Abstract
Monosporascus cannonballus, Rhizoctonia solani and Pythium aphanidermatum are the main causal agents of muskmelon vine decline disease in Oman. This study was conducted to examine the response of six cucurbit rootstocks grafted on four muskmelon scions to the causal agents and fruit quality and quantity. The response of 10 day old Palmira seedlings to artificial inoculation with R. solani pathogen alone revealed more damage to muskmelon seedling whereas P. aphanidermatum and M. cannonballus caused less damage when inoculated singly but more disease severity index when combined with R. solani. Artificial inoculation of different rootstocks produced significantly no damping-off and very low vine decline disease severity index on Mubyeongjangsoo, Titan, Tetsukabuto, Rsscih7458, Ezra and Strong Tosa rootstocks. All rootstocks produced high grafting success and low graft failure with the four selected muskmelon cultivars. Rootstocks enhanced early harvesting of grafted Tamara but had no effect on other scions. Fruit shape was almost not significantly affected by grafting except Samit grafted on Strong Tosa and Caramel grafted on Mubyeongjangsoo produced significantly different fruit shapes compared to ungrafted controls in the spring 2013 trial. Fruits from both grafted Shahd and Tamara showed no significant differences in rind brightness, redness and yellowness from the control. An various effect of rootstock was found on harvesting, fruit number and weight, chlorophyll content, and stem diameter of the scion. Rootstocks enhanced early harvesting and increased fruit number and fruit weight in grafted Tamara scions. There was no significant effect of grafting on fruit TSS. The study shows positive effects of grafting on tolerance to vine decline and on fruit quality and yield.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nd. 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 17
Claim · model-written summary
Six rootstocks produced very low vine decline disease severity index under artificial inoculation.
- Taxon
- muskmelon
.jpg?width=60)
Cucumis melot0 - Material
- Mubyeongjangsoo, Titan, Tetsukabuto, Rsscih7458, Ezra and Strong Tosae1
- Treatment
- Artificial inoculatione1
- Outcome
- vine decline disease severity indexe1
- Direction
- very lowe1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
t0“Effect of rootstock on muskmelon cultivar reaction to vine decline disease and yield under arid conditions”
e1“Artificial inoculation of different rootstocks produced significantly no damping-off and very low vine decline disease severity index on Mubyeongjangsoo, Titan, Tetsukabuto, Rsscih7458, Ezra and Strong Tosa rootstocks”
Claim · model-written summary
Six rootstocks produced no damping-off under artificial inoculation, a significant result.
- Taxon
- muskmelonCucumis melot0
- Material
- Mubyeongjangsoo, Titan, Tetsukabuto, Rsscih7458, Ezra and Strong Tosae1
- Treatment
- Artificial inoculatione1
- Outcome
- damping-offe1
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of rootstock on muskmelon cultivar reaction to vine decline disease and yield under arid conditions”
e1“Artificial inoculation of different rootstocks produced significantly no damping-off and very low vine decline disease severity index on Mubyeongjangsoo, Titan, Tetsukabuto, Rsscih7458, Ezra and Strong Tosa rootstocks”
Claim · model-written summary
All rootstocks produced high grafting success and low graft failure with four muskmelon cultivars.
- Taxon
- muskmelonCucumis melot0
- Material
- four selected muskmelon cultivarse2
- Outcome
- grafting successe2
- Direction
- highe2
- Qualifier
- low graft failuree2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of rootstock on muskmelon cultivar reaction to vine decline disease and yield under arid conditions”
e2“All rootstocks produced high grafting success and low graft failure with the four selected muskmelon cultivars”
Claim · model-written summary
Rootstocks enhanced early harvesting of grafted Tamara scions.
- Taxon
- muskmelonCucumis melot0
- Material
- Tamarae3
- Treatment
- Rootstockse3
- Outcome
- early harvestinge3
- Direction
- enhancede3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of rootstock on muskmelon cultivar reaction to vine decline disease and yield under arid conditions”
e3“Rootstocks enhanced early harvesting of grafted Tamara but had no effect on other scions”
Claim · model-written summary
Rootstocks had no effect on early harvesting of other scions.
