Paper · 1981 · UA Campus Repository (The University of Arizona)

Field and Laboratory Studies for Control of Phymatotrichum Root Rot

Jim Mueller; S. C. Alderman; D. A. Pennington; et al.

2
claims
7
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

The tests were established in Graham Co. (SouthEastern Arizona), Pinal Co. (Central Arizona) and Pima Co. (SouthCentral Arizona). The tests were similar in nature and consisted of applying 1800 to 2000 kg /ha of granulated sodium chloride with various types of fertilizer spreaders in strips (usually 8 to 16 beds in width), through old cotton soils heavily infested with Phymatotrichum root rot. Alternating non -treated strips constituted check treatments. All plots were replicated at least 4 times. After application the sodium chloride was disked or plowed into the soil and the beds shaped. These field operations were followed by irrigation, bed mulching, and subsequent planting. Varieties in these trials consisted of commonly planted Pima varieties (Gossypium barbadense) and upland varieties (G. hirsutum) both of which are equally susceptible to the disease. Stand counts were made after emergence and disease evaluation determined by use of aerial infra -red photography, visual observations and yield data. The middle 4 rows of each plot was harvested with a 2 bed harvester. No reduction in incidence of Phymatotrichum root rot was seen in any of the sodium chloride tests established during 1977, 1978, and 1979. Also, no carry -over effects have been noted in any of the tests. The results of a typical field test during 1979 at Marana, Arizona is shown in Table 1.

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 2

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sodium chloride did not reduce Phymatotrichum root rot incidence in 1977–1979 tests.

Treatment
sodium chloridee0
Interactor
Phymatotrichume0pathogen
Outcome
incidence of Phymatotrichum root rote0
Direction
No reductione0
Comparator
non -treated stripse2

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“No reduction in incidence of Phymatotrichum root rot was seen in any of the sodium chloride tests established during 1977, 1978, and 1979”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1090–1227 · show in text ↑
e1

“old cotton soils heavily infested with Phymatotrichum root rot”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 333–395 · show in text ↑
e2

“Alternating non -treated strips constituted check treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 397–457 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sodium chloride had no carry-over effect.

Treatment
sodium chloridee1
Outcome
carry -over effectse0
Direction
noe0
Comparator
non -treated stripse3

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Also, no carry -over effects have been noted in any of the tests”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1229–1293 · show in text ↑
e1

“sodium chloride tests”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1166–1187 · show in text ↑
e2

“old cotton soils”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 333–349 · show in text ↑
e3

“non -treated strips”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 409–428 · show in text ↑

sodium chloride · disease · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

5 papers: 1 positive, 4 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. no effect

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.