Identification of Pathogens and Laboratory Activity Test of Kiwifruit Rot Disease in Guizhou Province, China

Wang, Tao; Ren, Yanling; Zhao, Jinyu; Jiang, Yingjie; Tang, Jian; Liu, Yao; Liu, Chao; Wang, Juan; Ji, Xiaolei; Wang, Mingyan

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/6893691

Journal of Chemistry

On this page

Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Discussion Conclusion Data Availability Conflicts of Interest Authors’ Contributions Acknowledgments References Copyright Related Articles

Special Issue

Innovations in Green Plant Protection and Food Storage Technology

View this Special Issue

Research Article | Open Access

Volume 2022 | Article ID 6893691 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/6893691

Identification of Pathogens and Laboratory Activity Test of Kiwifruit Rot Disease in Guizhou Province, China

Tao Wang,¹Yanling Ren,¹Jinyu Zhao,¹Yingjie Jiang,¹Jian Tang,¹Yao Liu,¹Chao Liu,¹Juan Wang,¹Xiaolei Ji,¹and Mingyan Wang¹

Academic Editor: Pei Li

Received01 May 2022

Accepted03 Jun 2022

Published29 Jun 2022

Abstract

Kiwifruit (Actinidia spp.) postharvest decay is common in China, which can cause serious economic losses to kiwifruit industry. In order to further clarify the pathogen of kiwifruit rot disease in Guizhou Province, the rotten fruits of kiwifruit (cultivar “Jinyan”) were collected, and the pathogenic fungi were identified by isolation and purification, pathogenicity test, morphological characteristics, and analysis of rDNA-ITS sequences. The results showed that the pathogenic fungi of kiwifruit rot disease were Diaporthe phaseolorum and Fusarium tricinctum. Meanwhile, the results showed that all the tested agents had a certain inhibitory effect on Diaporthe phaseolorum and Fusarium tricinctum. Among them, 33.5% quinolone SC had the best inhibitory effect on Diaporthe phaseolorum with an EC₅₀ value of 9.67 mg/L, and 25% fludioxonil SC had the best inhibitory effect on Fusarium tridentatus with the EC₅₀ value of 13.13 mg/L. The results will provide a reference for the control of kiwifruit rot disease.

1. Introduction

Kiwifruit (Actinidia spp.) has soft meat, sour and sweet taste, rich in vitamin C, sugars, and a variety of essential amino acids for human body. It has a high nutritional and economic value and is deeply loved by consumers, which is known as “super fruit” and “king of fruit.” Kiwifruit is native to China, and more than 30 countries have engaged in large scale and industrialized artificial cultivation of kiwifruit industry. In 2020, the planting area of kiwifruit in China was about 193000 hectares and the output was about 2.291 million tons, accounting for more than 68% and 50% of the world, respectively [1]. Guizhou Province is located in the west of China, and its geographical and climatic conditions are suitable for the growth of kiwifruit and have been one of the main kiwifruit planting areas in China. By 2020, the cultivated area has reached 4.51 × 10⁴ hm² [2].

In recently years, with the rapid expansion of the kiwifruit planting area, the problem of rot disease has become increasingly prominent [3–5]. At present, postharvest rot disease of kiwifruit occurs widely around the world, causing serious economic losses during fruit storage, transportation, and sales [6, 7]. Kiwifruit rot disease mainly occurs in the postharvest period and storage stage of the fruit. Its main symptoms are the formation of round or oval brown lesions on the peel, a water-stained ring on the edge of the lesion, and the color of the flesh of the lesion. It is milky white, and the pulp at the junction between disease and health is water-stained, often forming perforated rot. In severe cases, the whole fruit rots completely [8, 9]. The pathogenic microorganism of kiwifruit rot is rich in diversity. At present, the pathogenic microorganism that have been reported are mainly Botryosphaeria dothidea [10, 11], Phomopsis spp. [12, 13], and Pestalotiopsis spp. [7, 10]. Alternaria alternata, Plectosphaerella cucumerina, Neofusicoccum parvum, Phomopsis spp., and Fusarium oxysporum have been reported as pathogens of kiwifruit rot in Guizhou Province, China [10, 14–17]. However, research studies on rot disease of Guizhou kiwifruit are basically concentrated on “Guichang” kiwifruit and “Hongyang” kiwifruit varieties, and there are few reports on Guizhou “Jinyan” kiwifruit varieties.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Isolation and Purification of the Pathogens

