Abstract
The Rhizoctonia-bacterial root rot complex continues to be a concerning problem in sugar beet production areas. To investigate resistance to this complex in 26 commercial sugar beet cultivars, field studies and greenhouse studies with mature roots from the field were conducted with Rhizoctonia solani anastomosis group 2-2 IIIB strains and Leuconostoc mesenteroides. Based on means for the 26 cultivars in the 2010 and 2011 field studies, fungal rot ranged from 0 to 8%, bacterial rot ranged from 0 to 37%, total internal rot ranged from 0 to 44%, and surface rot ranged from 0 to 52%. All four rot variables resulted in significant (P < 0.0001) cultivar differences. Based on regression analysis, strong positive relationships (r 2 from 0.6628 to 0.9320; P < 0.0001) were present among the rot variables. When ranking cultivars, the most consistent rot variable was surface rot, because 12 of 13 variable–year combinations had significant (P ≤ 0.05) correlations. When cultivar ranking in greenhouse assays was compared, there was frequently a positive correlation with storage data but no relationship with field results. Thus, the greenhouse assays will identify storage rot resistance but field screening will be required to find resistance to this rot complex in the field.
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
Claim · model-written summary
In the 2010 and 2011 field studies, fungal rot ranged from 0 to 8% across the 26 sugar beet cultivars.
- Taxon
- sugar beet
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0 - Interactor
- Rhizoctonia solani
Rhizoctonia solanie1pathogen - Outcome
- fungal rote2
- Value
- 0 to 8%e2
- Setting
- 2010 and 2011 field studiese2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“26 commercial sugar beet cultivars”
e1“field studies and greenhouse studies with mature roots from the field were conducted with Rhizoctonia solani anastomosis group 2-2 IIIB strains and Leuconostoc mesenteroides”
e2“Based on means for the 26 cultivars in the 2010 and 2011 field studies, fungal rot ranged from 0 to 8%”
Claim · model-written summary
Bacterial rot ranged from 0 to 37% across the 26 sugar beet cultivars.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Interactor
- Leuconostoc mesenteroides
Leuconostoc mesenteroidese1pathogen - Outcome
- bacterial rote3
- Value
- 0 to 37%e3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“26 commercial sugar beet cultivars”
e1“field studies and greenhouse studies with mature roots from the field were conducted with Rhizoctonia solani anastomosis group 2-2 IIIB strains and Leuconostoc mesenteroides”
e3“bacterial rot ranged from 0 to 37%”
Claim · model-written summary
Total internal rot ranged from 0 to 44% across the 26 sugar beet cultivars.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Interactor
- Rhizoctonia solaniRhizoctonia solanie1pathogen
- Second interactor
- Leuconostoc mesenteroidesLeuconostoc mesenteroidese1pathogen
- Outcome
- total internal rote4
- Value
- 0 to 44%e4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“26 commercial sugar beet cultivars”
e1“field studies and greenhouse studies with mature roots from the field were conducted with Rhizoctonia solani anastomosis group 2-2 IIIB strains and Leuconostoc mesenteroides”
e4“total internal rot ranged from 0 to 44%”
Claim · model-written summary
Surface rot ranged from 0 to 52% across the 26 sugar beet cultivars.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Interactor
- Rhizoctonia solaniRhizoctonia solanie1pathogen
- Second interactor
- Leuconostoc mesenteroidesLeuconostoc mesenteroidese1pathogen
- Outcome
- surface rote5
- Value
- 0 to 52%e5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“26 commercial sugar beet cultivars”
e1“field studies and greenhouse studies with mature roots from the field were conducted with Rhizoctonia solani anastomosis group 2-2 IIIB strains and Leuconostoc mesenteroides”
e5“surface rot ranged from 0 to 52%”
Claim · model-written summary
All four rot variables showed significant cultivar differences.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Outcome
- cultivar differencese6
- Qualifier
- All four rot variablese6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“26 commercial sugar beet cultivars”
e6“All four rot variables resulted in significant (P < 0.0001) cultivar differences”
Claim · model-written summary
Rot variables were strongly and positively related to each other (r2 0.6628 to 0.9320).
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Outcome
- rot variablese7
- Direction
- positivee7
- Value
- r 2 from 0.6628 to 0.9320e7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“26 commercial sugar beet cultivars”
e7“strong positive relationships (r 2 from 0.6628 to 0.9320; P < 0.0001) were present among the rot variables”
Claim · model-written summary
Surface rot was the most consistent rot variable for ranking cultivars, with 12 of 13 variable-year combinations significantly correlated.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Outcome
- surface rote1
- Value
- 12 of 13e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“26 commercial sugar beet cultivars”
e1“the most consistent rot variable was surface rot, because 12 of 13 variable–year combinations had significant (P ≤ 0.05) correlations”
Claim · model-written summary
Cultivar ranking in greenhouse assays was frequently positively correlated with storage data.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Outcome
- cultivar ranking in greenhouse assayse1
- Direction
- positivee1
- Qualifier
- frequentlye1
- Comparator
- storage datae1
- Setting
- greenhouse assayse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“26 commercial sugar beet cultivars”
e1“When cultivar ranking in greenhouse assays was compared, there was frequently a positive correlation with storage data but no relationship with field results”
Claim · model-written summary
Cultivar ranking in greenhouse assays showed no relationship with field results.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Outcome
- cultivar ranking in greenhouse assayse1
- Direction
- no relationshipe1
- Comparator
- field resultse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“26 commercial sugar beet cultivars”
e1“When cultivar ranking in greenhouse assays was compared, there was frequently a positive correlation with storage data but no relationship with field results”
Claim · model-written summary
Field screening is required to find resistance to the rot complex in the field.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Outcome
- field screeninge1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“26 commercial sugar beet cultivars”
e1“field screening will be required to find resistance to this rot complex in the field”
Claim · model-written summary
Greenhouse assays will identify storage rot resistance.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Outcome
- storage rot resistancee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“26 commercial sugar beet cultivars”
e1“the greenhouse assays will identify storage rot resistance”