- Taxon
- muskmelonCucumis melot0
- Material
- other scionse3
- Treatment
- Rootstockse3
- Outcome
- early harvestinge3
- Direction
- no effecte3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of rootstock on muskmelon cultivar reaction to vine decline disease and yield under arid conditions”
e3“Rootstocks enhanced early harvesting of grafted Tamara but had no effect on other scions”
Claim · model-written summary
Grafting almost did not significantly affect fruit shape, apart from two scion-rootstock combinations.
- Taxon
- muskmelonCucumis melot0
- Treatment
- graftinge4
- Outcome
- Fruit shapee4
- Direction
- not significantly affectede4
- Comparator
- ungrafted controlse4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of rootstock on muskmelon cultivar reaction to vine decline disease and yield under arid conditions”
e4“Fruit shape was almost not significantly affected by grafting except Samit grafted on Strong Tosa and Caramel grafted on Mubyeongjangsoo produced significantly different fruit shapes compared to ungrafted controls in the spring 2013 trial”
Claim · model-written summary
Samit grafted on Strong Tosa produced significantly different fruit shapes compared with ungrafted controls in the spring 2013 trial.
- Taxon
- muskmelonCucumis melot0
- Material
- Samite4
- Treatment
- grafted on Strong Tosae4
- Outcome
- fruit shapese4
- Direction
- significantly differente4
- Comparator
- ungrafted controlse4
- Setting
- spring 2013 triale4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of rootstock on muskmelon cultivar reaction to vine decline disease and yield under arid conditions”
e4“Fruit shape was almost not significantly affected by grafting except Samit grafted on Strong Tosa and Caramel grafted on Mubyeongjangsoo produced significantly different fruit shapes compared to ungrafted controls in the spring 2013 trial”
Claim · model-written summary
Caramel grafted on Mubyeongjangsoo produced significantly different fruit shapes compared with ungrafted controls in the spring 2013 trial.
- Taxon
- muskmelonCucumis melot0
- Material
- Caramele4
- Treatment
- grafted on Mubyeongjangsooe4
- Outcome
- fruit shapese4
- Direction
- significantly differente4
- Comparator
- ungrafted controlse4
- Setting
- spring 2013 triale4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of rootstock on muskmelon cultivar reaction to vine decline disease and yield under arid conditions”
e4“Fruit shape was almost not significantly affected by grafting except Samit grafted on Strong Tosa and Caramel grafted on Mubyeongjangsoo produced significantly different fruit shapes compared to ungrafted controls in the spring 2013 trial”
Claim · model-written summary
Grafted Shahd and Tamara showed no significant differences in rind brightness, redness and yellowness from the control.
- Taxon
- muskmelonCucumis melot0
- Material
- Shahd and Tamarae5
- Treatment
- graftede5
- Outcome
- rind brightness, redness and yellownesse5
- Direction
- no significant differencese5
- Comparator
- the controle5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of rootstock on muskmelon cultivar reaction to vine decline disease and yield under arid conditions”
e5“Fruits from both grafted Shahd and Tamara showed no significant differences in rind brightness, redness and yellowness from the control”
Claim · model-written summary
Rootstocks had a various effect on chlorophyll content and stem diameter of the scion.
- Taxon
- muskmelonCucumis melot0
- Treatment
- rootstocke6
- Outcome
- chlorophyll content, and stem diametere6
- Direction
- various effecte6
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of rootstock on muskmelon cultivar reaction to vine decline disease and yield under arid conditions”
e6“An various effect of rootstock was found on harvesting, fruit number and weight, chlorophyll content, and stem diameter of the scion”
Claim · model-written summary
Rootstocks increased fruit number and fruit weight in grafted Tamara scions.
- Taxon
- muskmelonCucumis melot0
- Material
- Tamarae7
- Treatment
- Rootstockse7
- Outcome
- fruit number and fruit weighte7
- Direction
- increasede7
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of rootstock on muskmelon cultivar reaction to vine decline disease and yield under arid conditions”
e7“Rootstocks enhanced early harvesting and increased fruit number and fruit weight in grafted Tamara scions”
Claim · model-written summary
Grafting had no significant effect on fruit TSS.
