@article{craven_peterson_windham_mitchell_martin_2005, title={Molecular identification of the turf grass rapid blight pathogen}, volume={97}, ISSN={["1557-2536"]}, DOI={10.3852/mycologia.97.1.160}, abstractNote={Rapid blight is a newly described disease on turf grasses, primarily found on golf courses using suboptimal water for irrigation purposes. On the basis of shared morphological characteristics, it has been proposed that the rapid blight pathogen belongs to a genus of stramenopiles, Labyrinthula, which had been known to cause disease of marine plants only. We have collected 10 isolates from four species of turf grass in five states and sequenced portions of the SSU (18S) rDNA gene from each to provide a definitive taxonomic placement for rapid blight pathogens. We also included sequences from Labyrinthuloides yorkensis, Schizochytrium aggregatum, Aplanochytrium sp., Thraustochytrium striatum, Achlya bisexualis and several nonturf-grass isolates of Labyrinthula. We found that rapid blight isolates indeed are placed firmly within the genus Labyrinthula and that they lack detectable genetic diversity in the 18S rDNA region. We propose that the rapid blight pathogens share a recent common ancestor and might have originated from a single, infected population.}, number={1}, journal={MYCOLOGIA}, author={Craven, KD and Peterson, PD and Windham, DE and Mitchell, TK and Martin, SB}, year={2005}, pages={160–166} }
 @article{peterson_leonard_miller_laudon_sutton_2005, title={Prevalence and distribution of common barberry, the alternate host of Puccinia graminis, in Minnesota}, volume={89}, ISSN={["1943-7692"]}, DOI={10.1094/PD-89-0159}, abstractNote={ A federal and state program operated from 1918 until the 1980s to eradicate common barberry (Berberis vulgaris), the alternate host of Puccinia graminis, from the major areas of cereal production in the United States. Over 500 million bushes were destroyed nationally during the program, approximately 1 million in Minnesota. Some sites in Minnesota where barberry bushes were destroyed remained in the “active” class when eradication was phased out in the 1980s. Active sites were defined as those on which there was still a possibility of emergence of barberry seedlings or sprouts arising from the parent bush. In the present study, from 1998 to 2002, 72 of the approximately 1,200 active sites in Minnesota were surveyed. Areas within 90 m of mapped locations of previously destroyed bushes were searched carefully at each site. Reemerged barberry plants were found on 32 sites. The reproductive status and GPS coordinates were recorded for each reemerged bush. More than 90% of the barberry bushes were found in counties with less than 400 ha of wheat per county, mostly in southeastern Minnesota, but one bush was found in a major wheat-producing county in northwestern Minnesota. Reemergence of barberry may serve as a source of new wheat stem rust races in future epidemics. }, number={2}, journal={PLANT DISEASE}, author={Peterson, PD and Leonard, KJ and Miller, JD and Laudon, RJ and Sutton, TB}, year={2005}, month={Feb}, pages={159–163} }
 @article{kelman_peterson_2002, title={Contributions of plant scientists to the development of the germ theory of disease}, volume={4}, number={2}, journal={Microbes and Infection}, author={Kelman, A. and Peterson, P. D.}, year={2002}, pages={257–260} }
 @article{peterson_campbell_2002, title={Prevalence and ecological association of foliar pathogens of cucumber in North Carolina, 1996-1998}, volume={86}, ISSN={["0191-2917"]}, DOI={10.1094/PDIS.2002.86.10.1094}, abstractNote={ During the fall growing seasons of 1996-98, 5,400 leaves exhibiting leaf spots were collected from cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.) fields and microscopically examined to identify the organisms associated with these symptoms. Five fungal pathogens were associated with leaf lesions: Alternaria cucumerina, Colletotrichum orbiculare, Corynespora cassiicola, Didymella bryoniae, and Pseudoperonospora cubensis; D. bryoniae and C. orbiculare occurred most frequently. When pathogens were paired on five or more leaves, associations between pathogen pairs were tested for independence via a 2-by-2 contingency table χ2 analysis. In all, 66 two-way pathogen associations were tested. Of these, 39 associations were negative (occurred together less often than expected at random), 1 was positive (occurred together more often than expected at random), and, in 16 cases, the pathogens were not associated. An association between C. orbiculare and D. bryoniae occurred 24 times and, each time, the relationship was negative. This result, combined with different environmental requirements for infection, suggests that these pathogens either occupy different niches in the plant canopy or are antagonistic. No relationship between the cultivars grown or the fungicides applied and the pathogens isolated from specific field sites was found. Information on the dominant pathogens responsible for leaf spot epidemics in North Carolina's cucumber fields will be useful to target breeding and disease control strategies. }, number={10}, journal={PLANT DISEASE}, author={Peterson, PD and Campbell, CL}, year={2002}, month={Oct}, pages={1094–1100} }
 @book{peterson_2001, title={A directory of North Carolina's railroad structures}, publisher={Raleigh, N.C: Old North State Chapter of the National Railroad Historical Society,}, author={Peterson, A.}, year={2001} }
