Paper · 1993 · HortScience

INVESTIGATIONS OF THE ROLE OF EPICUTICULAR WAX IN RESISTANCE OF GRAPE BERRIES TO BOTRYTIS CINEREA

Edward W. Hellman

5
claims
12
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Prior to inoculation with a spore suspension of Botrytis cinerea, detached mature grape berries were given treatments to disrupt the epicuticular wax; gently rubbing with a rounded spatula, rubbing with a tissue, dipping in chloroform for 10 sec., or wounding with a scalpel. Other berries were inoculated at undisturbed areas on the side of the berry and at the base of the pedicle, or at the base of a pedicle with a natural wound. Berries were incubated at 23°C with 99% relative humidity for 72 hours, then evaluated for infection. Berries of Vitis vinifera cultivars `Thompson Seedless' and `Perlette' had infection rates of 18.5% and 3%, respectively, when the wax was undisturbed. Infection rates of berries with disrupted wax or natural wounds were much higher for both cultivars, ranging from 20% to 100%. No infections occured on either treated or untreated berries of cultivars derived from V. aestivalis, `Cynthiana'; V. labruscana, `Concord'; or those of hybrid origin, `Mars' and `Vignoles'. Wounding berries of `Concord' and `Cynthiana' resulted in 60% infection rates.

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 5

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Undisturbed Thompson Seedless grape berries had 18.5% infection.

Taxon
Vitis viniferaVitis viniferae0
Material
Thompson Seedlesse0
Interactor
Botrytis cinereaBotrytis cinereae1pathogen
Outcome
infection ratese0
Value
18.5%e0

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

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Botrytis cinerea
Botrytis cinerea · InteractorRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Berries of Vitis vinifera cultivars `Thompson Seedless' and `Perlette' had infection rates of 18.5% and 3%, respectively, when the wax was undisturbed”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 536–686 · show in text ↑
e1

“Botrytis cinerea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 48–64 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Undisturbed Perlette berries had 3% infection.

Taxon
Vitis viniferaVitis viniferae0
Material
Perlettee0
Interactor
Botrytis cinereaBotrytis cinereae1pathogen
Outcome
infection ratese0
Value
3%e0

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

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Botrytis cinerea
Botrytis cinerea · InteractorRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Berries of Vitis vinifera cultivars `Thompson Seedless' and `Perlette' had infection rates of 18.5% and 3%, respectively, when the wax was undisturbed”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 536–686 · show in text ↑
e1

“Botrytis cinerea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 48–64 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Wax disruption or natural wounds raised infection in both cultivars to 20–100%.

Taxon
GRAPEt0
Treatment
disrupted wax or natural woundse0
Interactor
Botrytis cinereaBotrytis cinereae1pathogen
Outcome
Infection ratese0
Direction
much highere0
Value
20% to 100%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Botrytis cinerea
Botrytis cinerea · InteractorRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Infection rates of berries with disrupted wax or natural wounds were much higher for both cultivars, ranging from 20% to 100%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 688–813 · show in text ↑
t0

“GRAPE BERRIES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 64–77 · show in text ↑
e1

“Botrytis cinerea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 48–64 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Treated and untreated Cynthiana, Concord, Mars and Vignoles berries had no infections.

Taxon
V. aestivalisVitis aestivalise0
Interactor
Botrytis cinereaBotrytis cinereae1pathogen
Outcome
No infectionse0

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

Vitis aestivalis
Vitis aestivalis · TaxonPublic domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Botrytis cinerea
Botrytis cinerea · InteractorRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“No infections occured on either treated or untreated berries of cultivars derived from V. aestivalis, `Cynthiana'; V. labruscana, `Concord'; or those of hybrid origin, `Mars' and `Vignoles'”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 815–1004 · show in text ↑
e1

“Botrytis cinerea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 48–64 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Wounded Concord and Cynthiana berries had 60% infection.

Taxon
GRAPEt0
Treatment
Woundinge0
Interactor
Botrytis cinereaBotrytis cinereae1pathogen
Outcome
infection ratese0
Value
60%e0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Botrytis cinerea
Botrytis cinerea · InteractorRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Wounding berries of `Concord' and `Cynthiana' resulted in 60% infection rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1006–1083 · show in text ↑
t0

“GRAPE BERRIES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 64–77 · show in text ↑
e1

“Botrytis cinerea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 48–64 · show in text ↑

mechanical · Botrytis cinerea · VitisPositive and negative results

3 papers: 1 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. no effect
See all 3 papers →

loss of function · Botrytis cinerea · VitisPositive and negative results

5 papers: 3 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 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.