These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
139 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31598257)
1. Will natural resistance result in populations of ash trees remaining in British woodlands after a century of ash dieback disease? Evans MR R Soc Open Sci; 2019 Aug; 6(8):190908. PubMed ID: 31598257 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A first assessment of Fraxinus excelsior (common ash) susceptibility to Hymenoscyphus fraxineus (ash dieback) throughout the British Isles. Stocks JJ; Buggs RJA; Lee SJ Sci Rep; 2017 Nov; 7(1):16546. PubMed ID: 29185457 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A glimmer of hope - ash genotypes with increased resistance to ash dieback pathogen show cross-resistance to emerald ash borer. Gossner MM; Perret-Gentil A; Britt E; Queloz V; Glauser G; Ladd T; Roe AD; Cleary M; Liziniewicz M; Nielsen LR; Ghosh SK; Bonello P; Eisenring M New Phytol; 2023 Nov; 240(3):1219-1232. PubMed ID: 37345294 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Genome-wide epigenetic variation among ash trees differing in susceptibility to a fungal disease. Sollars ESA; Buggs RJA BMC Genomics; 2018 Jun; 19(1):502. PubMed ID: 29954338 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Ash dieback, soil and deer browsing influence natural regeneration of European ash (Fraxinus excelsior L.). Turczański K; Dyderski MK; Rutkowski P Sci Total Environ; 2021 Jan; 752():141787. PubMed ID: 32889266 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Ash leaf metabolomes reveal differences between trees tolerant and susceptible to ash dieback disease. Sambles CM; Salmon DL; Florance H; Howard TP; Smirnoff N; Nielsen LR; McKinney LV; Kjær ED; Buggs RJA; Studholme DJ; Grant M Sci Data; 2017 Dec; 4():170190. PubMed ID: 29257137 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Canditate metabolites for ash dieback tolerance in Fraxinus excelsior. Nemesio-Gorriz M; Menezes RC; Paetz C; Hammerbacher A; Steenackers M; Schamp K; Höfte M; Svatoš A; Gershenzon J; Douglas GC J Exp Bot; 2020 Oct; 71(19):6074-6083. PubMed ID: 32598444 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Virulence of Hymenoscyphus albidus and H. fraxineus on Fraxinus excelsior and F. pennsylvanica. Kowalski T; Bilański P; Holdenrieder O PLoS One; 2015; 10(10):e0141592. PubMed ID: 26517266 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Genomic basis of European ash tree resistance to ash dieback fungus. Stocks JJ; Metheringham CL; Plumb WJ; Lee SJ; Kelly LJ; Nichols RA; Buggs RJA Nat Ecol Evol; 2019 Dec; 3(12):1686-1696. PubMed ID: 31740845 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The Endophytic Mycobiome of European Ash and Sycamore Maple Leaves - Geographic Patterns, Host Specificity and Influence of Ash Dieback. Schlegel M; Queloz V; Sieber TN Front Microbiol; 2018; 9():2345. PubMed ID: 30405540 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Estimating coextinction risks from epidemic tree death: affiliate lichen communities among diseased host tree populations of Fraxinus excelsior. Jönsson MT; Thor G PLoS One; 2012; 7(9):e45701. PubMed ID: 23049840 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Endophytic fungi related to the ash dieback causal agent encode signatures of pathogenicity on European ash. Rafiqi M; Kosawang C; Peers JA; Jelonek L; Yvanne H; McMullan M; Nielsen LR IMA Fungus; 2023 May; 14(1):10. PubMed ID: 37170345 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Ability of the ash dieback pathogen to reproduce and to induce damage on its host are controlled by different environmental parameters. Marçais B; Giraudel A; Husson C PLoS Pathog; 2023 Apr; 19(4):e1010558. PubMed ID: 37079641 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]