Paper · 2018 · Annals of Plant Protection Sciences

Biological approach for management of nematodes in banana

Debanand Das; Nibedita Borgohain

9
claims
18
verbatim quotes
2
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Field trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of biocontrol agent viz., AM fungi, Pseudomonus fluorescens, Paecilomyces lilacinus, Bacillus subtalis and Heterorhabditis indica for the management of plant parasitic nematodes around banana rhizosphere alone and in combination. The bioagents were applied around the banana rhizosphere at the time of planting, followed by three months after planting. One chemical check (carbofuran 3G) and an untreated check were maintained for comparison. Results obtained from three years of experimentation revealed that all the treatments significantly superior to the untreated check, increasing the plant growth parameters and yield of crops, and reducing the population of Meloidogyne incognita and Pratylenchus spp. Among the biocontrol agents, combined application of Pseudomonus fluorescens and Paecilomyces lilacinus (=Purpureocillium lilacinum) @ 12.5 g m-2 each were found to be the best in reducing the nematode population of M. incognita and Pratylenchus thornei, root knot index; and increasing the plant growth parameters and yield of banana.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 9

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Treatments significantly increased banana growth parameters over untreated checks.

Taxon
bananat0
Treatment
all the treatmentse0
Outcome
plant growth parameterse0
Direction
increasinge0
Comparator
untreated checke0

Verbatim

t0

“banana”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–57 · show in text ↑
e0

“all the treatments significantly superior to the untreated check, increasing the plant growth parameters and yield of crops, and reducing the population of Meloidogyne incognita and Pratylenchus spp.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 561–760 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Treatments significantly increased crop yield over untreated checks.

Taxon
bananat0
Treatment
all the treatmentse0
Outcome
yield of cropse0
Direction
increasinge0
Comparator
untreated checke0

Verbatim

t0

“banana”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–57 · show in text ↑
e0

“all the treatments significantly superior to the untreated check, increasing the plant growth parameters and yield of crops, and reducing the population of Meloidogyne incognita and Pratylenchus spp.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 561–760 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Treatments reduced Meloidogyne incognita populations relative to untreated checks.

Taxon
bananat0
Treatment
all the treatmentse0
Interactor
Meloidogyne incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae0pathogen
Outcome
population of Meloidogyne incognitae0
Direction
reducinge0
Comparator
untreated checke0

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

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

t0

“banana”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–57 · show in text ↑
e0

“all the treatments significantly superior to the untreated check, increasing the plant growth parameters and yield of crops, and reducing the population of Meloidogyne incognita and Pratylenchus spp.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 561–760 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Treatments reduced Pratylenchus spp. populations relative to untreated checks.

Taxon
bananat0
Treatment
all the treatmentse0
Interactor
Pratylenchus spp.Pratylenchuse0pathogen
Outcome
population of Meloidogyne incognita and Pratylenchus spp.e0
Direction
reducinge0
Comparator
untreated checke0

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

Pratylenchus
Pratylenchus · Interactor · picture of the genus (one of its species)USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“banana”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–57 · show in text ↑
e0

“all the treatments significantly superior to the untreated check, increasing the plant growth parameters and yield of crops, and reducing the population of Meloidogyne incognita and Pratylenchus spp.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 561–760 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined Pseudomonus and Paecilomyces was best at reducing M. incognita populations.

Taxon
bananat0
Treatment
combined application of Pseudomonus fluorescens and Paecilomyces lilacinus (=Purpureocillium lilacinum) @ 12.5 g m-2 eache0
Interactor
M. incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae0pathogen
Second interactor
Pseudomonus fluorescense0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
nematode population of M. incognitae0
Direction
reducinge0
Qualifier
Paecilomyces lilacinuse0

Not reportedComparator

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

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

t0

“banana”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–57 · show in text ↑
e0

“combined application of Pseudomonus fluorescens and Paecilomyces lilacinus (=Purpureocillium lilacinum) @ 12.5 g m-2 each were found to be the best in reducing the nematode population of M. incognita and Pratylenchus thornei, root knot index; and increasing the plant growth parameters and yield of banana”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 790–1095 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The combined application was best at reducing Pratylenchus thornei.

Taxon
bananat0
Treatment
combined application of Pseudomonus fluorescens and Paecilomyces lilacinus (=Purpureocillium lilacinum) @ 12.5 g m-2 eache0
Interactor
Pratylenchus thorneiPratylenchus thorneie0pathogen
Second interactor
Pseudomonus fluorescense0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
Pratylenchus thorneie0
Direction
reducinge0
Qualifier
Paecilomyces lilacinuse0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

t0

“banana”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–57 · show in text ↑
e0

“combined application of Pseudomonus fluorescens and Paecilomyces lilacinus (=Purpureocillium lilacinum) @ 12.5 g m-2 each were found to be the best in reducing the nematode population of M. incognita and Pratylenchus thornei, root knot index; and increasing the plant growth parameters and yield of banana”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 790–1095 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The combined application was best at reducing root knot index.

Taxon
bananat0
Treatment
combined application of Pseudomonus fluorescens and Paecilomyces lilacinus (=Purpureocillium lilacinum) @ 12.5 g m-2 eache0
Outcome
root knot indexe0
Direction
reducinge0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

t0

“banana”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–57 · show in text ↑
e0

“combined application of Pseudomonus fluorescens and Paecilomyces lilacinus (=Purpureocillium lilacinum) @ 12.5 g m-2 each were found to be the best in reducing the nematode population of M. incognita and Pratylenchus thornei, root knot index; and increasing the plant growth parameters and yield of banana”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 790–1095 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The combined application was best at increasing banana growth parameters.

Taxon
bananat0
Treatment
combined application of Pseudomonus fluorescens and Paecilomyces lilacinus (=Purpureocillium lilacinum) @ 12.5 g m-2 eache0
Outcome
plant growth parameterse0
Direction
increasinge0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

t0

“banana”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–57 · show in text ↑
e0

“combined application of Pseudomonus fluorescens and Paecilomyces lilacinus (=Purpureocillium lilacinum) @ 12.5 g m-2 each were found to be the best in reducing the nematode population of M. incognita and Pratylenchus thornei, root knot index; and increasing the plant growth parameters and yield of banana”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 790–1095 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The combined application was best at increasing banana yield.

Taxon
bananat0
Treatment
combined application of Pseudomonus fluorescens and Paecilomyces lilacinus (=Purpureocillium lilacinum) @ 12.5 g m-2 eache0
Outcome
yield of bananae0
Direction
increasinge0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

t0

“banana”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–57 · show in text ↑
e0

“combined application of Pseudomonus fluorescens and Paecilomyces lilacinus (=Purpureocillium lilacinum) @ 12.5 g m-2 each were found to be the best in reducing the nematode population of M. incognita and Pratylenchus thornei, root knot index; and increasing the plant growth parameters and yield of banana”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 790–1095 · show in text ↑

Purpureocillium lilacinum · growth · MusaResults 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 →

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.