Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 159

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Alternative Disease Control Agents Induce Resistance to Blue Mold in Harvested ‘Red Delicious’ Apple Fruit

de Capdeville, Guy, Wilson, Charles L., Beer, Steven V., Aist, James R.·2002·Phytopathology®

Abstract

Alternative control agents, including UV-type C (254 nm) irradiation, yeasts antagonistic to fungal growth, chitosan and harpin, were evaluated for their ability to induce resistance in cv. Red Delicious apple fruit against postharvest blue mold caused by Penicillium expansum. Freshly harvested and controlled atmosphere (CA)-stored fruit were treated with these agents at different doses and concentrations or with paired combinations of the agents. Treated fruit were inoculated with P. expansum 24, 48, or 96 h following treatment, and stored at 24°C in the dark. The fruit were evaluated for development of disease every 2 days for 14 days by measuring the diameter of lesions that formed. The area under the disease progress curve (AUDPC) was calculated and analyzed statistically. All treatments were effective in reducing the AUDPC; UV-C was most effective, followed by harpin, chitosan, and the yeasts, respectively. Regardless of treatment, fresh fruit were more responsive to treatments than CA-stored fruit. There was a clear time-dependent response of the fruit to the treatments, in which treatments applied 96 h before inoculation provided the best results. In a few situations, the combinations of agents did provide an additive effect, but no synergistic effects were detected. Moreover, disease severity in fruit treated by any combination was markedly better than that in the controls. Although the combinations of treatments was overall less effective than the single treatments, they did provide significant reductions of the progress of disease in comparison with the controls. Because the fungus did not come into contact with any of the control agents, this study showed conclusively that the agents studied were able to induce resistance in the fruit rather than merely inhibit the pathogen directly. It also showed, for the first time, that harpin is able to induce resistance in harvested apple fruit. The use of these control agents may minimize the costs of control strategies and reduce the risks associated with the excessive use of fungicides in harvested apple fruit

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1094/phyto.2002.92.8.900

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 159

Metadata

Authors
de Capdeville, G., Wilson, C. L., Beer, S. V., & Aist, J. R.
Venue
Phytopathology®
Published
2002-08
Volume
92
Issue
8
Pages
900-908
ISSN
  • 0031-949X (ISSN-L)
  • 1943-7684
OpenAlex
W2092596738
Cited by
159
References
2
FWCI
4.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Alternative Disease Control Agents Induce Resistance to Blue Mold in Harvested ‘Red Delicious’ Apple Fruit. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1094/phyto.2002.92.8.900
The paper
de Capdeville, G., Wilson, C. L., Beer, S. V., & Aist, J. R. (2002). Alternative Disease Control Agents Induce Resistance to Blue Mold in Harvested ‘Red Delicious’ Apple Fruit. Phytopathology®. https://doi.org/10.1094/phyto.2002.92.8.900

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.