Paper · 2009 · Annals of Plant Protection Sciences

Efficacy of Bio-control agents in Management of Reniform Nematode - Root Rot Complex in Cotton

Muttucumaru Sivakumar

7
claims
14
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Comparative efficacy of four bio-agents viz., Trichoderma viride, Paecilomyces lilacinus, Pochonia chlamydosporia and Pseudomonas fluorescens were tested against reniform nematode, Rotylenchulus reniformis - Macrophomina phaseolina root rot complex on cotton cv. CU-5 during 2006–2007. The bio-agents were effective both as seed treatment and soil application. P. fluorescens as seed treatment @ 20 g/ha followed by soil application @ 2.5 kg/ha2 was found significantly superior over other treatments recording 62.5% reduction of female nematodes in the root system, 56.4 and 45.6% increase in plant height and root weight, 56.6% reduction in soil population of nematodes and 98.5% increased yield. Seed treatment with T. viride was most effective in reducing the root rot incidence to the tune of 91.9% and was on par with P. fluorescece in respect of yield.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 7

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

P. fluorescens seed and soil application reduced female nematodes in cotton roots by 62.5% versus other treatments.

Treatment
P. fluorescens as seed treatment @ 20 g/ha followed by soil application @ 2.5 kg/ha2e0
Interactor
P. fluorescensPseudomonas fluorescense0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
female nematodes in the root systeme0
Direction
reductione0
Value
62.5%e0
Comparator
other treatmentse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Pseudomonas fluorescens
Pseudomonas fluorescens · InteractorNinjatacoshell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“P. fluorescens as seed treatment @ 20 g/ha followed by soil application @ 2.5 kg/ha2 was found significantly superior over other treatments recording 62.5% reduction of female nematodes in the root system, 56.4 and 45.6% increase in plant height and root weight, 56.6% reduction in soil population of nematodes and 98.5% increased yield.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 361–698 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 88–94 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

P. fluorescens seed and soil application increased cotton plant height by 56.4% versus other treatments.

Treatment
P. fluorescens as seed treatment @ 20 g/ha followed by soil application @ 2.5 kg/ha2e0
Interactor
P. fluorescensPseudomonas fluorescense0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
plant heighte0
Direction
increasee0
Value
56.4e0
Comparator
other treatmentse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Pseudomonas fluorescens
Pseudomonas fluorescens · InteractorNinjatacoshell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“P. fluorescens as seed treatment @ 20 g/ha followed by soil application @ 2.5 kg/ha2 was found significantly superior over other treatments recording 62.5% reduction of female nematodes in the root system, 56.4 and 45.6% increase in plant height and root weight, 56.6% reduction in soil population of nematodes and 98.5% increased yield.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 361–698 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 88–94 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

P. fluorescens seed and soil application increased cotton root weight by 45.6% versus other treatments.

Treatment
P. fluorescens as seed treatment @ 20 g/ha followed by soil application @ 2.5 kg/ha2e0
Interactor
P. fluorescensPseudomonas fluorescense0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
root weighte0
Direction
increasee0
Value
45.6%e0
Comparator
other treatmentse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Pseudomonas fluorescens
Pseudomonas fluorescens · InteractorNinjatacoshell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“P. fluorescens as seed treatment @ 20 g/ha followed by soil application @ 2.5 kg/ha2 was found significantly superior over other treatments recording 62.5% reduction of female nematodes in the root system, 56.4 and 45.6% increase in plant height and root weight, 56.6% reduction in soil population of nematodes and 98.5% increased yield.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 361–698 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 88–94 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

P. fluorescens seed and soil application reduced the soil nematode population by 56.6% versus other treatments.

Treatment
P. fluorescens as seed treatment @ 20 g/ha followed by soil application @ 2.5 kg/ha2e0
Interactor
P. fluorescensPseudomonas fluorescense0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
soil population of nematodese0
Direction
reductione0
Value
56.6%e0
Comparator
other treatmentse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Pseudomonas fluorescens
Pseudomonas fluorescens · InteractorNinjatacoshell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“P. fluorescens as seed treatment @ 20 g/ha followed by soil application @ 2.5 kg/ha2 was found significantly superior over other treatments recording 62.5% reduction of female nematodes in the root system, 56.4 and 45.6% increase in plant height and root weight, 56.6% reduction in soil population of nematodes and 98.5% increased yield.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 361–698 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 88–94 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

P. fluorescens seed and soil application increased cotton yield by 98.5% versus other treatments.

Treatment
P. fluorescens as seed treatment @ 20 g/ha followed by soil application @ 2.5 kg/ha2e0
Interactor
P. fluorescensPseudomonas fluorescense0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Value
98.5%e0
Comparator
other treatmentse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Pseudomonas fluorescens
Pseudomonas fluorescens · InteractorNinjatacoshell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“P. fluorescens as seed treatment @ 20 g/ha followed by soil application @ 2.5 kg/ha2 was found significantly superior over other treatments recording 62.5% reduction of female nematodes in the root system, 56.4 and 45.6% increase in plant height and root weight, 56.6% reduction in soil population of nematodes and 98.5% increased yield.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 361–698 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 88–94 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

T. viride seed treatment reduced cotton root rot incidence by 91.9%.

Treatment
Seed treatment with T. viridee0
Interactor
T. virideTrichoderma viridee0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
root rot incidencee0
Direction
reducinge0
Value
91.9%e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Trichoderma viride
Trichoderma viride · InteractorKatja Schulz · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Seed treatment with T. viride was most effective in reducing the root rot incidence to the tune of 91.9% and was on par with P. fluorescece in respect of yield.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 699–859 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 88–94 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cotton yield under T. viride seed treatment was on par with P. fluorescece.

Treatment
Seed treatment with T. viridee0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
on pare0
Comparator
P. fluorescecee0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Seed treatment with T. viride was most effective in reducing the root rot incidence to the tune of 91.9% and was on par with P. fluorescece in respect of yield.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 699–859 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 88–94 · show in text ↑

Trichoderma viride · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect

2 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

Pseudomonas fluorescens · pest · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

Pseudomonas fluorescens · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree

4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

Pseudomonas fluorescens · growth · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree

6 papers: 6 positive, 0 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

seed treatment · pest · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

seed treatment · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

40 papers: 37 positive, 3 negative or no effect

36 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

36 papers more in this group

See all 40 papers →

seed treatment · growth · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

47 papers: 39 positive, 8 negative or no effect

38 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

43 papers more in this group

See all 47 papers →

application · pest · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

49 papers: 36 positive, 13 negative or no effect

35 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect

45 papers more in this group

See all 49 papers →

8 of 11 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.