02754naa a2200541 a 450000100080000000500110000800800410001902400520006010000260011224501340013826000090027252012550028165000170153665000210155365000090157465000220158365000180160565000180162365000100164165000100165165000250166165000150168670000140170170000240171570000190173970000180175870000200177670000180179670000200181470000200183470000180185470000170187270000200188970000180190970000170192770000170194470000230196170000200198470000190200470000180202370000150204170000230205670000240207970000150210370000180211870000210213677300550215721793472025-10-02       2025    bl uuuu     u00u1 u    #d7 ahttps://doi.org/10.1007/s40858-025-00763-82DOI1 aCARVALHO, A. C. C. de  aModeling the severity–yield relationship and economic damage threshold of white spot epidemics in maize.h[electronic resource]  c2025  aMaize white spot (MWS) is an important disease of maize in Brazil. This study examined the relationship between MWS severity and yield using Fisher's Z (Z) and the correlation coefficient (r). Meta-analytic and random-coefficients models were fitted to yield–disease data to estimate the regression intercept (β0) and slope (β1). The effects of moderator variables (yield class, severity class, and region) were also assessed in the random-coefficients model. Economic damage thresholds (EDTs) were then determined through simulation. A significant association was observed between white spot severity and maize yield (Z=0.51; r= −0.47), with both models indicating a negative relationship. In the meta-analytic model, β0 and β1 were estimated at 7,616.61 kg/ha and−60.22, respectively; in the random-coefficients model, they were 7,555.61 kg/ha and−57.53. No moderator significantly affected the slope (P&gt0.06), but yield class had a significant effect on the intercept (P&lt0.01). The MWS damage coefficient was−0.80% (95% CI:−1.06 to−0.55), and the mean EDT was 2.1% disease severity. These findings confirm MWS as a limiting factor for maize yield and provide a quantitative basis for optimizing disease management strategies.  aEpidemiology  aPantoea ananatis  aDano  aDoença de Planta  aEpidemiologia  aMancha Branca  aMilho  aPerda  aPhaeosphaeria Maydis  aRendimento1 aBRAGA, K.1 aCUSTÓDIO, A. A. P.1 aCANTERI, M. G.1 aFANTIN, L. H.1 aUTIAMADA, C. M.1 aCAMPOS, H. D.1 aSILVA, D. D. da1 aCOSTA, R. V. da1 aDUARTE, A. P.1 aCOSTA, A. A.1 aCARVALHO, A. G.1 aMOCHKO, A. C.1 aSILVA, A. L.1 aLUJAN, D. W.1 aMEDEIROS, F. C. L.1 aJULIATTI, F. C.1 aJULIATT, F. C.1 aFANTIN, G. M.1 aROY, T. M.1 aGRIGOLLI, J. F. J.1 aNUNES‑JÚNIOR, J.1 aSENGER, M.1 aTORMEN, N. R.1 aDEL PONTE, E. M.  tTropical Plant Pathologygv. 50, article 75, 2025.