首页> 外文期刊>Phytopathology >Multiple Treatment Meta-Analysis of Products Evaluated for Control of Fire Blight in the Eastern United States
【24h】

Multiple Treatment Meta-Analysis of Products Evaluated for Control of Fire Blight in the Eastern United States

机译:在美国东部进行火疫病控制评估的产品的多处理荟萃分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The aim of this analysis was to estimate the effect sizes and consistency of products evaluated for fire blight control in the eastern United States over the last decade. Because only 3% of the 69 studies published from 2000 to 2008 explicitly presented a measure of within-study variability, a method for estimating the least significant difference (LSD) and, hence the sampling variance, for studies with at least two significant mean separations in the presented mean multiple comparisons was developed. Lin's concordance analysis indicated that the estimated LSD was an accurate predictor of the actual LSD based on 35 studies in a calibration evaluation ( rho sub(c) = 0.997). Separate multi-treatment random-effects meta-analyses were performed for three control categories: antibiotics, biological control, and plant defense-activating products and mean log response ratios relative to the nontreated controls (L) were computed for each treatment and then back-transformed to obtain the mean percent disease control. None of the products evaluated performed as well as streptomycin, the standard product for fire blight control, for which the mean disease control was 68.6%. As a group, experimental antibiotics provided the best fire blight control with mean effect sizes ranging from 59.7 to 61.7%. Among the biological controls, the best control was noted for treatments combining the antibiotic streptomycin with a product based on Pantoea agglomerans (55.0% mean disease reduction) or Bacillus subtilis (53.9%). Mean disease control was 31.9, 25.7, and 22.6%, respectively, for products based on B. subtilis, Pantoea agglomerans, and Pseudomonas fluorescens without an antibiotic, suggesting that the higher efficacy of the combination treatments was due to the antibiotic. Among the plant defense-activating products, prohexadione calcium had the highest and most consistent effect size (50.7% control), while other products provided modest mean disease control of between 6.1 and 25.8%. Percent control values were significantly moderated by study location and cultivar used in the study, and were smaller, but more variable, when products were tested under high disease intensity compared with low disease intensity. Results indicate that wide-scale use of biological control and plant defense-activating products in the eastern United States is likely to remain low.
机译:该分析的目的是估计过去十年来美国东部用于控制火疫病的产品的效果大小和一致性。由于2000年至2008年发表的69项研究中只有3%明确提出了研究内变异性的量度,因此,对于至少具有两个显着平均均值分离的研究,一种估计最小显着差异(LSD)的方法,因此也用于估计抽样方差。在提出的平均值中,进行了多次比较。 Lin的一致性分析表明,根据35个校准评估中的研究,估计的LSD是实际LSD的准确预测因子(rho sub(c)= 0.997)。对三种控制类别进行了单独的多处理随机效应荟萃分析:抗生素,生物控制和植物防御激活产物,并计算了每种处理相对于未处理对照的平均对数响应比(L),然后反向转化以获得疾病控制的平均百分比。所评估的产品均没有表现出比链霉素(火疫病防治的标准产品)更好的效果,链霉素的平均疾病控制率为68.6%。作为一个整体,实验性抗生素可提供最佳的火疫病防治效果,平均效果范围为59.7至61.7%。在生物学对照中,将抗生素链霉素与基于聚结泛菌(55.0%的平均病害减少率)或枯草芽孢杆菌(53.9%)的产品联合治疗的效果最好。对于基于枯草芽孢杆菌,聚结泛菌和荧光假单胞菌的产品,平均疾病控制率分别为31.9、25.7和22.6%,这表明联合治疗的较高疗效归因于抗生素。在植物防御激活产品中,原己二酮钙具有最大和最一致的效应大小(对照为50.7%),而其他产品提供的平均病害控制在6.1%至25.8%之间。通过在研究中使用的研究位置和栽培品种显着地降低了对照值,当在高疾病强度下与低疾病强度下对产品进行测试时,控制值较小,但变化更大。结果表明,在美国东部,广泛使用生物防治和植物防御激活产品的可能性可能仍然很低。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号