Significance of Short‐term Latent Infections in the Control of Brown Rot in Peach Fruits

Kable, P. F.

doi:10.1111/j.1439-0434.1971.tb03474.x

Cited by 21 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The latter incidence agreed well with 1 % brownrotted fruits after postharvest storage. This indicated the relative unimportance of latent infections as sources of brown rot, which agreed with earlier findings (Kable 1971) that quiescent infections caused Under normal southern Ontario conditions, the development of even a low incidence of brown-rotted fruit covered with conidia-producing sporodochia just before harvest creates a serious risk of new incipient infections of ripe fruits. Many of these infections might lead to brown rot during postharvest storage and subsequent ripening.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

“…Symptomless latent infections have been detected previously by fungal isolation from surfacedisinfested fruit tissue but only in immature apricots and peaches (Wade 1956). Most latent infections have been described as small lesions (0.5-2.0 mm diameter) or as halo spots, and as being arrested or quiescent infections (Jenkins & Reinganum 1965, Kable 1971, Wade & Cruickshank 1992. On plums, halo spots have developed under the differing climatic conditions of New Zealand (Tate & Corbin 1978), New York (Rosenberger 1985), andCalifornia (Gubleretal.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Detection and Significance of Symptomless Latent Infections of Monilinia Fructicola in Plums

Northover

Cerkauskas

1994

Canadian Journal of Plant Pathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Detection and Significance of Symptomless Latent Infections of Monilinia Fructicola in Plums

Northover

Cerkauskas

1994

Canadian Journal of Plant Pathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Latent infections by M. fructicola or the closely related M. laxa have been documented in apricot (25,28,29), peach (15,20,25), plum (21,25), prune (20), and cherry (8,31). Even without wounding, however, immature fruit may harbor symptomless (latent) infections.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Kable (13,15) concluded that only latent infections near harvest are important in the development of fruit rot in the semiarid climate of southeastern Australia. Kable (13,15) concluded that only latent infections near harvest are important in the development of fruit rot in the semiarid climate of southeastern Australia.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Incidence of Latent Infection of Immature Peach Fruit byMonilinia fructicolaand Relationship to Brown Rot in Georgia

2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The brown rot fungus Monilinia fructicola (G. Wint.) Honey is economically the most important pathogen of peach (Prunus persica (L.) Batsch) in Georgia (30). Direct yield losses result from infection of flowers (blossom and twig blight) and from fruit rot at harvest and postharvest; indirect losses are due to the cost of fungicide application during bloom and during the pre-and postharvest periods. In most years, direct losses from M. fructicolaincited blossom blight are minor (23,32,33); however, cankers, formed on twigs as a result of blossom blight, may serve as a source of inoculum for infections that occur during the preharvest fruit ripening stage, particularly in early maturing cultivars (23,32,33). Other within-orchard inoculum sources for preharvest fruit infections include conidia produced on thinned fruit on the ground (1,9,17) and on aborted, nonabscised fruit in the tree (1,17). By contrast, conidia produced on overwintered fruit mummies in early spring do not survive long enough to cause fruit rot (24).Immature stone fruits generally do not exhibit symptoms or signs of infection by M. fructicola unless ingress and colonization are favored by prolonged rain or high humidity following injury. Even without wounding, however, immature fruit may harbor symptomless (latent) infections. Latent infections may become active as the fruit ripen, thus becoming a possible means of carryover of M. fructicola from the spring to the preharvest period. Latent infections by M. fructicola or the closely related M. laxa have been documented in apricot (25,28,29), peach (15,20,25), plum (21,25), prune (20), and cherry (8,31). Michailides et al. (19,20) reported positive relationships between the incidence of latent infection in immature French prune, nectarine, and plum and fruit rot severity at harvest and postharvest in California. Similarly, Northover and Cerkauskas (21) determined that latent infections in European plum in Ontario, Canada, occurred throughout the growing season and correlated positively with fruit rot incidence at harvest. These authors concluded that latent infections were most important in humid temperate regions, where they may readily progress to fruit rot.In peach, latent infections can occur during all stages of fruit development but their role in the epidemiology of brown rot is uncertain. Kable (13,15) concluded that only latent infections near harvest are important in the development of fruit rot in the semiarid climate of southeastern Australia. Landgraf and Zehr (17) surveyed potential inoculum sources for fruit infection by M. fructicola in South Carolina peach orchards but did not include latent infection. They did acknowledge, however, the need to evaluate the role of latent infection in the humid southeastern United States. A better understanding of the importance of latent infection in the epidemiology of brown rot could facilitate the early detection of increased fruit rot risk before harvest, thereby increasing lead time for disease management decisions (8,(18)(19)(20).The objectiv...

show abstract

“…In the absence of inoculum, pre-harvest sprays would not be necessary. Conditions that usually necessitate some pre-harvest spraying include presence of blossom blight and/or green fruit decay; brown rot in adjacent stone fruit blocks (Kable 1969); significant fruit splitting or insect injury (Tate & Ogawa 1975); rainfall at any stage from 4 weeks pre-harvest; and storage of fruit before processing, or long distance transport of fruit. Under such conditions, and in the absence of fungus tolerance, benzimidazoles would be preferable to alternative fungicides such as captan because: pre-harvest is a critical infection period for fruit decay and just as influential in determining harvest losses as the blossom period (Table 2; Chandler 1974;Kable 1975); short-term latent infections are controlled by benzimidazoles but not protectants (Kable 1971); pre-harvest benzimidazole sprays give better pre-and post-harvest brown rot control than similar captan sprays ( Suggestions to delay tolerance emergence include mixing "specific" and '.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brown rot control in peaches

Tate¹,

Seelye²

1977

New Zealand Journal of Experimental Agriculture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Significance of Short‐term Latent Infections in the Control of Brown Rot in Peach Fruits

Cited by 21 publications

References 4 publications

Detection and Significance of Symptomless Latent Infections of Monilinia Fructicola in Plums

Detection and Significance of Symptomless Latent Infections of Monilinia Fructicola in Plums

Incidence of Latent Infection of Immature Peach Fruit byMonilinia fructicolaand Relationship to Brown Rot in Georgia

Brown rot control in peaches

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About