Paper · 2013 · Journal of Plant Protection Research

Pathogenicity of Meloidogyne Incognita Race 1 on Tomato as Influenced by Different Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi and Bioformulated Paecilomyces Lilacinus in a Dysteric Cambisol Soil

Idorenyin Asukwo Udo; Michael Ifeanyichukwu Uguru; Rufus Omemaramadu Ogbuji

10
claims
18
verbatim quotes
13
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc-nd

Abstract

Abstract A greenhouse experiment was conducted to investigate the single and combined effects of different arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) and bioformulated Paecilomyces lilacinus against M. incognita race 1 on tomato. Dysteric Cambisol soil was used. The experiment took place in Calabar, Cross River State, Nigeria. The experiment was laid out as a 3x6 factorial in a completely randomized design (CRD) with three replications. Three applications of the bionematicide were combined with five species of AMF plus an uninoculated control. The results indicated that AMF species differed significantly (p ≤ 0.05) in their efficacy of gall and egg mass inhibition, tomato root colonization rate as well as growth and fresh fruit yield enhancement. Glomus etunicatum and G. deserticola were the most efficient species. Two applications of the bionematicide more significantly (p ≤ 0.05) reduced galling and egg production than a single application. Individual combinations of two AMF (G. etunicatum and G. deserticola) with a double application of the bionematicide, resulted in the greatest gall and egg mass inhibition and consequently the greatest growth and fresh fruit yield enhancement.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 10

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

AMF species differed significantly in gall and egg mass inhibition.

Treatment
AMF speciese0
Interactor
M. incognita race 1Meloidogyne incognitae1pathogen
Outcome
gall and egg mass inhibitione0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Meloidogyne incognita
Meloidogyne incognita · InteractorPhoto by William Wergin and Richard Sayre. Colorized by Stephen Ausmus. U.S. Department of Agriculture · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“AMF species differed significantly (p ≤ 0.05) in their efficacy of gall and egg mass inhibition”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 569–664 · show in text ↑
e1

“against M. incognita race 1 on tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 183–220 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

AMF species differed significantly in tomato root colonization.

Treatment
AMF speciese0
Interactor
AMF speciese0symbiont
Outcome
tomato root colonization ratee0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“AMF species differed significantly (p ≤ 0.05) in their efficacy of gall and egg mass inhibition, tomato root colonization rate as well as growth and fresh fruit yield enhancement”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 569–747 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

AMF species differed significantly in tomato growth and fresh fruit yield enhancement.

Treatment
AMF speciese0
Interactor
AMF speciese0symbiont
Outcome
growth and fresh fruit yield enhancemente0
Direction
enhancemente0

Not reportedComparator

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“AMF species differed significantly (p ≤ 0.05) in their efficacy of gall and egg mass inhibition, tomato root colonization rate as well as growth and fresh fruit yield enhancement”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 569–747 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Glomus etunicatum was among the most efficient AMF species.

Treatment
Glomus etunicatume0
Interactor
Glomus etunicatume0symbiont
Outcome
most efficient speciese0

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Glomus etunicatum and G. deserticola were the most efficient species”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 749–817 · show in text ↑
e1

“against M. incognita race 1 on tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 183–220 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

G. deserticola was among the most efficient AMF species.

Treatment
G. deserticolae0
Interactor
G. deserticolaSeptoglomus deserticolae0symbiont
Outcome
most efficient speciese0

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Glomus etunicatum and G. deserticola were the most efficient species”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 749–817 · show in text ↑
e1

“against M. incognita race 1 on tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 183–220 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Two bionematicide applications reduced galling and egg production more than one application.

Treatment
Two applications of the bionematicidee0
Interactor
M. incognita race 1Meloidogyne incognitae1pathogen
Outcome
galling and egg productione0
Direction
reducede0
Comparator
a single applicatione0

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Meloidogyne incognita
Meloidogyne incognita · InteractorPhoto by William Wergin and Richard Sayre. Colorized by Stephen Ausmus. U.S. Department of Agriculture · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Two applications of the bionematicide more significantly (p ≤ 0.05) reduced galling and egg production than a single application”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 819–947 · show in text ↑
e1

“against M. incognita race 1 on tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 183–220 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

G. etunicatum with two bionematicide applications gave the greatest gall and egg mass inhibition.

Treatment
G. etunicatume0
Interactor
M. incognita race 1Meloidogyne incognitae1pathogen
Second interactor
G. etunicatume0symbiont
Outcome
gall and egg mass inhibitione0
Direction
greateste0

Not reportedComparator

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Meloidogyne incognita
Meloidogyne incognita · InteractorPhoto by William Wergin and Richard Sayre. Colorized by Stephen Ausmus. U.S. Department of Agriculture · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Individual combinations of two AMF (G. etunicatum and G. deserticola) with a double application of the bionematicide, resulted in the greatest gall and egg mass inhibition”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 949–1120 · show in text ↑
e1

“against M. incognita race 1 on tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 183–220 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

G. deserticola with two bionematicide applications gave the greatest gall and egg mass inhibition.

Treatment
G. deserticolae0
Interactor
M. incognita race 1Meloidogyne incognitae1pathogen
Second interactor
G. deserticolaSeptoglomus deserticolae0symbiont
Outcome
gall and egg mass inhibitione0
Direction
greateste0

Not reportedComparator

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Meloidogyne incognita
Meloidogyne incognita · InteractorPhoto by William Wergin and Richard Sayre. Colorized by Stephen Ausmus. U.S. Department of Agriculture · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Individual combinations of two AMF (G. etunicatum and G. deserticola) with a double application of the bionematicide, resulted in the greatest gall and egg mass inhibition”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 949–1120 · show in text ↑
e1

“against M. incognita race 1 on tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 183–220 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

G. etunicatum with double bionematicide application gave greatest tomato growth and yield enhancement.

Treatment
G. etunicatume0
Interactor
G. etunicatume0symbiont
Outcome
growth and fresh fruit yield enhancemente0
Direction
greateste0

Not reportedComparator

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Individual combinations of two AMF (G. etunicatum and G. deserticola) with a double application of the bionematicide, resulted in the greatest gall and egg mass inhibition and consequently the greatest growth and fresh fruit yield enhancement”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 949–1191 · show in text ↑
e1

“against M. incognita race 1 on tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 183–220 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

G. deserticola with double bionematicide application gave greatest tomato growth and yield enhancement.

Treatment
G. deserticolae0
Interactor
G. deserticolaSeptoglomus deserticolae0symbiont
Outcome
growth and fresh fruit yield enhancemente0
Direction
greateste0

Not reportedComparator

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Individual combinations of two AMF (G. etunicatum and G. deserticola) with a double application of the bionematicide, resulted in the greatest gall and egg mass inhibition and consequently the greatest growth and fresh fruit yield enhancement”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 949–1191 · show in text ↑
e1

“against M. incognita race 1 on tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 183–220 · show in text ↑

Septoglomus deserticola · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)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 →

mycorrhiza · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results differ

65 papers: 59 positive, 6 negative or no effect

58 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

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

61 papers more in this group

See all 65 papers →

mycorrhiza · Meloidogyne incognita · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

9 papers: 8 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

5 papers more in this group

See all 9 papers →

mycorrhiza · disease · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

37 papers: 31 positive, 6 negative or no effect

30 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

33 papers more in this group

See all 37 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.