health approach  (Gossner Foods)

Journal: Journal of Pest Science

Article Title: A recent ash dieback infection neither affects emerald ash borer performance nor triggers a substantial systemic phytochemical defense response in European ash

doi: 10.1007/s10340-025-01981-4

Figure Lengend Snippet: Experimental setup and visual comparison of ash dieback, Hymenoscyphus fraxineus, (ADB), inoculated trees and control trees. a ) Schematic of ADB and emerald ash borer, Agrilus planipennis , (EAB), treatment application as well as phloem sampling positions for the larval experiment. b ) A tree not inoculated with ADB (left) and a tree inoculated for ca. 6 months with ADB (right); note dieback in upper branches. c ) Typical ADB-caused lesion on the stem surface and below the bark

Article Snippet: Our results indicate that previously reported phytochemically mediated cross-resistance of European ash to ADB and EAB (Gossner et al. ), is probably driven by genetically determined differences in ash constitutive phytochemistry, rather than by genotypic differences in defense inducibility.

Techniques: Comparison, Control, Sampling

Journal: Journal of Pest Science

Article Title: A recent ash dieback infection neither affects emerald ash borer performance nor triggers a substantial systemic phytochemical defense response in European ash

doi: 10.1007/s10340-025-01981-4

Figure Lengend Snippet: Emerald ash borer, Agrilus planipennis, (EAB), larval performance after 48–50 days on trees co-inoculated with ash dieback, Hymenoscyphus fraxineus, (ADB), (treatment: ADB-EAB) compared to trees infested with only EAB (treatment: EAB). a ) Predicted larval dry weight overall means (± 95% CI). Smaller, more transparent points represent individual larval weights. b ) Predicted mean probability of larvae reaching the final instar (± 95% CI). Smaller, more transparent points represent individual larvae that either reached the final instar (100%) during the experimental duration or did not reach the final instar (0%). c ) Predicted mean probability of larval survival (± 95% CI). Smaller, more transparent points represent individual larvae that either survived until the experiment ended (100%) or did not survive (0%). Mean values sharing the same letter do not differ significantly between inoculation treatments ( P > 0.05)

Article Snippet: Our results indicate that previously reported phytochemically mediated cross-resistance of European ash to ADB and EAB (Gossner et al. ), is probably driven by genetically determined differences in ash constitutive phytochemistry, rather than by genotypic differences in defense inducibility.

Techniques:

Journal: Journal of Pest Science

Article Title: A recent ash dieback infection neither affects emerald ash borer performance nor triggers a substantial systemic phytochemical defense response in European ash

doi: 10.1007/s10340-025-01981-4

Figure Lengend Snippet: Kaplan–Meier curves and 95% confidence bands for survival of adult emerald ash borer, Agrilus planipennis, (EAB), when feeding on leaves of ash dieback, Hymenoscyphus fraxineus, (ADB), inoculated trees or non-inoculated trees (control). Survival curves were averaged across provenances. The risk table on the bottom lists the number of surviving beetles over the experimental duration

Article Snippet: Our results indicate that previously reported phytochemically mediated cross-resistance of European ash to ADB and EAB (Gossner et al. ), is probably driven by genetically determined differences in ash constitutive phytochemistry, rather than by genotypic differences in defense inducibility.

Techniques: Control

Journal: Journal of Pest Science

Article Title: A recent ash dieback infection neither affects emerald ash borer performance nor triggers a substantial systemic phytochemical defense response in European ash

doi: 10.1007/s10340-025-01981-4

Figure Lengend Snippet: Specialized phytochemical profiles of trees inoculated with ash dieback (treatment: ADB), emerald ash borer larvae (treatment: EAB), co-inoculated with both (treatment: ADB–EAB) or lacking both (treatment: control) visualized using partial least squares discriminant analysis (PLS-DA). a ) phytochemical profiles measured in the phloem next to the ADB infection front. b ) phytochemical profiles measured in the phloem 18–20 cm away from the ADB infection front (or at comparable positions in non-ADB-treated plants). c ) phytochemical profiles in leaves of trees either inoculated with ADB or not inoculated with ADB. Tables to the right of each plot show P values and classification error rates (CER) obtained during pairwise comparison of the profiles using permutation tests. Significant values are highlighted in bold font

Article Snippet: Our results indicate that previously reported phytochemically mediated cross-resistance of European ash to ADB and EAB (Gossner et al. ), is probably driven by genetically determined differences in ash constitutive phytochemistry, rather than by genotypic differences in defense inducibility.

Techniques: Control, Infection, Comparison

Journal: Journal of Pest Science

Article Title: A recent ash dieback infection neither affects emerald ash borer performance nor triggers a substantial systemic phytochemical defense response in European ash

doi: 10.1007/s10340-025-01981-4

Figure Lengend Snippet: Effect of tree inoculation with ash dieback (ADB), emerald ash borer larvae (EAB), co-inoculation of ADB and EAB (ADB-EAB) or no inoculation (control) on key specialized metabolites in the phloem: a ) verbascoside, b ) calceolarioside B and c ) esculetin and in the leaf d ) verbascoside, e ) calceolarioside B and f ) esculetin of ash trees. Metabolites in the phloem were either measured next to the ADB infection or 18-20 cm distant to the infection. Shown are predicted mean normalized peak areas for each compound (± Šidák adjusted 95% CI). Smaller, more transparent points represent normalized compound peak areas of individual trees. Mean values sharing the same letter do not differ significantly ( P > 0.05)

Article Snippet: Our results indicate that previously reported phytochemically mediated cross-resistance of European ash to ADB and EAB (Gossner et al. ), is probably driven by genetically determined differences in ash constitutive phytochemistry, rather than by genotypic differences in defense inducibility.