The rotten kiwifruit was collected from Gubao town (106.525230°E, 26.852491°N), Maijia town (106.626288°E, 26.711823°N), and Machang town (106.223953°E, 26.447156°N) in Guizhou Province, China. A total of 290 samples were collected, packaged in a clean ziplock bag, and then taken back to the laboratory store in a 4°C refrigerator for pathogen isolation. The kiwifruit is first rinsed with tap water and then dried. The infected tissues (0.5 × 0.5 cm size) were soaked in 75% alcohol for about 30 s, rinsed with sterile water 3 s, and then plated the tissues on the PDA plates. After that, the PDA plates were maintained in a constant temperature incubator at 26°C without light. After culturing for 3 days, all the strains were cultured three times on the new PDA plates using a single spore technique to ensure purity. Finally, the purified strains were stored at 4°C for further use.

2.2. Pathogenicity Test

Pathogenicity tests were performed by inoculating the fungus on the puncture site of the surface of healthy and nearly mature kiwifruits, and the kiwifruits were incubated in an incubator in a 26°C constant temperature incubator with a humidity of 60% and a photoperiod of 14 L : 10 D. The surface of healthy and nearly mature kiwifruits inoculated with sterile water served as a control. After 12 days of inoculation, some symptoms have been observed on the surface. The causal fungus in the infected kiwifruit surface was reisolated on the PDA plate as described above. The characteristics of the reisolated fungus were used to compare with its original culture.

2.3. Morphological and Molecular Identification

Individual colony was inoculated on the PDA plate and maintained in a constant temperature incubator at 26°C without light for 8 days. Then, the morphology was identified by both eyes and an inverted microscopy (ECLIPSE Ni-E, Nikon Corporation, Japan). The total DNA of the tested strain was extracted with the Ezup column fungal genomic DNA extraction kit (B518259-0050, Sangon Corporation Shanghai, China), and the rDNA-ITS sequence was amplified by primers ITS1 (5′-TCCGTAGGTGAACCTGCGG-3′) and ITS4 (5′-TCCTCCGCTTATTGATATGC-3′). The total reaction volume is 25 μL: 12.5 μL 2xEs Taq Mix, 1 μL each primer, 1 μL DNA, and 9.5 μL ddH₂O. The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) reaction conditions were predenaturation at 94°C for 5 min, 35 cycles of 94°C for 30 s, 56°C for 1 min, 72°C for 1 min, and final extension at 72°C for 7 min. After amplification, the PCR product was sequenced at Sangon Corporation (Shanghai, China) and searched for sequence similarity with the National Center of Biotechnology Information (NCBI) database.

2.4. In Vitro Antifungal Activity Test

The in vitro antifungal activities of 11 kinds of fungicides, 33.5% quinolone SC (Shanghai Hulian biopharmaceutical Co., Ltd., China), 250 g/L propiconazole EC (Shandong Xinxing pesticide Co., Ltd., China), 25% myclobutanil EC (Zhejiang Yifan Biotechnology Group Co., Ltd., China), 25% fludioxonil SC (Jiangsu Syngenta Nantong crop protection Co., Ltd., China), 0.3% eugenol AP (Jiangsu Nantong Shenyu green Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., China), 80% ethylicin EC (Henan Kebang Chemical Co., Ltd., China), 100 g/L cyazofamid SC (Henan Guangnong pesticide factory, China), 1% Osthol AP (Inner Mongolia Qingyuanbao Biological Technology Co., Ltd., China) 25% cupric-ammonium complexion (Henan Anyang Guofeng Pesticide Co., Ltd., China), 430 g/L tebuconazole SC (Jiangsu Renxin Crop Protection Technology Co., Ltd., China), and 80% zineb WP (Shandong Xinxing Pesticide Co., Ltd., China) and 5 kinds of essential oils (patchouli essential oil (Guangzhou Biotechnology Co., Ltd., China), fennel essential oil (Beijing Maosi Trading Co., Ltd.), garlic essential oil (Beijing Maosi Trading Co., Ltd.), clove essential oil (Beijing Maosi Trading Co., Ltd.), and benzoin essence oil (Beijing Maosi Trading Co., Ltd.) were tested [18]. The inhibition rates I (%) are calculated by the following formula, where C (cm) and T (cm) represent the fungi diameters of the CK and treated PDA plates, respectively. Meanwhile, the EC₅₀ values of 11 kinds of fungicides and 5 kinds of plant essential oils against Diaporthe phaseolorum and Fusarium tricinctum were calculated with the SPSS 19.0 software.

