Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Garden pea Varietal Susceptibility to Mycosphaerella pinodes and its Effect on Yield Components of Single Plants Cover

Garden pea Varietal Susceptibility to Mycosphaerella pinodes and its Effect on Yield Components of Single Plants

Journal of Fruit and Ornamental Plant Research
Volume 70 (2009): Issue 1 (June 2009)
By:  and    
Open Access
|Jul 2009
References

References

  1. Ali S.M., Nitschke L.F., Dube A.J., Krause M.R., Camerom B. 1978. Selection of pea lines for resistance to pathotypes of, andvar.29: 841-849.
    Search in Google Scholar
  2. Bajan C. 1968. Badania nad patogenicznością i biologią trzech gatunków z rodzaju Ascochyta występujących na grochu (L.).21: 17-74. [in Polish]
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  3. Bartłomiejczak J., Bartłomiejczak S. 1978. Askochytozy na grochu konserwowym, odporność odmian oraz hodowla odpornościowa w świetle literatury i wstępnych testowań w SHRO Nochowo.3/4: 38-45. [in Polish]
    Search in Google Scholar
  4. Beasse C., Ney B., Tivoli B. 1999. Effects of pods infection byon yield component of pea ().135: 359-367.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  5. Boros L. 2003. Susceptibility of pea cultivars to ascochyta disease caused byProgramme and Abstracts, 2nd International Seed Health Conference. "Healthy Seed For Healthy Crop" Poznań 16-18 September, p. 29.
    Search in Google Scholar
  6. Boros L., Wiewióra B. 2004. Evaluation of varietal susceptibility in pea to5European Conference on Grain Legumes with ICLGG "Legumes for the benefit of agriculture, nutrition and the environment: their genomics, their products and their improvement" 7-11 June, Dijon France, Conference Handbook, p. 316.
    Search in Google Scholar
  7. Boros L., Wawer A. 2007. [Response of pea cultivars toin tests under controlled conditions and in the field at controlled infection]. Zesz.522: 157-165. [in Polish with English summary]
    Search in Google Scholar
  8. Clauss E. 1963. Physiological causes ofandresistance in pea (L.). The phenolic constituents of the testae and their importance in foot rot infection.33: 323-337.
    Search in Google Scholar
  9. FAO. 2007. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nation. FAOSTAT database.
    Search in Google Scholar
  10. Fondevilla S., Avila C.M., Cubero J.I., Rubiales D. 2005. Response toin a germplasm collection ofspp.124: 313-315.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  11. Garry G., Jeuffroy M.H., Tivoli B. 1998. Effects of ascochyta blight() on biomas production, seed number and seed weight of dry pea (L.) as affected by plant growth stage and disease intensity.132: 49-59.
    Search in Google Scholar
  12. Hwang S.F., Zhang R., Chang K.F., Gossen B.D., Turnbull G.D., Bing D.J. 2006. Comparison of three methods for assessing reaction toin field pea ().113: 20-23.
    Search in Google Scholar
  13. Kraft J.M., Dunne B., Goulden B., Amstrong S. 1998. A search for resistance in pea to82: 251-253.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  14. Marcinkowska J. 1996. Frequency of occurrence ofand, the fungi responsible for ascochyta blight on peas.12: 15-33.
    Search in Google Scholar
  15. Marcinkowska J.Z. 2002. Foliar diseases ofL. in Poland.46: 49-54.
    Search in Google Scholar
  16. Moussart A., Tivoli B., Lemanchard E., Denefenbourg F., Roi S., Sicard. 1998. The effect of infection by Ascochyta blight pathogen of dried pea () in seedling emergance, early disease development and transmition of the disease to aerial plant parts.104: 93-102.
    Search in Google Scholar
  17. Nasir M., Hoppe H.H. 1997. Evaluation of varietal susceptibility in peas to130 (suppl S): 32-33.
    Search in Google Scholar
  18. Onfroy C., Tivoli B., Corbiere R., Bouznad Z. 1999. Cultural, molecular and pathogenic variability ofandvar.isolates from dried pea () in France.48: 218-229.
    Search in Google Scholar
  19. Prioul S., Onfroy C., Tivoli B., Baranger A. 2003. Controlled environment assessment of partial resistance toin pea (L.) seedlings.131: 121-130.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  20. Roger C., Tivoli B. 1996. Spatio-temporal development of pycnidia and perithecia and dissemination of spores ofon pea ().45: 518-528.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  21. Tivolli B., Beasse C., Lemanchard E., Masson E. 1996. Effect of Ascochyta blight () on yield component of single pea () plants under field conditions.129: 209-216.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  22. Xue A.G. 2003. Diseases of pea. Pages 201-213 in Diseases of field crops in Canada. (Bailey K.L., Gossen B.D., Gugel R., Morrall R.A.A. eds.) Canadian Phytopathological Society, Saskatoon, SK. 290 pp.
    Search in Google Scholar
  23. Xue A.G., Warkentin T.D., Greeniaus M.T., Zimmer R.C. 1996. Genotypic variability in seedborne infection of field pea byand its relations to foliar disease severity.18: 370-374.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  24. Xue A.G., Warkentin T.D., Kenaschuk E.O. 1997. Effects of timings of inoculation withon yield and seed infection of field pea.77: 685-689.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  25. Xue A.G., Warkentin T.D. 2001. Partial resistance toin field pea.81(3): 535-540.
    Search in Google Scholar
  26. Weber Z., Weber H. 1976. Problemy askochytoz w nasiennictwie i hodowli grochów konserwowych.2: 32-36. [in Polish]
    Search in Google Scholar
  27. Warkentin T.D., Rashid K.Y., Xue A.G. 1996. Fungicidal control of ascochyta blight of field pea.76: 67-71.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  28. Wroth J.M. 1998. Variation in pathogenicity among and withinpopulations collected from the field in Australia.76: 1955-1966.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  29. Zhang R., Hwang S.F., Chang K.F., Gossen B.D., Strelkov S.E., Turnbull G.D., Blade S.F. 2006. Genetic resistance toin 558 field pea accessions.46: 2409-2414 [DOI: 10.2135/cropsci2006.05.0305]
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/v10032-009-0004-0 | Journal eISSN: 1231-0948
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 37 - 47
Published on: Jul 31, 2009
Published by: Sciendo
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 2 issues per year
Keywords:
Pisum sativum,
M. pinodes,
foot rot,
stem and leaf blight,
yield components
Related subjects:
Life sciences,
Plant science,
Life sciences, other

© 2009 Lech Boros, Anna Wawer, published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons License.

Volume 70 (2009): Issue 1 (June 2009)
Previous article
Next article