Techniques: Control, Infection

Journal: Journal of Pest Science

Article Title: A recent ash dieback infection neither affects emerald ash borer performance nor triggers a substantial systemic phytochemical defense response in European ash

doi: 10.1007/s10340-025-01981-4

Figure Lengend Snippet: Experimental setup and visual comparison of ash dieback, Hymenoscyphus fraxineus, (ADB), inoculated trees and control trees. a ) Schematic of ADB and emerald ash borer, Agrilus planipennis , (EAB), treatment application as well as phloem sampling positions for the larval experiment. b ) A tree not inoculated with ADB (left) and a tree inoculated for ca. 6 months with ADB (right); note dieback in upper branches. c ) Typical ADB-caused lesion on the stem surface and below the bark

Article Snippet: The stem cross section area (mean area: 82 mm 2 , 95% CI: 78.4–85.6 mm 2 ) was measured since it might affect EAB performance (Gossner et al. ).

Techniques: Comparison, Control, Sampling

Journal: Journal of Pest Science

Article Title: A recent ash dieback infection neither affects emerald ash borer performance nor triggers a substantial systemic phytochemical defense response in European ash

doi: 10.1007/s10340-025-01981-4

Figure Lengend Snippet: Emerald ash borer, Agrilus planipennis, (EAB), larval performance after 48–50 days on trees co-inoculated with ash dieback, Hymenoscyphus fraxineus, (ADB), (treatment: ADB-EAB) compared to trees infested with only EAB (treatment: EAB). a ) Predicted larval dry weight overall means (± 95% CI). Smaller, more transparent points represent individual larval weights. b ) Predicted mean probability of larvae reaching the final instar (± 95% CI). Smaller, more transparent points represent individual larvae that either reached the final instar (100%) during the experimental duration or did not reach the final instar (0%). c ) Predicted mean probability of larval survival (± 95% CI). Smaller, more transparent points represent individual larvae that either survived until the experiment ended (100%) or did not survive (0%). Mean values sharing the same letter do not differ significantly between inoculation treatments ( P > 0.05)

Article Snippet: The stem cross section area (mean area: 82 mm 2 , 95% CI: 78.4–85.6 mm 2 ) was measured since it might affect EAB performance (Gossner et al. ).

Techniques:

Journal: Journal of Pest Science

Article Title: A recent ash dieback infection neither affects emerald ash borer performance nor triggers a substantial systemic phytochemical defense response in European ash

doi: 10.1007/s10340-025-01981-4

Figure Lengend Snippet: Kaplan–Meier curves and 95% confidence bands for survival of adult emerald ash borer, Agrilus planipennis, (EAB), when feeding on leaves of ash dieback, Hymenoscyphus fraxineus, (ADB), inoculated trees or non-inoculated trees (control). Survival curves were averaged across provenances. The risk table on the bottom lists the number of surviving beetles over the experimental duration

Article Snippet: The stem cross section area (mean area: 82 mm 2 , 95% CI: 78.4–85.6 mm 2 ) was measured since it might affect EAB performance (Gossner et al. ).

Techniques: Control

Journal: Journal of Pest Science

Article Title: A recent ash dieback infection neither affects emerald ash borer performance nor triggers a substantial systemic phytochemical defense response in European ash

doi: 10.1007/s10340-025-01981-4

Figure Lengend Snippet: Specialized phytochemical profiles of trees inoculated with ash dieback (treatment: ADB), emerald ash borer larvae (treatment: EAB), co-inoculated with both (treatment: ADB–EAB) or lacking both (treatment: control) visualized using partial least squares discriminant analysis (PLS-DA). a ) phytochemical profiles measured in the phloem next to the ADB infection front. b ) phytochemical profiles measured in the phloem 18–20 cm away from the ADB infection front (or at comparable positions in non-ADB-treated plants). c ) phytochemical profiles in leaves of trees either inoculated with ADB or not inoculated with ADB. Tables to the right of each plot show P values and classification error rates (CER) obtained during pairwise comparison of the profiles using permutation tests. Significant values are highlighted in bold font

Article Snippet: The stem cross section area (mean area: 82 mm 2 , 95% CI: 78.4–85.6 mm 2 ) was measured since it might affect EAB performance (Gossner et al. ).

Techniques: Control, Infection, Comparison

Journal: Journal of Pest Science

Article Title: A recent ash dieback infection neither affects emerald ash borer performance nor triggers a substantial systemic phytochemical defense response in European ash

doi: 10.1007/s10340-025-01981-4

Figure Lengend Snippet: Effect of tree inoculation with ash dieback (ADB), emerald ash borer larvae (EAB), co-inoculation of ADB and EAB (ADB-EAB) or no inoculation (control) on key specialized metabolites in the phloem: a ) verbascoside, b ) calceolarioside B and c ) esculetin and in the leaf d ) verbascoside, e ) calceolarioside B and f ) esculetin of ash trees. Metabolites in the phloem were either measured next to the ADB infection or 18-20 cm distant to the infection. Shown are predicted mean normalized peak areas for each compound (± Šidák adjusted 95% CI). Smaller, more transparent points represent normalized compound peak areas of individual trees. Mean values sharing the same letter do not differ significantly ( P > 0.05)

Article Snippet: The stem cross section area (mean area: 82 mm 2 , 95% CI: 78.4–85.6 mm 2 ) was measured since it might affect EAB performance (Gossner et al. ).

Techniques: Control, Infection