Paper · 2007 · Annals of Plant Protection Sciences

Management of Rotylenchulus reniformis with bio-control agents in cotton

Naren Sreenivasan; Rajeshwari Sundarababu

6
claims
10
verbatim quotes
2
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

The efficacy of commercial formulations of Vesicular Arbuscular Mycorrhiza, Glomus mosseae, plant growth promoting rhizobacterium, Pseudomonas fluorescens and the antagonistic fungus, Trichoderma viride against reniform nematode, Rotylenchulus reniformis, in cotton was studied under green house conditions. Among the three bio-control agents tried, G. mosseae as soil application and P. fluorescens as seed treatment performed well in improving the plant growth and yield of cotton. G. mosseae as soil application recorded maximum reduction of nematode population in roots (72.1%) and soil (81.1%) which was on par with seed treatment of P. fluorescens. These treatments also significantly reduced number of eggs/eggmass. Trichoderma viride both as seed treatment and soil application was less effective in the management of R. reniformis.

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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Glomus mosseae soil application improved cotton growth and yield.

Treatment
G. mosseae as soil applicatione0
Interactor
G. mosseaeFunneliformis mosseaee0symbiont
Outcome
plant growth and yielde0
Direction
improvinge0

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 ↗
Funneliformis mosseae
Funneliformis mosseae · Interactor · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categorySamson90 · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“G. mosseae as soil application and P. fluorescens as seed treatment performed well in improving the plant growth and yield of cotton.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 350–483 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pseudomonas fluorescens seed treatment improved cotton growth and yield.

Treatment
P. fluorescens as seed treatmente0
Interactor
P. fluorescensPseudomonas fluorescense0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
plant growth and yielde0
Direction
improvinge0

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

Verbatim

e0

“G. mosseae as soil application and P. fluorescens as seed treatment performed well in improving the plant growth and yield of cotton.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 350–483 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Glomus mosseae soil application reduced nematodes in cotton roots by 72.1%.

Treatment
G. mosseae as soil applicatione0
Interactor
nematodeNematodae0pest
Second interactor
G. mosseaeFunneliformis mosseaee0symbiont
Outcome
nematode population in rootse0
Direction
reductione0
Value
72.1%e0
Comparator
seed treatment of P. fluorescense0

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 ↗
Funneliformis mosseae
Funneliformis mosseae · Second interactor · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categorySamson90 · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“G. mosseae as soil application recorded maximum reduction of nematode population in roots (72.1%) and soil (81.1%) which was on par with seed treatment of P. fluorescens.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 484–654 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 66–72 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Glomus mosseae soil application reduced soil nematodes by 81.1%.

Treatment
G. mosseae as soil applicatione0
Outcome
nematode population in roots (72.1%) and soile0
Direction
reductione0
Value
81.1%e0
Comparator
seed treatment of P. fluorescense0

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

“G. mosseae as soil application recorded maximum reduction of nematode population in roots (72.1%) and soil (81.1%) which was on par with seed treatment of P. fluorescens.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 484–654 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 66–72 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

These treatments significantly reduced eggs per egg mass.

Treatment
These treatmentse0
Outcome
number of eggs/eggmasse0
Direction
reducede0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“These treatments also significantly reduced number of eggs/eggmass.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 655–722 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 66–72 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Trichoderma viride seed and soil treatments were less effective for nematode management.

Interactor
R. reniformisRotylenchulus reniformise0pest
Outcome
management of R. reniformise0
Direction
less effectivee0

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 ↗
Rotylenchulus reniformis
Rotylenchulus reniformis · Interactor · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryScot Nelson · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Trichoderma viride both as seed treatment and soil application was less effective in the management of R. reniformis.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 723–840 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 66–72 · show in text ↑

Funneliformis mosseae · yield · 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 →

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 →

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 →

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

283 papers: 253 positive, 30 negative or no effect

252 papers in the same direction as this paper · 27 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

279 papers more in this group

See all 283 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.