 @misc{peterson_2001, title={E.M. Freeman: Early research on cereal diseases and the rise of plant pathology at the University of Minnesota}, volume={39}, number={2001}, journal={Annual Review of Phytopathology}, author={Peterson, P. D.}, year={2001}, pages={13–26} }
 @book{stem rust of wheat: from ancient enemy to modern foe_2001, ISBN={0890542716}, publisher={St. Paul, Minn.: APS Press}, year={2001} }
 @misc{peterson_griffith_2000, title={C.L. SHEAR: Gifted mycologist, plant pathologist, and APS founder}, volume={38}, ISSN={["1545-2107"]}, DOI={10.1146/annurev.phyto.38.1.19}, abstractNote={ Cornelius Lott Shear was one of the most influential plant pathologists of the early twentieth century. He was first and foremost an excellent mycologist who did pioneering research on pathogenic fungi and, as a senior pathologist with the USDA's Bureau of Plant Industry, studied important crop diseases and offered useful control measures. Shear's successful research enhanced his reputation among his fellow pathologists and allowed him to embark on what was perhaps his most significant contribution to plant pathology, his pivotal role in the creation of the American Phytopathological Society in 1908. Shear felt that an independent society dedicated to the unique needs of plant pathologists would facilitate communication and cooperation among practitioners. Between his scientific research and his role in the creation of APS, Shear stands out for the enormous impact he had on his science. }, journal={ANNUAL REVIEW OF PHYTOPATHOLOGY}, author={Peterson, PD and Griffith, CS}, year={2000}, pages={19–29} }
 @article{peterson_griffith_campbell_2000, title={Hermann von Schrenk and the rise of forest pathology in the United States}, volume={84}, ISSN={["1943-7692"]}, DOI={10.1094/PDIS.2000.84.5.586}, abstractNote={At the turn of the twentieth century, forest pathology first appeared as a new specialty of the discipline of phytopathology in the United States. With origins in Europe in the middle of the nineteenth century, forest pathology manifested itself in the United States as a scattered collection of essays before becoming a recognized subdiscipline by the first decade of the twentieth century. It emerged primarily from the confluence of two sources: taxonomic mycology and the growing conservation movement. In this review, we will examine one individual, botanist and mycologist Hermann Von Schrenk (Fig. 1), who personified the rise of this new specialty through his research on the diseases of trees for the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Von Schrenk’s career also provides timely lessons by demonstrating that the issues created by the interactions of plant pathologists and industry were present from the early history of the science. Forest pathology began in Germany during the nineteenth century, primarily through the efforts of the Hartigs. In 1833, Theodore Hartig, forester, educator, and son of G. L. Hartig, chief forester of Prussia, published a report on the effects of mycelium in wood. In tune with the dominant biological theory of spontaneous generation, T. Hartig deduced that the fungi were the result rather than the cause of rotting wood. Nevertheless, the report served to illustrate the destructive nature of fungi. In the 1870s, Robert Hartig, son of Theodore, did foundational research on the etiology of tree diseases caused by fungi and related fungi to the cause of wood deterioration. Through his textbooks and teaching, Hartig established the basis of forest pathology (15). Forest pathology, however, developed more slowly than other aspects of plant pathology, particularly in the United States, due in large part to the different level of interest in the health and preservation of trees versus crops grown for food and fiber. Ornamental and forest trees failed to garner much interest, but orchard fruit trees did attract a great deal of attention from the earliest days of plant disease studies because of a myriad of diseases such as fire blight and peach yellows that plagued them. The most notable early work on forest tree diseases in the United States came from William Farlow, the gifted Harvard mycologist, who studied in the early 1870s with Anton DeBary and was certainly aware of the botanical trends in Germany. After he returned to the United States in 1879, Farlow lectured and wrote on “Diseases of forest trees.” This paper, however, was his single contribution to the field until 1891, when he wrote the article, “Diseases of trees likely to follow mechanical injuries” (4,5). Farlow’s work did not represent the full extent of American interest in tree diseases, but it certainly reflected the most scientifically advanced knowledge available. It also revealed a large degree of attachment to classical mycology at a time when plant pathology was shifting in a more applied direction, particularly at the USDA and the state agricultural experiment stations. The publication of “Diseases of shade and ornamental trees” by Beverly T. Galloway and Albert F. Woods in the USDA Yearbook for 1896 marked the first serious foray into forest pathology by America’s foremost institution of agricultural research. The Yearbook paper by Galloway, chief of the Division of Vegetable Physiology and Pathology, and Woods, his top deputy, highlighted ongoing attempts by the USDA to collect data on tree diseases. The article was intended only as a brief