3. Result

3.1. Morphological Identification

The hyphae of strain F1 are fluffy and white in the early stage of growth. The center of the hyphae appears yellowish-brown, and the edges are white on the 3^rd day. On the 8th day, the diameter of the colony is overgrown in the Petri dish. The hypha on the front is dark gray (Figure 1(a)), the back of the PDA medium is dark brown (Figure 1(b)), and the hyphae are transparent with many branches and segments (Figure 1(c)).

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

The hyphae of strain F2 are fluffy, appearing white at the initial stage of growth, with irregular edges and slow growth. On the 3rd day, the mycelium produces pink pigment. Then, on the 10th day, the diameter of the colony grows over the Petri dish, and the color of the bottom of the medium gradually changes to rose red on the front (Figure 1(d)), with yellow on the back (Figure 1(e)) and many hyphae branches (Figure 1(f)).

3.2. ITS Sequence Identification

The sequences of F1 and F2 strains were uploaded to NCBI to obtain the GenBank numbers of ON566024 and ON566025. Phylogenetic trees of the ITS sequence were constructed based on the N-J and M-L methods, as shown in Figure 2, and the strain F1 was classified as Diaporthe phaseolorum with the similarity of 99% and 85%, respectively. Meanwhile, Figure 3 shows that the strain F2 was classified as Fusarium tricinctum with bootstrap values of both 100% ((N-J method) and (M-L method)).

3.3. Pathogenicity Determination

Pathogenicity was determined by the stab inoculation method, and the results are shown in Figure 4. Figure 4 shows that the Diaporthe phaseolorum (strain F1) and Fusarium tricinctum (strain F2) can cause kiwifruit rot. Among them, the diameter of kiwifruit rot disease caused by F1 was 3.93 cm (Figure 4(b)), and F2 caused kiwifruit rot disease with a diameter of 4.25 cm (Figure 4(e)). The diseased kiwifruit was reisolated, and the strains with the same morphological characteristics as the original inoculated strains were obtained, which met the requirements of Koch’s law.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

3.4. In Vitro Antifungal Activity

It can be seen from Table 1 that the test fungicides and plant essential oils revealed different degrees of inhibition on the growth of Diaporthe phaseolorum and Fusarium tricinctum. Especially, 33.5% quinolone SC showed the best inhibitory effect against Diaporthe phaseolorum with the EC₅₀ value of 9.67 mg/L; meanwhile, 25% fludioxonil SC had an EC₅₀ value of 13.13 mg/L against Fusarium tricinctum, which were even better than those of other fungicides and plant essential oils.

4. Discussion

Postharvest rot disease of kiwifruit occurs globally, which has a significant impact on the quality and flavor of kiwifruit. At present, it has caused significant economic losses to the kiwifruit industry. Therefore, the identification of pathogens of kiwifruit postharvest rot disease is of great significance for industrial development. In this study, 2 pathogens classified as Diaporthe phaseolorum and Fusarium tricinctum were obtained from the rotten fruits of kiwifruit (cultivar “Jinyan”) which were collected from Guizhou Province, China. Diaporthe phaseolorum has a higher separation rate, and the asexual form of the fungus is Phomopsis spp. [19]. Phomopsis spp. has also been reported many times in other varieties in Guizhou Province, for example, “Guichang” kiwifruit [12, 20] and “Hongyang” kiwifruit [21]. Our results showed that the main pathogen of kiwifruit (cultivar “Jinyan”) rot disease in Guizhou Province was related to other strains. In addition, Phomopsis spp. was an important pathogen of kiwifruit rot disease in other regions, such as “Xuxiang” kiwifruit in Hubei and Shaanxi [22], “Jinyu” kiwifruit in Hubei, and “Golden” kiwifruit in Wuhan. The “Jinmei” kiwifruit [23] detected Phomopsis spp. as an important pathogen. It indicated that Phomopsis spp. was an important pathogen of kiwifruit rot disease among different strains and regions, and it caused harm to various strains of kiwifruit in the whole country.

