PubMed · 3388755
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
D G Spoerke, S E Spoerke, B H Rumack. 1988. Berry identification using a modified botanic key.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3388755/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Joseph Hooker became one of the most influential botanists of his day. He is best remembered as a friend of Charles Darwin and an early advocate of natural selection. However, after returning to Britain from his first major voyage, Hooker spent years struggling to find a paid position that would allow him to pursue his studies of plant classification and distribution. As he worked to establish himself, he also helped transform the status of botany as a discipline. In all his efforts, Hooker relied on a network of unpaid, colonial collectors, whose often-forgotten contributions to Victorian natural history are vital to the understanding of the professionalization of the sciences in the 19th century.
The use of composted grape marc (CGM) as a plant growth medium was investigated with Hypostases (Hypostases phyllostagya). Seven media were prepared using CGM mixed, in different ratios, with native peat and perlite. The following mixtures were used: 100% CGM, 75% CGM + 25% peat, 50% CGM + 50% perlite, 25% CGM + 75% peat, 50% CGM + 25%) peat + 25% perlite, 25%, CGM + 50%, peat + 25% perlite and 100% peat. The experiment was arranged in a randomized plot design with four replicates under greenhouse conditions. After a growing period of three months, some horticultural parameters were measured. Besides, some physical and chemical properties of the growing medium were determined. The mixtures of 50% CGM + 50% peat, 25% CGM + 75% peat and 100% peat were found to be most suitable based on the horticultural parameters. This was confirmed through the physical characteristics. Up to 50% composted grape marc can be used in mixtures with peat on account of its low cost and high nutrient content.
Cross protection is a type of induced resistance developing in plants against viruses. Its basis is that prior infection with one virus affords protection against closely related ones. Its history started about seventy years ago, when the Dutchman Thung and the Englishman Salaman described the phenomenon independently. During the 1930s, several virologists confirmed the discovery, which was considered the first possibility to protect plants against virus infection. Growing interest also led plant virologists to formulate the first hypotheses on its mechanism, with the onset of a still unsolved debate. The hypotheses, that have been succeeded until the 1970s, included (i) antibody formation, (ii) exhaustion of essential metabolites, (iii) limited sites for virus multiplication, and (iv) specific adsorption by new cell compounds. These hypotheses were re-proposed and discussed on several occasions without arriving at a final conclusion. The statement of molecular genetics of viruses produced new interesting "theories", fundamentally based on the interference between virus strains. A model developed by the Americans Palukaitis and Zaitlin in 1984 indicates that excess of progeny positive-sense RNA of the protecting strain would sequester the minus-strand RNA of the challenging strain. Other models involve a function of the coat protein, or gene recombination. However, no model that could unify all the various facets of cross protection has hitherto been proposed. All that has not stopped the phenomenon having practical application. From the first attempts against a severe disease of cocoa in West Africa realized by Posnette in the 1940s, a number of crops (such as tomato, tobacco, citrus, cucurbits, grapevine, soybean, papaya, and so on) have been submitted to this practice. During the 1980s, cross protection came to a standstill because of the development of new resistant or tolerant cultivars. Its story is by no means ended, and much work is needed to understand its limits and possibilities.