Paper · 2023 · Indian Journal of Horticulture

Biological management of Sclerotium rot of chilli

Dipankar Mandal; Rini Pal; Ashok K. Mohanty

6
claims
17
verbatim quotes
3
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-sa

Abstract

Sclerotium rot of chilli caused by Sclerotium rolfsii is one of the most devastating soil-borne diseases whichposes a problem for the successful cultivation of the crop. The present field investigation was carried out forthe biological management of Sclerotium rot of chilli during rabi seasons of 2019-20 and 2020-21. It was foundthat all the modules were effective to reduce the incidence of the disease. Among the biological modules, seedtreatment with T. viride + P. fluorescens @ 10.0 g/kg of seed and soil application of T. viride and P. fluorescens @2.5kg/ha and soil application of neem cake @ 5 q/ha + drenching with T. viride and P. fluorescens @10 g/l of watereach twice at 10 days interval starting from 30 DAT was most effective in reducing the incidence of the diseaseby 56.2% and increasing the fruit yield by 66.7% in comparison to untreated control. The treatment also improvedsoil microbial status and achieved the highest plant growth promotion in terms of plant height and leaf numberand maximum B:C ratio of 2.26.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

All biological modules reduced the incidence of Sclerotium rot in chilli.

Taxon
chillit0
Treatment
all the modulese1
Interactor
Sclerotium rolfsiiAgroathelia rolfsiie0pathogen
Outcome
incidence of the diseasee1
Direction
reducee1

Not reportedComparator

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

Agroathelia rolfsii
Agroathelia rolfsii · InteractorEdward L. Barnard - Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services · CC BY 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Biological management of Sclerotium rot of chilli”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–49 · show in text ↑
e0

“Sclerotium rot of chilli caused by Sclerotium rolfsii is one of the most devastating soil-borne diseases”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–104 · show in text ↑
e1

“all the modules were effective to reduce the incidence of the disease”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 336–405 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The combined T. viride and P. fluorescens module reduced Sclerotium rot incidence by 56.2 % relative to untreated control.

Taxon
chillit0
Treatment
seed treatment with T. viride + P. fluorescens @ 10.0 g/kg of seed and soil application of T. viride and P. fluorescens @2.5kg/ha and soil application of neem cake @ 5 q/ha + drenching with T. viride and P. fluorescens @10 g/l of watere2
Interactor
Sclerotium rolfsiiAgroathelia rolfsiie0pathogen
Second interactor
T. viridee2biocontrol_agent
Outcome
incidence of the diseasee2
Direction
reducinge2
Value
56.2%e2
Comparator
untreated controle2

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

Agroathelia rolfsii
Agroathelia rolfsii · InteractorEdward L. Barnard - Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services · CC BY 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Biological management of Sclerotium rot of chilli”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–49 · show in text ↑
e0

“Sclerotium rot of chilli caused by Sclerotium rolfsii is one of the most devastating soil-borne diseases”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–104 · show in text ↑
e2

“Among the biological modules, seed treatment with T. viride + P. fluorescens @ 10.0 g/kg of seed and soil application of T. viride and P. fluorescens @2.5kg/ha and soil application of neem cake @ 5 q/ha + drenching with T. viride and P. fluorescens @10 g/l of water each twice at 10 days interval starting from 30 DAT was most effective in reducing the incidence of the disease by 56.2% and increasing the fruit yield by 66.7% in comparison to untreated control”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · abstract, characters 407–865 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The combined T. viride and P. fluorescens module increased chilli fruit yield by 66.7 % relative to untreated control.

Taxon
chillit0
Treatment
seed treatment with T. viride + P. fluorescens @ 10.0 g/kg of seed and soil application of T. viride and P. fluorescens @2.5kg/ha and soil application of neem cake @ 5 q/ha + drenching with T. viride and P. fluorescens @10 g/l of watere2
Outcome
fruit yielde2
Direction
increasinge2
Value
66.7%e2
Comparator
untreated controle2

Verbatim

t0

“Biological management of Sclerotium rot of chilli”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–49 · show in text ↑
e2

“Among the biological modules, seed treatment with T. viride + P. fluorescens @ 10.0 g/kg of seed and soil application of T. viride and P. fluorescens @2.5kg/ha and soil application of neem cake @ 5 q/ha + drenching with T. viride and P. fluorescens @10 g/l of water each twice at 10 days interval starting from 30 DAT was most effective in reducing the incidence of the disease by 56.2% and increasing the fruit yield by 66.7% in comparison to untreated control”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · abstract, characters 407–865 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The combined module improved soil microbial status.

