Paper · 2014

Effect of two bio-agents against root knot nematode Meloidogyne graminicola (Golden and Brichfield, 1965) in Wheat

Abdulameer Faisal Wasmi; Hussein Ali Salim; Ratna K. Subba; et al.

5
claims
15
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Pot experiments conducted for the evaluation of efficacy of biocontrol agent viz., Arthrobotrys oligospora and Paecilomyces lilacinus against root knot nematode Meloidogyne graminicola in wheat revealed that soil application of Arthrobotrys oligospora and Paecilomyces lilacinus alone or in combination was able to control the nematode population and improve the yield. Combined soil application of A. oligospora (@ 5ml/pot) + P. lilacinus (@ 5ml/pot) as soil application was effective to check the root knot nematode in wheat.

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 5

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil application of Arthrobotrys oligospora controlled the nematode population in wheat.

Treatment
soil application of Arthrobotrys oligosporae1
Interactor
Meloidogyne graminicolaMeloidogyne graminicolae2pathogen
Second interactor
Arthrobotrys oligosporae2biocontrol_agent
Outcome
nematode populatione1
Direction
decreaseinferrede1
Setting
Pot experimentse2

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“in Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 106–114 · show in text ↑
e1

“soil application of Arthrobotrys oligospora and Paecilomyces lilacinus alone or in combination was able to control the nematode population”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 208–346 · show in text ↑
e2

“Pot experiments conducted for the evaluation of efficacy of biocontrol agent viz., Arthrobotrys oligospora and Paecilomyces lilacinus against root knot nematode Meloidogyne graminicola in wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–193 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil application of Paecilomyces lilacinus controlled the nematode population in wheat.

Treatment
Paecilomyces lilacinuse1
Interactor
Meloidogyne graminicolaMeloidogyne graminicolae2pathogen
Second interactor
Paecilomyces lilacinusPurpureocillium lilacinume2biocontrol_agent
Outcome
nematode populatione1
Direction
decreaseinferrede1
Setting
Pot experimentse2

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Purpureocillium lilacinum
Purpureocillium lilacinum · Second interactorAuthor not explicitly stated. Article is by Jeanne Carey, Ron D’Amico, Deanna A. Sutton, and Michael G. Rinald · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“in Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 106–114 · show in text ↑
e1

“soil application of Arthrobotrys oligospora and Paecilomyces lilacinus alone or in combination was able to control the nematode population”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 208–346 · show in text ↑
e2

“Pot experiments conducted for the evaluation of efficacy of biocontrol agent viz., Arthrobotrys oligospora and Paecilomyces lilacinus against root knot nematode Meloidogyne graminicola in wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–193 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined soil application of Arthrobotrys oligospora and Paecilomyces lilacinus was effective to check the root knot nematode in wheat.

Treatment
Combined soil application of A. oligospora (@ 5ml/pot) + P. lilacinus (@ 5ml/pot)e1
Interactor
root knot nematodeMeloidogynee1pathogen
Second interactor
A. oligosporae1biocontrol_agent
Outcome
root knot nematodee1
Direction
checke1
Setting
Pot experimentse2

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Meloidogyne
Meloidogyne · Interactor · picture of the genus (one of its species)Photo by William Wergin and Richard Sayre. Colorized by Stephen Ausmus. U.S. Department of Agriculture · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“in Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 106–114 · show in text ↑
e1

“Combined soil application of A. oligospora (@ 5ml/pot) + P. lilacinus (@ 5ml/pot) as soil application was effective to check the root knot nematode in wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 370–526 · show in text ↑
e2

“Pot experiments conducted for the evaluation of efficacy of biocontrol agent viz., Arthrobotrys oligospora and Paecilomyces lilacinus against root knot nematode Meloidogyne graminicola in wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–193 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil application of Arthrobotrys oligospora improved the yield of wheat.

Treatment
soil application of Arthrobotrys oligosporae1
Interactor
Arthrobotrys oligosporae2biocontrol_agent
Outcome
yielde1
Direction
improvee1
Setting
Pot experimentse2

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“in Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 106–114 · show in text ↑
e1

“soil application of Arthrobotrys oligospora and Paecilomyces lilacinus alone or in combination was able to control the nematode population and improve the yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 208–368 · show in text ↑
e2

“Pot experiments conducted for the evaluation of efficacy of biocontrol agent viz., Arthrobotrys oligospora and Paecilomyces lilacinus against root knot nematode Meloidogyne graminicola in wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–193 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil application of Paecilomyces lilacinus improved the yield of wheat.

Treatment
Paecilomyces lilacinuse1
Interactor
Paecilomyces lilacinusPurpureocillium lilacinume2biocontrol_agent
Outcome
yielde1
Direction
improvee1
Setting
Pot experimentse2

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Purpureocillium lilacinum
Purpureocillium lilacinum · InteractorAuthor not explicitly stated. Article is by Jeanne Carey, Ron D’Amico, Deanna A. Sutton, and Michael G. Rinald · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“in Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 106–114 · show in text ↑
e1

“soil application of Arthrobotrys oligospora and Paecilomyces lilacinus alone or in combination was able to control the nematode population and improve the yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 208–368 · show in text ↑
e2

“Pot experiments conducted for the evaluation of efficacy of biocontrol agent viz., Arthrobotrys oligospora and Paecilomyces lilacinus against root knot nematode Meloidogyne graminicola in wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–193 · show in text ↑

application · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

877 papers: 795 positive, 82 negative or no effect

794 papers in the same direction as this paper · 75 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

873 papers more in this group

See all 877 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.