Fusarium tricinctum is the first pathogenic fungus found in the identification of kiwifruit rot disease pathogens in Guizhou Province. This pathogen has not been found to infect kiwifruit in previous studies. Fusarium is widely distributed in nature and is one of the most important phytopathogens discovered so far [24]. It can cause a variety of plants and their fruits to rot. Among them, Fusarium tricinctum can cause apple moldy heart disease [25], garlic root rot [26], lily Fusarium wilt [27], and potato dry rot [28]. Yang et al. [29] found that there were significant differences in the pathogenicity and severity of Fusarium in different provinces and between different places in the same province. Because Fusarium tricinctum are more harmful to fruits and fruit trees and have a wide range of damage; they should be paid attention to in field prevention and control.

In recent years, the prevention and treatment of kiwifruit fruit rot disease gradually attracted the attention of the world kiwifruit industry. In this study, the in vitro inhibitory effects of 16 kinds of fungicides and plant essential oils against Diaporthe phaseolorum and Fusarium tricinctum were determined. The results showed that all the tested agents had a certain inhibitory effect on the four pathogenic fungi. Among them, 33.5% quinolone SC had the best inhibitory effect on Diaporthe phaseolorum and 25% fludioxonil SC had the best inhibitory effect on Fusarium tricinctum. At present, there are many screening studies on the prevention and control of kiwifruit rot disease. The commonly used agents are mainly carbendazim, tebuconazole, prohydan, flusilazole, benomyl, and thiophanate-methyl. Previous studies have shown that ethylicin could significantly inhibit the mycelial growth of P. macrospore, Botryotinia fuckeliana, Botryosphaeria dothidea, and Fusarium proliferatum [30]. 42.4% azole ether-fluranil SC, 40% flusilazole EC, and other three kinds of fungicides had a significant inhibitory effect on Pestalotiopsis gracilis [31]. Curcumin has a significant inhibitory effect on the growth of Diaporthe phaseolorum mycelium [32]. But serious pesticide residue problems will come with the long-term use of pesticides [33], for example, pesticide residues are the main bottleneck for my country’s kiwifruit export volume and price increase [34]. Therefore, there is an urgent need for research and development to find alternatives to pesticides [35]. To sum up, the optimal control agents for various pathogens are different; this may be related to kiwifruit varieties and local geographic climate. Based on the results of the abovementioned in vitro screening of fungicides against kiwifruit rot pathogens, the field control effect tests of 33.5% quinolone SC and 25% fludioxonil SC against kiwifruit rot disease can be carried out in our next work, so as to provide an effective prevention and control method of kiwifruit rot disease in Guizhou Province.

5. Conclusion

In conclusion, our results showed that Diaporthe phaseolorum and Fusarium tricinctum were the pathogenic fungi of kiwifruit (cultivar “Jinyan”) rot disease in Guizhou Province. Meanwhile, 33.5% quinolone SC had the best inhibitory effect on Diaporthe phaseolorum and 25% fludioxonil SC had the best inhibitory effect on Fusarium tricinctum. Our study could provide a theoretical basis for the effective control method of kiwifruit rot disease in Guizhou Province.

Data Availability

The data used to support this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Authors’ Contributions

Tao Wang and Yanling Ren contributed equally to this work.

Acknowledgments

The study was supported by the Science and Technology Project of China Tobacco Guizhou Provincial Corporation grant number (201918), the Science and Technology Foundation of General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China grant number (2017IK257, 2017IK261, 2016IK075, and 2014IK022), the Science and Technology Foundation of Guizhou Province grant number (J(2013)2149), the 2021 Humanities and Social Sciences Research Project of Guizhou Provincial Department of Education, grant number [2022ZC016], and the 2021 Guizhou Province Theoretical Innovation Project (Joint Project), grant number [GZLCLH-2021-169]. This research is the achievement of Guizhou Province Academic Pioneer and Academic Pioneer Construction.

