Efficacy of biosurfactants in the management of<i>Phytophthora capsici</i>on pepper in recirculating hydroponic systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Zoosporic pathogens are among the most destructive root pathogens in recirculating cultural systems, and zoospores are the primary infectious propagule responsible for their spread via the recirculating nutrient solution. More stringent regulation of pesticide usage in greenhouses has resulted in the need for alternative management strategies. This investigation was designed to evaluate the efficacy of rhamnolipid and saponin biosurfactants in managing zoosporic plant pathogens in recirculating systems where plants are cultivated hydroponically in either an inorganic or an organic substrate. The efficacy of biosurfactants in the control of root rot was demonstrated in vivo using a pepper – Phytophthora capsici pathosystem. Amending the recirculating nutrient solution with either a rhamnolipid or a saponin biosurfactant (150 and 200 µg a.i./mL, respectively), which selectively kill zoospores, resulted in 100% control of the spread of the pathogen. Disease control was achieved in both ebb and flow and top-irrigated cultural systems, with either an organic potting mix or rockwool as the planting medium. In the absence of either biosurfactant, all plants within a cultural system were killed within 6–7 weeks following hypocotyl inoculation of a single plant in the system, which served as the source of secondary inoculum. Injecting the rhamnolipid biosurfactant into the irrigation line during every irrigation also resulted in 100% control of the disease. These results provide evidence that biosurfactants may be suitable alternatives to synthetic surfactants and microbial agents for the management of diseases caused by zoosporic pathogens in recirculating systems.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".