular: metabolites · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →lime · molecular: metabolites · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →pruning · molecular: metabolites · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- negative
15 papers more in this group
See all 19 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.