References

Z. W. Jiang and C. H. Zhong, “A comprehensive understanding with the importance of popular science knowledge to the kiwifruit quality improvement,” China Fruits, vol. 1, pp. 1–8, 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
W. M. Zhong, Y. X. Huang, D. M. Tang, X. Zhang, and Y. Qi, “Adaptability comparison of twenty of introduced kiwifruit varieties in central Guizhou,” Northern Horticulture, vol. 8, pp. 29–37, 2021.
View at: Google Scholar
R. L. Wang, Research on Postharvest Disease Physiology and Ozone Preservation Technology of Hongyang Kiwifruit, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China, 2020.
Y. J. Koh, J. S. Hur, and J. S. Jung, “Postharvest fruit rots of kiwifruit (Actinidia deliciosa) in Korea,” New Zealand Journal of Crop and Horticultural Science, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 303–310, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Kim, Y. Koh, Y. J. Koh, J. S. Jung, and J. S. Hur, “Control of postharvest fruit rot diseases of kiwifruit by antagonistic bacterium Bacillus subtilis,” Acta Horticulturae, vol. 1096, pp. 377–382, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Manning, J. Burdon, N. De Silva et al., “Maturity and postharvest temperature management affect rot expression in “hort16a” kiwifruit,” Postharvest Biology and Technology, vol. 113, pp. 40–47, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Li, H. Pan, M. Y. Chen, and C. H. Zhong, “First report of pestalotiopsis microspora causing postharvest rot of kiwifruit in Hubei province, China,” Plant Disease, vol. 100, no. 10, p. 2161, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. R. Pennycook, “Fungal fruit rots of Actinidia deliciosa (kiwifruit),” New Zealand Journal of Experimental Agriculture, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 289–299, 1985.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Zhou, G. Gong, Y. Cui et al., “Identification of botryosphaeriaceae species causing kiwifruit rot in Sichuan province, China,” Plant Disease, vol. 99, no. 5, pp. 699–708, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Li, H. Pan, M. Chen, S. Zhang, and C. Zhong, “Isolation and identification of pathogenic fungi causing postharvest fruit rot of kiwifruit (Actinidia chinensis) in China,” Journal of Phytop athology, vol. 165, no. 11-12, pp. 782–790, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Li, J. X. Jiang, J. H. Leng, B. M. Li, and Q. Yu, “Isolation and identification of pathogenic bacteria of kiwifruit fruit rot disease in Fengxin county,” Acta Agriculturae Universitatis Jiangxiensis, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 259–263, 2012.
View at: Google Scholar
L. Feng, H. Wei, Y. L. Huang, H. Xu, X. H. Sun, and J. Jiang, “Infection route and isolation and identification of rot fungus in kiwifruit Guichang,” China Brewing, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 66–70, 2018.
View at: Google Scholar
W. W. Su, D. Wu, and Z. C. Han, “Identification and analysis of pathogenic bacteria of kiwifruit fruit rot disease in Guizhou,” Henan Agricultural Science, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 97–102, 2021.
View at: Google Scholar
X. Y. Zhang and W. J. Li, “Inhibitory effect of artemisia annua tobacco vinegar on the growth of fusarium trilinea,” China Agricultural Science Bulletin, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 131–134, 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
Y. Sun, Z. Ye, Y. Xia, X. M. Liu, J. J. Pu, and H. Zhang, “Research progress on stem-end rot of mango,” China Fruit & Vegetable, vol. 40, no. 12, pp. 79–84, 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
H. Pan, Q. L. Hu, S. J. Zhang, D. Zu, L. Li, and C. H. Zhong, “Kiwifruit disease investigation and pathogen identification in liupanshui city, guizou province,” Plant Protection, vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 125–131, 2018.
View at: Google Scholar
T. Q. Li, Y. X. Huang, and X. J. Wang, “Comprehensive prevention and control measures of kiwifruit canker in Xiuwen county,” Plant Doctor, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 37-38, 2015.
View at: Google Scholar
Y. Zhou, Y. H. Ou, B. M. Li, and Q. Q. Li, “Indoor virulence determination of 10 fungicides against Botryosphaeria dothidea,” South China Fruits, vol. 45, no. 6, pp. 124-125, 2016.