introduction to the young field of forest pathology, although it did provide some cultural control information. The paper aroused a noticeable interest in tree diseases, as indicated by the large number of requests for information and specimens (37). For the next several years, the USDA maintained an interest in tree diseases, but the inclusion of forest pathology as a truly significant area of USDA pathological research would have to await the next century. By 1900, the demand for concerted attention to tree diseases came conspicuously “from owners of forest and shade trees” as well as “superintendents of parks and streets” (6). The Secretary of Agriculture declared that “the rapidly growing interest in forestry problems has created a widespread demand for information as to diseases affecting trees, and in recognition of this fact the work has been pushed forward as rapidly as possible” (36). The growth of forest pathology can be seen as part of an overall expansion of the Department’s attention to forestry, in part sparked by a national rise of interest in conservation (21). This trend was highlighted by the appointment of the legendary Gifford Pinchot (Fig. 2) as chief of the Division of Forestry in 1898. Pinchot was a national figure of growing influence, and he, more than any other American, would frame the definition of the Conservation Movement of the early twentieth century. Unlike the understanding of “conservation” today, Pinchot’s concern for conservation was to understand and monitor natural resources, not for the pur-}, number={5}, journal={PLANT DISEASE}, author={Peterson, PD and Griffith, CS and Campbell, CL}, year={2000}, month={May}, pages={586–591} }
 @misc{peterson_2000, title={Tobacco mosaic virus: One hundred years of contributions to virology.}, volume={91}, number={4}, journal={Isis}, author={Peterson, P. D.}, year={2000}, pages={822–823} }
 @article{peterson_griffith_1999, title={Herman von Schrenk: The beginnings of forest pathology in the U.S}, journal={Forest History Today}, author={Peterson, P. D. and Griffith, C. S.}, year={1999}, pages={29} }
 @book{campbell_peterson_griffith_1999, title={The formative years of plant pathology in the United States}, ISBN={0890542333}, publisher={St. Paul, MN: APS Press}, author={Campbell, C. L. and Peterson, P. D. and Griffith, C. S.}, year={1999} }
 @article{campbell_peterson_griffith_1998, title={The War Emergency Board of American plant pathologists}, volume={82}, ISSN={["1943-7692"]}, DOI={10.1094/PDIS.1998.82.1.121}, abstractNote={By the second decade of the twentieth century, plant pathology in the United States was developing rapidly into a mature, professional science. The level of that development can be viewed clearly through the activities of a committee appointed in 1918 as a response to the national emergency caused by World War I and known as the War Emergency Board of American Plant Pathologists. The formation of the War Board is a significant event in the history of plant pathology in the United States, not so much for what the Board contributed to the war effort, but rather because it became an extraordinary exercise in professional self-examination. The study of the organization of American phytopathological resources necessitated by the war, as well as the Board’s examination of the current level of the understanding of plant diseases and the ability to forge solutions to those problems, serve as an excellent lens through which to view the science of plant pathology in its formative years. As a lasting legacy, the War Board}, number={1}, journal={PLANT DISEASE}, author={Campbell, CL and Peterson, PD and Griffith, CS}, year={1998}, month={Jan}, pages={121–125} }
 @article{peterson_campbell_1997, title={Beverly T. Galloway: Visionary administrator}, volume={35}, ISSN={["1545-2107"]}, DOI={10.1146/annurev.phyto.35.1.29}, abstractNote={[Figure: see text]}, journal={ANNUAL REVIEW OF PHYTOPATHOLOGY}, author={Peterson, PD and Campbell, CL}, year={1997}, pages={29–43} }
 @article{griffith_peterson_campbell_1997, title={Byron David Halsted and experiment station plant pathology 1889 to 1900}, volume={81}, ISSN={["0191-2917"]}, DOI={10.1094/PDIS.1997.81.5.545}, abstractNote={Halsted (B.D.) fut le plus celebre scientifique americain du XIX e siecle a etudier et effectuer des recherches sur les maladies des plantes afin de pallier les problemes rencontres en agriculture}, number={5}, journal={PLANT DISEASE}, author={Griffith, CS and Peterson, PD and Campbell, CL}, year={1997}, month={May}, pages={545–549} }
 @article{hilty_peterson_1997, title={Frank Lamson-Scribner: Botanist and pioneer plant pathologist in the United States}, volume={35}, ISSN={["0066-4286"]}, DOI={10.1146/annurev.phyto.35.1.17}, abstractNote={[Figure: see text]}, journal={ANNUAL REVIEW OF PHYTOPATHOLOGY}, author={Hilty, JW and Peterson, PD}, year={1997}, pages={17–26} }
 @article{peterson_griffith_campbell_1995, title={Treatment of grape diseases: The science and successes of Frank Lamson-Scribner}, volume={79}, number={1}, journal={Plant Disease}, author={Peterson, P. D., Jr and Griffith, C. S. and Campbell, C. L.}, year={1995}, pages={89} }
 @article{peterson_campbell_griffith_1992, title={James E. Teschemacher and the cause and management of potato blight in the United States}, volume={76}, number={7}, journal={Plant Disease}, author={Peterson, P. D., Jr. and Campbell, C. L. and Griffith, C. S.}, year={1992}, pages={754} }