Abstract
The responses of diverse cucurbit accessions, including cucumber, melon, watermelon, pumpkin, and Momordica spp., to Meloidogyne javanica and M. incognita, were evaluated. For melons and cucumbers, severity of galling was significantly affected by nematode species, but no significant effects of cultivars or cultivar x nematode species interactions on the level of galling were observed. Severity of galling was always higher for M. incognita than for M. javanica in any cultivar tested. Galling indices in melons were 0.3 and 1.6, and in cucumber 2.8 and 3.7, for M. javanica and M. incognita, respectively. Watermelon did not did show root galling when inoculated with M. javanica and showed a very low index (0-0.3) with M. incognita. Cucurbita accessions evaluated were the most susceptible. Galling index in pumpkin inoculated with M. javanica was significantly lower than that caused by M. incognita. Cucurbita moschata and the intraspecific hybrids of C. moschata were more resistant than commercial cultivars of...
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 12
Claim · model-written summary
For melons and cucumbers, galling severity was significantly affected by nematode species.
- Taxon
- melons and cucumbers
.jpg?width=60)
Cucumis melo
Cucumis sativuse1 - Treatment
- nematode speciese1
- Outcome
- severity of gallinge1
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e1“For melons and cucumbers, severity of galling was significantly affected by nematode species, but no significant effects of cultivars or cultivar x nematode species interactions on the level of galling were observed”
Claim · model-written summary
For melons and cucumbers, cultivars had no significant effect on the level of galling, nor did cultivar x nematode species interactions.
- Taxon
- melons and cucumbersCucumis meloCucumis sativuse1
- Treatment
- cultivarse1
- Outcome
- level of gallinge1
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede1
- Qualifier
- cultivar x nematode species interactionse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“For melons and cucumbers, severity of galling was significantly affected by nematode species, but no significant effects of cultivars or cultivar x nematode species interactions on the level of galling were observed”
Claim · model-written summary
Galling severity was higher with M. incognita than with M. javanica in every cultivar tested.
- Taxon
- cucurbit accessionse0
- Interactor
- M. incognita
_penetrates_a_tomato_root_-_USDA-ARS.jpg?width=60)
Meloidogyne incognitae2pathogen - Outcome
- Severity of gallinge2
- Direction
- highere2
- Qualifier
- in any cultivar testede2
- Comparator
- M. javanicae2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_penetrates_a_tomato_root_-_USDA-ARS.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“The responses of diverse cucurbit accessions, including cucumber, melon, watermelon, pumpkin, and Momordica spp., to Meloidogyne javanica and M. incognita”
e2“Severity of galling was always higher for M. incognita than for M. javanica in any cultivar tested”
Claim · model-written summary
On melons, the galling index with M. javanica was 0.3.
- Taxon
- melonsCucumis meloe3
- Interactor
- M. javanicaMeloidogyne javanicae3pathogen
- Outcome
- Galling indicese3
- Value
- 0.3e3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“Galling indices in melons were 0.3 and 1.6, and in cucumber 2.8 and 3.7, for M. javanica and M. incognita, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
On melons, the galling index with M. incognita was 1.6.
- Taxon
- melonsCucumis meloe3
- Interactor
- M. incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae3pathogen
- Outcome
- Galling indicese3
- Value
- 1.6e3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“Galling indices in melons were 0.3 and 1.6, and in cucumber 2.8 and 3.7, for M. javanica and M. incognita, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
On cucumber, the galling index with M. javanica was 2.8.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse3
- Interactor
- M. javanicaMeloidogyne javanicae3pathogen
- Outcome
- Galling indicese3
- Value
- 2.8e3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“Galling indices in melons were 0.3 and 1.6, and in cucumber 2.8 and 3.7, for M. javanica and M. incognita, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
On cucumber, the galling index with M. incognita was 3.7.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse3
- Interactor
- M. incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae3pathogen
- Outcome
- Galling indicese3
- Value
- 3.7e3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“Galling indices in melons were 0.3 and 1.6, and in cucumber 2.8 and 3.7, for M. javanica and M. incognita, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Watermelon showed no root galling when inoculated with M. javanica.
- Taxon
- Watermelon
Citrullus lanatuse4 - Treatment
- inoculated with M. javanicae4
- Interactor
- M. javanicaMeloidogyne javanicae4pathogen
- Outcome
- root gallinge4
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“Watermelon did not did show root galling when inoculated with M. javanica”
Claim · model-written summary
Watermelon showed a very low root galling index (0-0.3) with M. incognita.
- Taxon
- WatermelonCitrullus lanatuse4
- Interactor
- M. incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae5pathogen
- Outcome
- root gallinge4
- Value
- 0-0.3e5
- Qualifier
- very lowe5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“Watermelon did not did show root galling when inoculated with M. javanica”
e5“showed a very low index (0-0.3) with M. incognita”
Claim · model-written summary
Cucurbita accessions were the most susceptible to the nematodes evaluated.
Verbatim
e6“Cucurbita accessions evaluated were the most susceptible”
Claim · model-written summary
In pumpkin inoculated with M. javanica, galling index was significantly lower than that caused by M. incognita.
- Taxon
- pumpkine7
- Treatment
- inoculated with M. javanicae7
- Interactor
- M. javanicaMeloidogyne javanicae7pathogen
- Second interactor
- M. incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae7pathogen
- Outcome
- Galling indexe7
- Direction
- lowere7
- Comparator
- M. incognitae7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e7“Galling index in pumpkin inoculated with M. javanica was significantly lower than that caused by M. incognita”
Claim · model-written summary
Cucurbita moschata and its intraspecific hybrids were more resistant to the nematodes than commercial cultivars.
- Taxon
- Cucurbita moschata
Cucurbita moschatae1 - Material
- intraspecific hybrids of C. moschatae1
- Outcome
- resistante1
- Direction
- more resistante1
- Comparator
- commercial cultivarse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Cucurbita moschata and the intraspecific hybrids of C. moschata were more resistant than commercial cultivars”
The same questions in other papers
inoculation · pest · Citrullus lanatus (watermelon)Positive and negative results
2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
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.