- Taxon
- muskmelonCucumis melot0
- Treatment
- graftinge2
- Outcome
- fruit TSSe2
- Direction
- no significant effecte2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of rootstock on muskmelon cultivar reaction to vine decline disease and yield under arid conditions”
e2“There was no significant effect of grafting on fruit TSS”
Claim · model-written summary
Grafting had positive effects on tolerance to vine decline.
- Taxon
- muskmelonCucumis melot0
- Treatment
- graftinge1
- Outcome
- tolerance to vine declinee1
- Direction
- positive effectse1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of rootstock on muskmelon cultivar reaction to vine decline disease and yield under arid conditions”
e1“The study shows positive effects of grafting on tolerance to vine decline and on fruit quality and yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Grafting had positive effects on fruit quality and yield.
- Taxon
- muskmelonCucumis melot0
- Treatment
- graftinge1
- Outcome
- fruit quality and yielde1
- Direction
- positive effectse1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of rootstock on muskmelon cultivar reaction to vine decline disease and yield under arid conditions”
e1“The study shows positive effects of grafting on tolerance to vine decline and on fruit quality and yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Artificial inoculation with R. solani alone caused more damage to muskmelon seedlings than inoculation with P. aphanidermatum or M. cannonballus alone.
- Taxon
- muskmelonCucumis meloe3
- Organ / stage
- 10 day old Palmira seedlingse3
- Treatment
- artificial inoculation with R. solani pathogen alonee3
- Interactor
- R. solani
Rhizoctonia solanie3pathogen - Outcome
- damagee3
- Direction
- more damagee3
- Comparator
- P. aphanidermatum and M. cannonballuse3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of rootstock on muskmelon cultivar reaction to vine decline disease and yield under arid conditions”
e3“The response of 10 day old Palmira seedlings to artificial inoculation with R. solani pathogen alone revealed more damage to muskmelon seedling whereas P. aphanidermatum and M. cannonballus caused less damage when inoculated singly but more disease severity index when combined with R. solani”
Claim · model-written summary
P. aphanidermatum and M. cannonballus caused less damage to muskmelon seedlings when inoculated singly.
- Taxon
- muskmelonCucumis meloe3
- Treatment
- inoculated singlye3
- Interactor
- P. aphanidermatumPythium aphanidermatume3pathogen
- Second interactor
- M. cannonballusMonosporascus cannonballuse3pathogen
- Outcome
- damagee3
- Direction
- less damagee3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of rootstock on muskmelon cultivar reaction to vine decline disease and yield under arid conditions”
e3“The response of 10 day old Palmira seedlings to artificial inoculation with R. solani pathogen alone revealed more damage to muskmelon seedling whereas P. aphanidermatum and M. cannonballus caused less damage when inoculated singly but more disease severity index when combined with R. solani”
Claim · model-written summary
P. aphanidermatum and M. cannonballus combined with R. solani increased the disease severity index of muskmelon seedlings relative to single inoculation.
- Taxon
- muskmelonCucumis meloe3
- Treatment
- combined with R. solanie3
- Interactor
- P. aphanidermatumPythium aphanidermatume3pathogen
- Second interactor
- M. cannonballusMonosporascus cannonballuse3pathogen
- Outcome
- disease severity indexe3
- Direction
- moree3
- Qualifier
- combined with R. solanie3
- Comparator
- inoculated singlye3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of rootstock on muskmelon cultivar reaction to vine decline disease and yield under arid conditions”
e3“The response of 10 day old Palmira seedlings to artificial inoculation with R. solani pathogen alone revealed more damage to muskmelon seedling whereas P. aphanidermatum and M. cannonballus caused less damage when inoculated singly but more disease severity index when combined with R. solani”
The same questions in other papers
grafting · quality: sugar starch · Cucumis melo (muskmelon)Results differ
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →grafting · yield · Cucumis melo (muskmelon)Results differ
29 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- negative
30 papers more in this group
See all 34 papers →grafting · quality: grain · Cucumis melo (muskmelon)Positive and negative results
4 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →inoculation · disease · Cucumis melo (muskmelon)Positive and negative results
12 papers in the same direction as this paper · 26 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
36 papers more in this group
See all 40 papers →inoculation · pest · Cucumis melo (muskmelon)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- negative
grafting · disease · Cucumis melo (muskmelon)Results agree
5 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 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.