Abstract
A field study was conducted to test the effect of different green leaf manures elucidate as eco-friendly management of M.incognita on tomato. Recommended dosage of green leaf manures, such as Gliricidia maculata, Thespesia populnea, Calotropis gigantia, Azadiracta indica and Glycosmis pentaphylla were compared with control as treatments. The results revealed that extent of galling (35.87), gall index (0.327), yield (17.87 Mt/ha), Reproductive factor (0.411) and plant growth includes height and dry matter, respectively (22.47 cm and 45.08 g) were significantly best in Gliricidia maculata compared to other treatments. While other green leaf manures, T. populnea and A. indica ranked second and third, respectively in managing M. incognita. This study also revealed that green leaf manures improve the plant growth and reduced the nematode infestation in tomato fields. Moreover, G. maculata can be used as an alternative in eco-friendly manage root-knot nematode.
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 11
Claim · model-written summary
Gliricidia maculata green leaf manure gave the best (lowest) extent of galling, 35.87, in tomato.
- Taxon
- tomato
Solanum lycopersicume2 - Treatment
- Gliricidia maculatae1
- Interactor
- M.incognita
_penetrates_a_tomato_root_-_USDA-ARS.jpg?width=60)
Meloidogyne incognitae2pest - Outcome
- extent of gallinge0
- Direction
- significantly beste1
- Value
- 35.87e0
- Comparator
- other treatmentse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_penetrates_a_tomato_root_-_USDA-ARS.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“extent of galling (35.87)”
e1“were significantly best in Gliricidia maculata compared to other treatments”
e2“M.incognita on tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Gliricidia maculata gave the best (lowest) gall index, 0.327.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume2
- Treatment
- Gliricidia maculatae1
- Interactor
- M.incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae2pest
- Outcome
- gall indexe0
- Direction
- significantly beste1
- Value
- 0.327e0
- Comparator
- other treatmentse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“gall index (0.327)”
e1“were significantly best in Gliricidia maculata compared to other treatments”
e2“M.incognita on tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Gliricidia maculata gave the best tomato yield, 17.87 Mt/ha.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume2
- Treatment
- Gliricidia maculatae1
- Interactor
- M.incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae2pest
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- significantly beste1
- Value
- 17.87 Mt/hae0
- Comparator
- other treatmentse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“yield (17.87 Mt/ha)”
e1“were significantly best in Gliricidia maculata compared to other treatments”
e2“M.incognita on tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Gliricidia maculata gave the best (lowest) nematode reproductive factor, 0.411.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume2
- Treatment
- Gliricidia maculatae1
- Interactor
- M.incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae2pest
- Outcome
- Reproductive factore0
- Direction
- significantly beste1
- Value
- 0.411e0
- Comparator
- other treatmentse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Reproductive factor (0.411)”
e1“were significantly best in Gliricidia maculata compared to other treatments”
e2“M.incognita on tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Plant height was best, 22.47 cm, with Gliricidia maculata.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume2
- Treatment
- Gliricidia maculatae1
- Interactor
- M.incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae2pest
- Outcome
- heighte0
- Direction
- significantly beste1
- Value
- 22.47 cme0
- Comparator
- other treatmentse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“height and dry matter, respectively (22.47 cm and 45.08 g)”
e1“were significantly best in Gliricidia maculata compared to other treatments”
e2“M.incognita on tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Plant dry matter was best, 45.08 g, with Gliricidia maculata.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume2
- Treatment
- Gliricidia maculatae1
- Interactor
- M.incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae2pest
- Outcome
- dry mattere0
- Direction
- significantly beste1
- Value
- 45.08 ge0
- Comparator
- other treatmentse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“height and dry matter, respectively (22.47 cm and 45.08 g)”
e1“were significantly best in Gliricidia maculata compared to other treatments”
e2“M.incognita on tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
T. populnea manure ranked second in managing M. incognita.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume2
- Treatment
- T. populneae0
- Interactor
- M. incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae0pest
- Outcome
- managing M. incognitae0
- Direction
- ranked seconde0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“While other green leaf manures, T. populnea and A. indica ranked second and third, respectively in managing M. incognita”
e2“M.incognita on tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
A. indica manure ranked third in managing M. incognita.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume2
- Treatment
- A. indicae0
- Interactor
- M. incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae0pest
- Outcome
- managing M. incognitae0
- Direction
- thirde0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“While other green leaf manures, T. populnea and A. indica ranked second and third, respectively in managing M. incognita”
e2“M.incognita on tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Green leaf manures improved plant growth in tomato fields.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- green leaf manurese0
- Outcome
- plant growthe0
- Direction
- improvee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“green leaf manures improve the plant growth and reduced the nematode infestation in tomato fields”
Claim · model-written summary
Green leaf manures reduced nematode infestation in tomato fields.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- green leaf manurese0
- Outcome
- nematode infestatione0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“green leaf manures improve the plant growth and reduced the nematode infestation in tomato fields”
Claim · model-written summary
G. maculata is recommended as an alternative for eco-friendly management of root-knot nematode.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- G. maculatae1
- Interactor
- root-knot nematodeMeloidogynee1pest
- Outcome
- alternative in eco-friendly manage root-knot nematodee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“M.incognita on tomato”
e1“G. maculata can be used as an alternative in eco-friendly manage root-knot nematode”
The same questions in other papers
fertilization · growth · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
566 papers in the same direction as this paper · 93 in the opposite direction · 8 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
664 papers more in this group
See all 668 papers →fertilization · Nematoda · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results agree
9 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →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.