Paper · 2011

Effect of Pseudomonas aeruginosa on the Root-Knot Nematode Meladogyne incognita Infecting Tomato, Lycoperiscum esculentum

T. Shankar; K Umamaheswari; D. Prabhu; et al.

4
claims
7
verbatim quotes
1
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Due to environmental concerns and increased regulation on use of chemical fumigants, more management, strategies for control of root - knot nematodes (Meloidogyne incognita) are currently being investigated on biological control using microbial antagonists as a potential alternative to chemical nematicides. Among the biological control agents that have been assessed are egg- parasitic fungi, nematode trapping fungi, bacteria and polyphagous predatory nematodes. Microorganisms that can grow in the rhizosphere provide the front line defense for roots against pathogen attach and are ideal for use as biocontrol agents. Fungi and bacteria are two major groups of microbes which are abundant in soil and some of them have showed great potential as bio control agent's nematodes. Hence, the present study has been carried out the effect of Pseudomonas aeruginosa on the root-knot nematode Meloidogyne incognita infecting tomato, Lycoperiscum esculentum. Isolate I and II inoculated tomato plants showed better growth compared to plants infested with Meloidogyne incognita. Our result also revealed that, there is a significant increase in plant height, shoot weight, root weight, moisture content and decreased gall index.

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 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Isolates I and II produced better tomato plant growth than nematode infestation alone.

Treatment
Isolate I and II inoculatede0
Interactor
Meloidogyne incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae0pathogen
Outcome
growthe0
Direction
bettere0
Comparator
plants infested with Meloidogyne incognitae0

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

“Isolate I and II inoculated tomato plants showed better growth compared to plants infested with Meloidogyne incognita”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 955–1072 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The inoculated tomato plants had significantly increased plant height, shoot weight and root weight.

Treatment
Pseudomonas aeruginosat0
Interactor
Pseudomonas aeruginosaPseudomonas aeruginosat0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
plant height, shoot weight, root weighte0
Direction
increasee0

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 ↗
Pseudomonas aeruginosa
Pseudomonas aeruginosa · InteractorCDC · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Our result also revealed that, there is a significant increase in plant height, shoot weight, root weight, moisture content and decreased gall index”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1074–1222 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effect of Pseudomonas aeruginosa on the Root-Knot Nematode Meladogyne incognita Infecting Tomato, Lycoperiscum esculentum”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–121 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The inoculated tomato plants had significantly increased moisture content.

Treatment
Pseudomonas aeruginosat0
Interactor
Pseudomonas aeruginosaPseudomonas aeruginosat0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
moisture contente0
Direction
increasee0

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 ↗
Pseudomonas aeruginosa
Pseudomonas aeruginosa · InteractorCDC · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“significant increase in plant height, shoot weight, root weight, moisture content and decreased gall index”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1116–1222 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effect of Pseudomonas aeruginosa on the Root-Knot Nematode Meladogyne incognita Infecting Tomato, Lycoperiscum esculentum”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–121 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The inoculated tomato plants had decreased gall index.

Treatment
Pseudomonas aeruginosat0
Interactor
Meladogyne incognitat0pathogen
Second interactor
Pseudomonas aeruginosaPseudomonas aeruginosat0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
gall indexe0
Direction
decreasede0

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 ↗
Pseudomonas aeruginosa
Pseudomonas aeruginosa · Second interactorCDC · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“decreased gall index”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1202–1222 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effect of Pseudomonas aeruginosa on the Root-Knot Nematode Meladogyne incognita Infecting Tomato, Lycoperiscum esculentum”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–121 · show in text ↑

Pseudomonas aeruginosa · pest · 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 →

Pseudomonas aeruginosa · growth · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results agree

9 papers: 9 positive, 0 negative or no effect

8 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

5 papers more in this group

See all 9 papers →

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

70 papers: 44 positive, 26 negative or no effect

43 papers in the same direction as this paper · 26 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

66 papers more in this group

See all 70 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.