Abstract
Plum pox virus (PPV) is one of the most destructive pathogens affecting stone fruit trees. It causes sharka disease and severe yield losses. The genetically modified plum cultivar 'HoneySweet' was developed to provide long-lasting resistance to PPV via RNA interference. Long-term field trials of 'HoneySweet' have been conducted in the Czech Republic since 2001, involving the artificial inoculation of the cultivar with PPV alone, and with apple chlorotic leaf spot virus (ACLSV) and prune dwarf virus (PDV) in combination. This study evaluates the impact of viral infection on tree growth after 24 years in the field. Growth parameters-trunk cross-sectional area (TCSA) and canopy volume-were measured and analysed using ANOVA and Tukey's test. The results show that infected trees exhibit significantly reduced growth compared to non-infected controls, with the strongest inhibition observed in trees inoculated with PPV + PDV + ACLSV. The presence of ACLSV had the most pronounced negative effect on growth, while PDV did not significantly influence tree vigour. These findings emphasise the importance of using virus-free rootstocks and certified planting material to prevent growth suppression in HoneySweet orchards.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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
Claim · model-written summary
Virus infected HoneySweet plum trees had significantly reduced growth versus uninfected controls.
- Taxon
- Plum Trees
Prunus domesticat0 - Material
- HoneySweett0
- Treatment
- infectede0
- Outcome
- growthe0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Comparator
- non-infected controlse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“infected trees exhibit significantly reduced growth compared to non-infected controls”
t0“HoneySweet GM Plum Trees”
Claim · model-written summary
The PPV, PDV, and ACLSV combination gave the strongest growth inhibition.
- Taxon
- Plum TreesPrunus domesticat0
- Treatment
- inoculated with PPV + PDV + ACLSVe0
- Interactor
- PPVe0pathogen
- Second interactor
- PDVe0pathogen
- Outcome
- inhibitione0
- Direction
- strongeste0
- Qualifier
- ACLSVe0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the strongest inhibition observed in trees inoculated with PPV + PDV + ACLSV.”
t0“HoneySweet GM Plum Trees”
Claim · model-written summary
ACLSV had the most pronounced negative effect on tree growth.
- Taxon
- Plum TreesPrunus domesticat0
- Treatment
- presence of ACLSVe0
- Interactor
- ACLSV
Trichovirus malie0pathogen - Outcome
- growthe0
- Direction
- negativee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The presence of ACLSV had the most pronounced negative effect on growth”
t0“HoneySweet GM Plum Trees”
Claim · model-written summary
PDV did not significantly affect tree vigour.
- Taxon
- Plum TreesPrunus domesticat0
- Treatment
- PDVe0
- Interactor
- PDVe0pathogen
- Outcome
- tree vigoure0
- Direction
- did not significantly influencee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“PDV did not significantly influence tree vigour.”
t0“HoneySweet GM Plum Trees”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors emphasize virus free rootstocks and certified planting material to prevent growth suppression.
- Taxon
- Plum TreesPrunus domesticat0
- Outcome
- using virus-free rootstocks and certified planting materiale0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“using virus-free rootstocks and certified planting material to prevent growth suppression in HoneySweet orchards”
t0“HoneySweet GM Plum Trees”
The same questions in other papers
pruning · disease · Prunus domestica (plum)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
inoculation · disease · Prunus domestica (plum)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →pruning · growth · Prunus domestica (plum)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
10 papers more in this group
See all 14 papers →infection · growth · Prunus domestica (plum)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- 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.