Biological Control of Pathogens Causing Root Rot Complex in Field Pea Using <i>Clonostachys rosea</i> Strain ACM941
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Pea root rot complex (PRRC), caused by Alternaria alternata, Aphanomyces euteiches, Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. pisi, F. solani f. sp. pisi, Mycosphaerella pinodes, Pythium spp., Rhizoctonia solani, and Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, is a major yield-limiting factor for field pea production in Canada. A strain of Clonostachys rosea (syn. Gliocladium roseum), ACM941 (ATCC 74447), was identified as a mycoparasite against these pathogens. When grown near the pathogen, ACM941 often was stimulated to produce lateral branches that grew directly toward the pathogen mycelium, typically entwining around the pathogen mycelium. When applied to the seed, ACM941 propagated in the rhizosphere and colonized the seed coat, hypocotyl, and roots as the plant developed and grew. ACM941 significantly reduced the recovery of all fungal pathogens from infected seed, increased in vitro seed germination by 44% and seedling emergence by 22%, and reduced root rot severity by 76%. The effects were similar to those of thiram fungicide, which increased germination and emergence by 33 and 29%, respectively, and reduced root rot severity by 65%. When soil was inoculated with selected PRRC pathogens in a controlled environment, seed treatment with ACM941 significantly increased emergence by 26, 38, 28, 13, and 21% for F. oxysporum f. sp. pisi, F. solani f. sp. pisi, M. pinodes, R. solani, and S. sclerotiorum, respectively. Under field conditions from 1995 to 1997, ACM941 increased emergence by 17, 23, 22, 13, and 18% and yield by 15, 6, 28, 6, and 19% for the five respective pathogens. The seed treatment effects of ACM941 on these PRRC pathogens were greater or statistically equivalent to those achieved with thiram. Results of this study suggest that ACM941 is an effective bioagent in controlling PRRC and is an alternative to existing chemical products.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".