Fungal trunk diseases: a problem beyond grapevines?
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Grapevine trunk diseases (GTDs) are caused by a broad range of taxonomically unrelated fungi that occur wherever grapes are grown and are the main biotic factor limiting vineyard productivity and longevity (Bertsch et al., 2013). GTDs cause untenable economic losses to the grapevine industry worldwide. For example, they are considered a ‘national crisis’ in France, where it has been estimated that 12% of the vineyards are currently economically nonviable due to these maladies causing losses of about €1 billion (Lorch, 2014). Because GTDs are chronic and there is currently no option to eradicate the infections, unproductive vineyards must be replanted, at a worldwide annual cost estimate of €1·132 billion (Hofstetter et al., 2012). The establishment, progress, severity and spread of GTDs have been associated with (i) drought, (ii) limited availability of effective fungicides, (iii) pressure to increase yields, (iv) lack of pruning wound protection due to cost of labour, and/or (v) poor low-quality propagation material. Growers are demanding solutions. Many vineyards with high GTD incidence were planted in the mid-to-late 1990s, during which wine-grape prices were increasing (Volpe et al., 2008). These vineyards were being replanted in the wake of phylloxera, and nurseries could barely meet the demand for grape plants. In 2009 researchers declared the worldwide impact of GTDs and prioritized research goals (Bertsch et al., 2009). Despite scientific advances, there are still unanswered questions, for example about how the pathogens spread and which climate conditions favour infection. This limits the efficacy of GTD management practices. Other crops, such as almond, pistachio and walnut, are now experiencing planting booms (INC, 2015). The significance of these and other tree crops is that they host some of the same GTD pathogens. While researchers fine-tune strategies for managing GTDs in grape, the pathogens may alternate to tree crops, thus endangering the productivity and longevity of orchards and vineyards alike. Recent reports of high disease incidence in pome and stone fruits, nut crops, small fruits and olive in California (Úrbez-Torres et al., 2013), Iran (Mohammadi et al., 2015), Italy (Carlucci et al., 2015), South Africa (Cloete et al., 2011) and Spain (Gramaje et al., 2012) highlight the need for a focus on this new set of hosts. The production systems are different; not all practices for GTD management in grape are feasible in tree crops, especially with dwindling numbers of skilled farm labourers. Tree crop nurseries are struggling to meet demands for plant material and, from our experience with GTDs, a lack of first-quality plants means that low-quality plants are sold, too. Are these plantings doomed to a lifetime of poor productivity? Is the sustainability of the fruit and tree nut industries at risk? Yours sincerely, David Gramaje et al.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle