Biological Control of Powdery Mildew on Zinnia (Zinnia elegans, L) Using Some Biocontrol Agents and Plant Extracts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Powdery mildew is a potentially serious disease of Zinnia (Zinnia elegans). The disease is caused by theair-borne fungus Erysiphe cichoracearum and it is an occasional disease of Zinnia in Egypt. Culture filtrates ofTrichoderma harzianum, Epicoccum sp., Streptomyces endus and an actenomycetal isolate in addition to twoplant extracts i.e. miswak (Salvadora persica) and henna (Lawsonia inermis) were evaluated to control powderymildew disease of Zinnia plants. Culture filtrates of the aforementioned biocontrol agents were used as 25 and50%. Bioassays were conducted under field conditions during the two successive seasons of 2006 and 2007 atthe Experimental Farm of the Fac. of Agric., Kafr El-Sheikh Univ., Egypt to test the efficacy of these culturefiltrates applied to protect Zinnia plants from powdery mildew disease.Spraying zinnia plants four times, beginning from June 15th with one week interval by a hand atomizer underfield conditions with the previously culture filtrates and the two plant extracts gave sufficient control to powderymildew disease. The obtained results showed that, all used treatments led to significant decrease in both diseaseincidence and severity compared with control treatment. The highest disease incidence inhibition was obtainedwhen Epicoccum sp. and T. harzianum were used as 50% (v/v) sterilized water followed by henna and miswakextracts were used, respectively. Sprayed plants recorded best results for most growth characters, peroxidase(POX) and polyphenol oxidase (PPO) enzymes activity compared unsprayed one. In conclusion, biocontrolagents and some plant extracts can be substitutes to fungicides as an alternative and safe method for controllingpowdery mildew disease of Zinnia.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".