Cited by 45Fungal Plant Pathogen ControlEssential Oils and Antimicrobial ActivityPowdery Mildew Fungal Diseases

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

In Vivo Antifungal Activities of 57 Plant Extracts Against Six Plant Pathogenic Fungi

Open access

Abstract

Methanol extracts of fresh materials of 57 plants were screened for in vivo antifungal activity against Magna-porthe grisea, Corticium sasaki, Botrytis cinerea, Phyto-phthora infestans, Puccinia recondita, and Blumeria graminis f. sp. hordei. Among them, seven plant extracts showed disease-control efficacy of more than 90% against at least one of six plant diseases. None of the plant extracts was highly active against tomato gray mold. The methanol extracts of Chloranthus japonicus (roots) (CjR) and Paulownia coreana (stems) (PcS) displayed the highest antifungal activity; the CjR extract controlled the development of rice blast, rice sheath blight, and wheat leaf rust more than 90%, and tomato gray mold and tomato late blight more than 80%. The PcS extract displayed control values of more than 90 % against rice blast, wheat leaf rust, and barley powdery mildew and more than 80% against tomato gray mold. The extract of PcS also had a curative activity against rice sheath blight and that of CjR had a little curative activity against rice blast. On the other hand, the extract of Rumex acetocella roots reduced specifically the development of barley powdery mildew. Further studies on the characterization of antifungal substances in antifungal plant extracts are underway and their disease-control efficacy should be examined under greenhouse and field conditions.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5423/ppj.2004.20.3.184

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 10

  1. 10.1002/ps.2780390202 · DOI
  2. 10.1002/ps.2780270403 · DOI
  3. 10.1016/0031-9422(94)00865-Q · DOI
  4. 10.1016/S0031-9422(97)00419-6 · DOI
  5. 10.1016/0031-9422(90)83065-9 · DOI
  6. 10.1016/0031-9422(92)80281-I · DOI
  7. 10.1002/ps.318 · DOI
  8. 10.1002/ps.811 · DOI
  9. 10.1002/ps.2780390209 · DOI
  10. 10.1007/BF02872707 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 45

Metadata

Authors
Choi, G.-J., Jang, K.-S., Kim, J.-S., Lee, S.-W., Cho, J.-Y., Cho, K.-Y., & Kim, J.-C.
Venue
The Plant Pathology Journal
Published
2004-09-01
Volume
20
Issue
3
Pages
184-191
ISSN
1598-2254 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W336965175
Cited by
45
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 7
FWCI
0.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
The Plant Pathology Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Fungal Plant Pathogen Control
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Essential Oils and Antimicrobial Activity
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Powdery Mildew Fungal Diseases
Keywords
plant extracts, antifungal activity, plant pathogenic fungi, Magnaporthe grisea, Botrytis cinerea, Phytophthora infestans, Puccinia recondita, Blumeria graminis f. sp. hordei, Chloranthus japonicus, rice blast, rice sheath blight, leaf rust, barley powdery mildew, tomato gray mold, tomato late blight, curative activity, disease control

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: In Vivo Antifungal Activities of 57 Plant Extracts Against Six Plant Pathogenic Fungi. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5423/ppj.2004.20.3.184
The paper
Choi, G.-J., Jang, K.-S., Kim, J.-S., Lee, S.-W., Cho, J.-Y., Cho, K.-Y., & Kim, J.-C. (2004). In Vivo Antifungal Activities of 57 Plant Extracts Against Six Plant Pathogenic Fungi. The Plant Pathology Journal. https://doi.org/10.5423/ppj.2004.20.3.184