Taxon
chillit0
Treatment
seed treatment with T. viride + P. fluorescens @ 10.0 g/kg of seed and soil application of T. viride and P. fluorescens @2.5kg/ha and soil application of neem cake @ 5 q/ha + drenching with T. viride and P. fluorescens @10 g/l of watere2
Outcome
soil microbial statuse4
Direction
improvede4

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

t0

“Biological management of Sclerotium rot of chilli”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–49 · show in text ↑
e2

“Among the biological modules, seed treatment with T. viride + P. fluorescens @ 10.0 g/kg of seed and soil application of T. viride and P. fluorescens @2.5kg/ha and soil application of neem cake @ 5 q/ha + drenching with T. viride and P. fluorescens @10 g/l of water each twice at 10 days interval starting from 30 DAT was most effective in reducing the incidence of the disease by 56.2% and increasing the fruit yield by 66.7% in comparison to untreated control”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · abstract, characters 407–865 · show in text ↑
e4

“The treatment also improved soil microbial status and achieved the highest plant growth promotion in terms of plant height and leaf number”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · abstract, characters 867–1004 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The combined module gave the highest plant growth promotion in chilli in terms of plant height and leaf number.

Taxon
chillit0
Treatment
seed treatment with T. viride + P. fluorescens @ 10.0 g/kg of seed and soil application of T. viride and P. fluorescens @2.5kg/ha and soil application of neem cake @ 5 q/ha + drenching with T. viride and P. fluorescens @10 g/l of watere2
Outcome
plant growth promotione4
Direction
higheste4
Qualifier
in terms of plant height and leaf numbere4

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

t0

“Biological management of Sclerotium rot of chilli”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–49 · show in text ↑
e2

“Among the biological modules, seed treatment with T. viride + P. fluorescens @ 10.0 g/kg of seed and soil application of T. viride and P. fluorescens @2.5kg/ha and soil application of neem cake @ 5 q/ha + drenching with T. viride and P. fluorescens @10 g/l of water each twice at 10 days interval starting from 30 DAT was most effective in reducing the incidence of the disease by 56.2% and increasing the fruit yield by 66.7% in comparison to untreated control”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · abstract, characters 407–865 · show in text ↑
e4

“The treatment also improved soil microbial status and achieved the highest plant growth promotion in terms of plant height and leaf number”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · abstract, characters 867–1004 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The combined module gave a maximum B:C ratio of 2.26.

Taxon
chillit0
Treatment
seed treatment with T. viride + P. fluorescens @ 10.0 g/kg of seed and soil application of T. viride and P. fluorescens @2.5kg/ha and soil application of neem cake @ 5 q/ha + drenching with T. viride and P. fluorescens @10 g/l of watere2
Outcome
B:C ratioe6
Direction
maximume6
Value
2.26e6

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

t0

“Biological management of Sclerotium rot of chilli”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–49 · show in text ↑
e2

“Among the biological modules, seed treatment with T. viride + P. fluorescens @ 10.0 g/kg of seed and soil application of T. viride and P. fluorescens @2.5kg/ha and soil application of neem cake @ 5 q/ha + drenching with T. viride and P. fluorescens @10 g/l of water each twice at 10 days interval starting from 30 DAT was most effective in reducing the incidence of the disease by 56.2% and increasing the fruit yield by 66.7% in comparison to untreated control”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · abstract, characters 407–865 · show in text ↑
e6

“maximum B:C ratio of 2.26”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1008–1033 · show in text ↑

seed treatment · yield · Capsicum (peppers)Positive and negative results

15 papers: 14 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

11 papers more in this group

See all 15 papers →

seed treatment · growth · Capsicum (peppers)Positive and negative results

27 papers: 26 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

23 papers more in this group

See all 27 papers →

botanical · growth · Capsicum (peppers)Positive and negative results

30 papers: 23 positive, 7 negative or no effect

22 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

26 papers more in this group

See all 30 papers →

botanical · yield · Capsicum (peppers)Positive and negative results

32 papers: 30 positive, 2 negative or no effect

29 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. positive

28 papers more in this group

See all 32 papers →

application · growth · Capsicum (peppers)Positive and negative results

36 papers: 34 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. positive

32 papers more in this group

See all 36 papers →

application · yield · Capsicum (peppers)Positive and negative results

74 papers: 73 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

70 papers more in this group

See all 74 papers →

botanical · soil: biology · Capsicum (peppers)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 →

seed treatment · soil: biology · Capsicum (peppers)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 →

8 of 11 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.

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.