Paper · 2014 · Egyptian Journal of Agronematology

Evaluation of some Rhizobacteria as Induce Systemic Resistance or Bio-Control Agents in Controlling Root-knot Nematode, Meloidogyne incognita on Tomato

A. Anter; A. Amin; A. Ashoub; et al.

6
claims
12
verbatim quotes
7
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Ten bacterial strains, selected from a bulk of isolates recovered from tomatorhizosphere, were tested for their ability to induce systemic resistance or bio-controlagents against Meloidogyne incognita in tomato under greenhouse condition.Results showed that all ten tested bacterial strains showed significant reduction innematode development and reproduction. The most effective strains wereMethylomonas methanica, Bacillus cereus, Bacillus brevis and Obesumbacterium proteus. They were achieving the highest reduction in nematode total populationand fecundity. Plant growth was improved as a result of application of rhizobacteria.Antioxidant enzymes activity for both peroxidase and polyphenol oxidase wereelevated in bacteriazied plants compared nematode infected plant as well as totalphenol content. Results revealed that crude culture suspension of bacteria wasmore effective for reducing nematode population followed by cell-free culturefiltrates, bacterial live cells and bacterial dead cells suspension, sequentially. It wasconcluded that these bacteria able to suppress M. incognita as resistance inducersfor tomato plants or bio-control agents.

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 resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

All ten bacterial strains significantly reduced nematode development and reproduction in tomato.

Treatment
ten tested bacterial strainse0
Interactor
Meloidogyne incognitaMeloidogyne incognitat0pest
Outcome
nematode development and reproductione0
Direction
reductione0

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 ↗
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

“all ten tested bacterial strains showed significant reduction innematode development and reproduction”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 258–359 · show in text ↑
t0

“Meloidogyne incognita on Tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 120–151 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Methylomonas methanica, Bacillus cereus, Bacillus brevis and Obesumbacterium proteus achieved the greatest reduction in nematode total population and fecundity.

Treatment
Methylomonas methanica, Bacillus cereus, Bacillus brevis and Obesumbacterium proteuse0
Interactor
Meloidogyne incognitaMeloidogyne incognitat0pest
Outcome
nematode total populationand fecunditye0
Direction
reductione0

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 ↗
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

“The most effective strains wereMethylomonas methanica, Bacillus cereus, Bacillus brevis and Obesumbacterium proteus. They were achieving the highest reduction in nematode total populationand fecundity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 361–561 · show in text ↑
t0

“Meloidogyne incognita on Tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 120–151 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Rhizobacteria application improved tomato plant growth.

Treatment
application of rhizobacteriae0
Outcome
Plant growthe0
Direction
improvede0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Plant growth was improved as a result of application of rhizobacteria”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 563–632 · show in text ↑
t0

“on Tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 142–151 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Peroxidase and polyphenol oxidase activities were elevated in bacterized plants versus nematode-infected plants.

Treatment
bacteriazied plantse0
Outcome
Antioxidant enzymes activity for both peroxidase and polyphenol oxidasee0
Direction
elevatede0
Comparator
nematode infected plante0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Antioxidant enzymes activity for both peroxidase and polyphenol oxidase wereelevated in bacteriazied plants compared nematode infected plant”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 633–773 · show in text ↑
t0

“on Tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 142–151 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Total phenol content was elevated in bacterized plants versus nematode-infected plants.

Treatment
bacteriazied plantse0
Outcome
totalphenol contente0
Direction
elevatede0
Comparator
nematode infected plante0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Antioxidant enzymes activity for both peroxidase and polyphenol oxidase wereelevated in bacteriazied plants compared nematode infected plant as well as totalphenol content”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 633–804 · show in text ↑
t0

“on Tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 142–151 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Crude bacterial culture suspension reduced nematode population more effectively than cell-free filtrates, live cells or dead-cell suspension.

Treatment
crude culture suspension of bacteriae0
Interactor
Meloidogyne incognitaMeloidogyne incognitat0pest
Outcome
nematode populatione0
Direction
more effective for reducinge0
Comparator
cell-free culturefiltrates, bacterial live cells and bacterial dead cells suspensione0

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

“crude culture suspension of bacteria wasmore effective for reducing nematode population followed by cell-free culturefiltrates, bacterial live cells and bacterial dead cells suspension, sequentially”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 828–1026 · show in text ↑
t0

“Meloidogyne incognita on Tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 120–151 · show in text ↑

421 · Meloidogyne incognita · 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 →

82983 · Meloidogyne incognita · 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 →

Bacillus cereus · Meloidogyne incognita · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)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 →

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 →

inoculation · growth · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

441 papers: 387 positive, 54 negative or no effect

386 papers in the same direction as this paper · 53 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

437 papers more in this group

See all 441 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.