TABLE 3

Some cim mutants exhibit resistance to Erysiphe cichoracearum

MutantExperiment 1Experiment 2Experiment 3
Wildtype3.00 ± 0.00a3.00 ± 0.003.00 ± 0.00
Wild type + BTH1.00 ± 0.001.00 ± 0.001.00 ± 0.00
cim52.08 ± 0.762.92 ± 0.28NTb
cim61.13 ± 0.331.56 ± 0.681.67 ± 0.67
cim7NT1.00 ± 0.001.00 ± 0.00
cim91.40 ± 0.661.27 ± 0.451.60 ± 0.66
cim102.50 ± 0.612.62 ± 0.742.54 ± 0.78
cim111.56 ± 0.501.92 ± 0.791.90 ± 0.94
cim122.30 ± 0.642.50 ± 0.812.71 ± 0.45
7792.50 ± 0.713.00 ± 0.001.90 ± 0.83
cim131.09 ± 0.291.36 ± 0.481.09 ± 0.29
cim141.50 ± 0.502.40 ± 0.662.63 ± 0.48
  • a Disease was scored on at least 10 plants per mutant, per experiment 10 days after inoculation, according to the following rating: rating 1, zero to one leaf per plant showed hyphal growth; rating 2, two to four leaves per plant infected; rating 3, more than four leaves per plant infected. Mean and standard deviation were calculated for one experiment. The experiment was repeated three times.

  • b NT, not tested.