Paper · 2010 · Alexandria Science Exchange Journal

Evaluation of Certain Agrochemical and Biological Agents Against Meloidogyne incognita on Tomatoes

Ibrahim, Hala S.; S. A. Saad, Abdel-Fattah; Massoud, Magdy A.; et al.

3
claims
5
verbatim quotes
7
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc-sa

Abstract

An experiment was conducted in a greenhouse to evaluate the biological performance of some agrochemical and biological agents against root-knot nematode on tomatoes planted in clay soil. The antagonistic bacterium Pseudomonas flouroscence was proved to be the most effective tool suppressing the infection of root-knot nematodes on tomatoes during the period of inspections. The mean of population reduction of P. flouroscence was (79.4%), followed by the mixture of antagonistic fungus and bacterium Trichoderma harazianum plus Pseudomonas flouroscence (73.0%), then fosthiazate (60.3%), while the least effective one was abamectin (22.5%). On the other hand, abamectin applied as soil drench gave the highest reduction percentage (81.6 % of root galls / 5g roots) followed by oxamyl (62.4%), then fosthiazate (61.5%). Carbofuran recorded the least reduction percentage of 33.1 % of root galls /5g roots. Meanwhile, abamectin gave the highest reduction percentage on egg masses / 5g roots (79.1 % ), followed by oxamyl and P. flouroscence giving 61.4 and 39.9 reduction percentages. The least effective treatment was Trichoderma harazianum which increased the egg masses by 18.8 %. Some treatments showed an indirect effect on the root and shoot system length and weight. The antagonistic fungus Trichoderma harazianum was the superior treatment which increase the root system length by 39.1 %, whilst abamectin didn't show any increase. Trichoderma harazianum as well as fosthiazate proved to be the most effective treatment on the root system fresh weight as they gave 86.8 and 85.5% increase, respectively. Abamectin was the least effective treatment giving 5.3% increase. On the other hand, T. harazianum was effective and gave the highest increase percentage of shoot system length followed by oxamyl (54.9 and 46.8%, respectively). Meanwhile, the same trend was obtained in case of shoot system weight giving increases of 87.8 and 81.9%, respectively. Abamectin treatment was the least efficient on its effecton both root system length and weight increase.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-sa. 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 3

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pseudomonas flouroscence most effectively suppressed nematode infection.

Treatment
Pseudomonas flouroscencee0
Interactor
root-knot nematodesMeloidogynee0pest
Second interactor
Pseudomonas flouroscencee0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
infection of root-knot nematodese0
Direction
suppressinge0

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
Meloidogyne · Interactor · picture of the genus (one of its species)Photo by William Wergin and Richard Sayre. Colorized by Stephen Ausmus. U.S. Department of Agriculture · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The antagonistic bacterium Pseudomonas flouroscence was proved to be the most effective tool suppressing the infection of root-knot nematodes on tomatoes during the period of inspections.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 187–374 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pseudomonas flouroscence reduced nematode populations by 79.4%.

Treatment
P. flouroscencee0
Interactor
Meloidogyne incognitaMeloidogyne incognitat0pest
Second interactor
P. flouroscencee0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
population reductione0
Direction
reductione0
Value
79.4%e0

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 mean of population reduction of P. flouroscence was (79.4%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 375–438 · show in text ↑
t0

“Meloidogyne incognita on Tomatoes”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 65–98 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Trichoderma and Pseudomonas mixture reduced nematode populations by 73.0%.

Treatment
Trichoderma harazianum plus Pseudomonas flouroscencee0
Interactor
Meloidogyne incognitaMeloidogyne incognitat0pest
Second interactor
Trichoderma harazianume0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
population reductione0
Direction
reductione0
Value
73.0%e0

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 mean of population reduction of P. flouroscence was (79.4%), followed by the mixture of antagonistic fungus and bacterium Trichoderma harazianum plus Pseudomonas flouroscence (73.0%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 375–561 · show in text ↑
t0

“Meloidogyne incognita on Tomatoes”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 65–98 · show in text ↑

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

3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

Pseudomonas · Meloidogyne · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

Trichoderma · Meloidogyne incognita · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results agree

7 papers: 7 positive, 0 negative or no effect

6 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

3 papers more in this group

See all 7 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.