Abstract
Split-root experiments and quantitative real time PCR were used to examine if vermicompost tea (VCT) drenching could induce host-plant resistance against root-knot nematodes (Meloidogyne incognita). Two greenhouse trials were conducted where cucumber (Cucumis sativus) roots were split into half; one part of the roots was drenched with VCT, and the other part received M. incognita inoculum. Control plants were drenched with water. Root penetration by M. incognita was lower in plants drenched with VCT as compared to the control (P ≤ 0.05) in both trials. Quantitative real time PCR was used to measure relative expression of defense-related genes, CHIT-1, PAL-1, β-1,3-Glucanase, LOX-1 and PR-1 on cucumber. Plants were: 1) drenched with VCT 2 days prior to M. incognita inoculation, 2) inoculated with M. incognita only, or 3) received no VCT or nematodes as the control. Plants drenched with VCT showed an up-regulation of CHIT-1 at 2 days, PAL-1 at 2 and 8 days, LOX-1 at 2 and 5 days, and down-regulation of PR-1 at 0 and 5 days after M. incognita inoculation. Up-regulation of CHIT-1, PAL-1 and LOX-1 by VCT drenching supported the hypothesis that VCT imitated Induced Systemic Resistance (ISR) on cucumber
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
Claim · model-written summary
Vermicompost tea lowered M. incognita root penetration in cucumber versus water controls in both greenhouse trials.
- Taxon
- cucumber
Cucumis sativuse1 - Organ / stage
- rootse1
- Treatment
- VCTe0
- Interactor
- M. incognita
_penetrates_a_tomato_root_-_USDA-ARS.jpg?width=60)
Meloidogyne incognitae0pathogen - Outcome
- Root penetration by M. incognitae0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Qualifier
- both trialse0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_penetrates_a_tomato_root_-_USDA-ARS.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Root penetration by M. incognita was lower in plants drenched with VCT as compared to the control (P ≤ 0.05) in both trials.”
e1“cucumber (Cucumis sativus) roots were split into half; one part of the roots was drenched with VCT, and the other part received M. incognita inoculum. Control plants were drenched with water.”
Claim · model-written summary
VCT drenching up-regulated cucumber CHIT-1 at 2 days after M. incognita inoculation.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse1
- Treatment
- VCTe0
- Interactor
- M. incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae0pathogen
- Gene
- CHIT-1e0
- Outcome
- up-regulation of CHIT-1e0
- Direction
- up-regulatione0
- Qualifier
- 2 dayse0
- Comparator
- controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Plants drenched with VCT showed an up-regulation of CHIT-1 at 2 days, PAL-1 at 2 and 8 days, LOX-1 at 2 and 5 days, and down-regulation of PR-1 at 0 and 5 days after M. incognita inoculation.”
e1“PR-1 on cucumber.”
e2“received no VCT or nematodes as the control”
Claim · model-written summary
VCT drenching up-regulated cucumber PAL-1 at 2 and 8 days after M. incognita inoculation.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse1
- Treatment
- VCTe0
- Interactor
- M. incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae0pathogen
- Gene
- PAL-1e0
- Outcome
- up-regulation of CHIT-1 at 2 days, PAL-1e0
- Direction
- up-regulatione0
- Qualifier
- 2 and 8 dayse0
- Comparator
- controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Plants drenched with VCT showed an up-regulation of CHIT-1 at 2 days, PAL-1 at 2 and 8 days, LOX-1 at 2 and 5 days, and down-regulation of PR-1 at 0 and 5 days after M. incognita inoculation.”
e1“PR-1 on cucumber.”
e2“received no VCT or nematodes as the control”
Claim · model-written summary
VCT drenching up-regulated cucumber LOX-1 at 2 and 5 days after M. incognita inoculation.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse1
- Treatment
- VCTe0
- Interactor
- M. incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae0pathogen
- Gene
- LOX-1e0
- Outcome
- LOX-1e0
- Direction
- up-regulatione0
- Qualifier
- 2 and 5 dayse0
- Comparator
- controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Plants drenched with VCT showed an up-regulation of CHIT-1 at 2 days, PAL-1 at 2 and 8 days, LOX-1 at 2 and 5 days, and down-regulation of PR-1 at 0 and 5 days after M. incognita inoculation.”
e1“PR-1 on cucumber.”
e2“received no VCT or nematodes as the control”
Claim · model-written summary
VCT drenching down-regulated cucumber PR-1 at 0 and 5 days after M. incognita inoculation.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse1
- Treatment
- VCTe0
- Interactor
- M. incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae0pathogen
- Gene
- PR-1e0
- Outcome
- PR-1e0
- Direction
- down-regulatione0
- Qualifier
- 0 and 5 dayse0
- Comparator
- controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Plants drenched with VCT showed an up-regulation of CHIT-1 at 2 days, PAL-1 at 2 and 8 days, LOX-1 at 2 and 5 days, and down-regulation of PR-1 at 0 and 5 days after M. incognita inoculation.”
e1“PR-1 on cucumber.”
e2“received no VCT or nematodes as the control”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors interpreted CHIT-1, PAL-1 and LOX-1 up-regulation as support for VCT imitating induced systemic resistance in cucumber.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse0
- Treatment
- VCT drenchinge0
- Gene
- CHIT-1, PAL-1 and LOX-1e0
- Outcome
- Induced Systemic Resistance (ISR)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Up-regulation of CHIT-1, PAL-1 and LOX-1 by VCT drenching supported the hypothesis that VCT imitated Induced Systemic Resistance (ISR) on cucumber”
The same questions in other papers
fertilization · Meloidogyne incognita · Cucumis sativus (cucumber)Results agree
3 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
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.