Subtropical Plant Pathology Research Site Logo
ARS Home About Us Helptop nav spacerContact Us En Espanoltop nav spacer
Printable VersionPrintable Version     E-mail this pageE-mail this page
Agricultural Research Service United States Department of Agriculture
Search
  Advanced Search
 
Programs and Projects
Subjects of Investigation
 

Research Project: DOMESTIC, EXOTIC, AND EMERGING DISEASES OF CITRUS, VEGETABLES, AND ORNAMENTALS (DEED)

Location: Subtropical Plant Pathology Research

Title: Disadvantages of the Horsfall-Barratt Scale for estimating severity of citrus canker

Authors
item Bock, C. H. -
item Gottwald, Timothy
item Parker, P. E. -
item Ferrandino, F. -
item Welham, S. -
item Van Den Bosch, F. -
item Parnell, S. -

Submitted to: American Phytopathological Society Annual Meeting
Publication Type: Proceedings
Publication Acceptance Date: April 25, 2009
Publication Date: June 1, 2009
Citation: Bock, C., Gottwald, T.R., Parker, P., Ferrandino, F., Welham, S., Van Den Bosch, F., Parnell, S. 2009. Disadvantages of the Horsfall-Barratt Scale for estimating severity of citrus canker. American Phytopathological Society Annual Meeting. 98:S23.

Technical Abstract: Direct visual estimation of disease severity to the nearest percent was compared to using the Horsfall-Barratt (H-B) scale. Data from a simulation model designed to sample two diseased populations were used to investigate the probability of the two methods to reject a null hypothesis (H0) using a t-test. The relative closeness of the means, their standard deviation and rater ability all influenced the probability of Type II error (failure to reject H0). If differences were gross between means or if raters were very imprecise then both methods had similar probability to reject H0. If populations had the same mean, there was no difference in ability of the two methods to accept H0. However, if these criteria were not met, the H-B scale had higher probability of Type II error, particularly at severities 20-50%. Larger sample size reduced the probability of Type II error by both methods, but invariably the sample size required to reject H0 at P=1.0 was smaller for direct estimation. Approx. 50% more samples were required for the H-B scaled data to reject H0 with the same probability as directly estimated data. The structure of the H-B scale predisposes hypothesis testing to greater risk of Type II error compared to direct estimation. The H-B scale, and other scales, can save time, and are easy to learn and apply, but if used, sufficient sample size is needed to minimise risk of Type II errors. Direct estimation using the 1-100% ratio scale is preferable when assessing plant disease.

   

 
Project Team
Adkins, Scott
Hilf, Mark
Duan, Ping
Gottwald, Timothy
Turechek, William
 
Publications
   Publications
 
Related National Programs
  Plant Diseases (303)
 
 
Last Modified: 06/19/2013
ARS Home | USDA.gov | Site Map | Policies and Links 
FOIA | Accessibility Statement | Privacy Policy | Nondiscrimination Statement | Information Quality | USA.gov | White House