View at: Google Scholar
L. Luongo, A. Santori, L. Riccioni, and A. Belisario, “Phomopsis sp. associated with post-harvest fruit rot of kiwifruit in Italy,” Journal of Plant Pathology, vol. 93, no. 1, pp. 205–209, 2011.
View at: Google Scholar
Y. H. Yang, J. Y. Wu, J. Ren, W. Yang, and Y. L. Zheng, “Isolation and identification of pathogenic bacteria of kiwifruit soft rot,” Plant Doctor, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 67–71, 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
J. Q. Lei, W. N. Wu, Y. Liu, X. Q. Long, W. J. Li, and R. Wang, “Isolation, identification and pathogenicity difference of pathogenic bacteria of “hongyang” kiwifruit soft rot in liupanshui area of Guizhou province,” Northern Horticulture, vol. 4, pp. 31–38, 2019.
View at: Google Scholar
P. P. Zuo, S. Fu, L. T. Peng, G. Fan, S. Z. Yang, and J. Li, “Identification of the pathogenic bacteria of postharvest soft rot of kiwifruit and the control effect of carvacrol on it,” Journal of Huazhong Agricultural University, vol. 39, no. 6, pp. 15–22, 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
L. Deng, H. Pan, Y. H. Zhang et al., “Field validation of efficient control agents for kiwifruit fruit rot disease,” Fruit Trees in South China, vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 127–129+132, 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
B. A. Summerell, B. Salleh, and J. F. Leslie, “A utilitarian approach to Fusarium identification,” Plant Disease, vol. 87, no. 2, pp. 117–128, 2003.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. L. Gao, Study on Pathogen Diversity of Fuji Apple Mycoheart Disease in Shaanxi Province, Northwest University of Agriculture and Forestry Science and Technology, Xianyang, China, 2003.
L. J. Zhang, W. X. Wang, and Q. Yu, “Isolation and identification of pathogenic bacteria of garlic root rot in jimusar, Xinjiang,” Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 725–734, 2017.
View at: Google Scholar
W. Y. Li, Z. P. Liu, and X. F. He, “Isolation, identification and pathogenicity of pathogen of lily fusarium wilt,” Journal of Shenyang Agricultural University, vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 153–158, 2016.
View at: Google Scholar
N. N. Ning, Q. Liu, W. R. Xian, and W. H. Wang, “Determination of indoor toxicity of five fungicides to potato dry rot,” Journal of Qinghai University, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 31–37, 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
B. Yang, Damage Invertigation of Potato Root Rot Caused by Fusarium and its Pathogenic Identification and ISSR Analysis of Genetic Diversity in Northwest China, Ningxia University, Ningxia, China, 2019.
X. J. Wang, S. Y. Li, Y. W. Li, R. He, L. W. Zhu, and P. Liu, “Pathogen identification of kiwifruit soft rot and fungicide screening for control of the disease,” Journal of Plant Protection, vol. 44, no. 5, pp. 826–832, 2017.
View at: Google Scholar
C. Li, Identification and Control of the Pathogen of Kiwifruit Ripening and Rot in Fengxin Nanchang: College of Agriculture, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Nanchang, China, 2014.
K. K. Kai, W. Bi, Y. Sui, C. Hua, Y. Liu, and D. Zhang, “Curcumin inhibits diaporthe phaseolorum and reduces postharvest decay in kiwifruit,” Scientia Horticulturae, vol. 259, Article ID 108860, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. L. Ren, T. Wang, Y. Wang, Q. Q. Cao, and H. J. Huang, “Research on the maximum residue limits of pesticides in fresh kiwifruit at home and abroad,” World Agriculture, vol. 6, pp. 49–56, 2018.
View at: Google Scholar
T. Wang, X. N. Wang, J. Tang, W. Li, Q. Q. Cao, and J. Peng, “Research on the response of kiwifruit industry to technical barriers to trade,” Public Standardization, vol. 16, pp. 181–184+187, 2021.
View at: Google Scholar
Y. L. Ren, T. Wang, Q. Q. Cao et al., “Research on the response of kiwifruit to technical trade barriers to pesticide residues in the high-end market—taking Japan and the European union as examples,” Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, vol. 46, no. 21, pp. 366–370, 2018.
View at: Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2022 Tao Wang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies

Views

489

Downloads

622

Citations