The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Incidence of Fusarium Root Rot in Asparagus Seedlings Infected with Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungus as Affected by Several Soil Amendments.
Open accessAbstract
Seedlings of asparagus (Asparagus officinalis L., cv. Mary Washington 500 W) were inoculated with arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungus (Glomus sp. R10) and grown in the presence of different soil amendments : carbonized chaff (CC), coconut charcoal (CO) and manure of coffee residue (MC) mixed with the soil in the ratio of 1 : 9 (v/v, 10% plot) or 3 : 7 (30% plot). Nine weeks later, the seedlings were exposed to fusarium root rot, caused by Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. asparagi (Foa) to test their tolerance. When asparagus seedlings were examined 13 weeks after Foa inoculation, incidence of fusarium root rot reached 90-100% in all the AM fungus-noninoculated plants, irrespective of the soil amendments. However, the incidences of root rot were 14.3% in the 30% CO and 20% in the 10% MC plots among the AM fungus-inoculated plants. In the non-AM inoculated plants, the disease indices reached 92.5 in the soil only plot and 48.9 in the 30% CC plot. As for AM-treated plants, the indices attained remarkably low values of 2.9 in the 30% CO and 4.0 in the 10% MC plots. More storage roots developed in the AM-treated plants than in the control, whether they were diseased or healthy. AM fungal infection levels were higher in the root systems of 10% and 30% CO and 10% MC plots than in the other plots ; little difference occurred among 10% and 30% CO and 10% MC plots. Furthermore, the infection area of the AM fungus in a root system was most extensive in the CO plots. These findings suggest that the addition of coconut charcoal or manure of coffee residue to bed soil is effective for increasing the tolerance to fusarium root rot in AM fungus-infected asparagus plants, though the effect differed with the quantity of the soil amendments.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Biochar effects on soil biota – A review
Lehmann, J., Rillig, M. C., Thies, J., Masiello, C. A., Hockaday, W. C., & Crowley, D. (2011) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2011.04.022 · Cited by 5,074
Atkinson, C. J., Fitzgerald, J. D., & Hipps, N. A. (2010) · Plant and Soil · doi:10.1007/s11104-010-0464-5 · Cited by 2,154
Biochar and its effects on plant productivity and nutrient cycling: A meta-analysis
Biederman, L. A., & Harpole, W. S. (2013) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12037 · Cited by 1,737
Mycorrhizal responses to biochar in soil–concepts and mechanisms
Warnock, D. D., Lehmann, J., Kuyper, T. W., & Rillig, M. C. (2007) · Plant and Soil · doi:10.1007/s11104-007-9391-5 · Cited by 1,269
Anderson, C. R., Condron, L. M., Clough, T. J., Fiers, M., Stewart, A., Hill, R. A., & Sherlock, R. R. (2011) · Pedobiologia · doi:10.1016/j.pedobi.2011.07.005 · Cited by 768
Metadata
- Authors
- Matsubara, Y., Hasegawa, N., & Fukui, H.
- Venue
- Engei Gakkai zasshi
- Published
- 2002
- Volume
- 71
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 370-374
- ISSN
- 0013-7626 (ISSN-L)
- 1880-358X
- OpenAlex
- W2056410875
- Cited by
- 158
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 1.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
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: Incidence of Fusarium Root Rot in Asparagus Seedlings Infected with Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungus as Affected by Several Soil Amendments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2503/jjshs.71.370
- The paper
- Matsubara, Y., Hasegawa, N., & Fukui, H. (2002). Incidence of Fusarium Root Rot in Asparagus Seedlings Infected with Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungus as Affected by Several Soil Amendments. Engei Gakkai zasshi. https://doi.org/10.2503/jjshs.71.370
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.