| Literature DB >> 31658285 |
Dongdong Yan1, Aocheng Cao1, Qiuxia Wang1, Yuan Li1, Ouyang Canbin1, Meixia Guo1, Xiaoqin Guo1.
Abstract
Root-knot nematode is an important soil pest in horticulture crops and constrains the protected cultivation development after methyl bromide (MB) was phased out in China. Dimethyl disulfide (DMDS) exhibits excellent efficacy against nematodes. Laboratory experiments and field trials were set up to clarify DMDS dose, efficacy, and yield. A dose-response experiment using three methods showed that DMDS presented high efficacy against the nematode Meloidogyne incongnita. The LC50 values of direct fumigation activity in the dessicator method were 0.086 and 0.070 mg L-1 for DMDS and 1,3-D, 29.865 and 18.851 mg L-1 for DMDS and 1,3-D of direct contact activity in the small tube method, 6.438 and 3.061 mg L-1 for DMDS and 1,3-D of soil fumigation activity in the soil fumigation method, respectively. The field trials indicated that DMDS showed an excellent efficacy of 80%-94% on root-knot nematode applied at 10-100 g m-2 on tomato in Tongzhou, Beijing. The crop yields showed no significant difference after applying 10-80 g m-2 DMDS. Results indicate that DMDS applied at 10 g m-2 for controlling root-knot nematode in Beijing is cost effective. In conclusion, DMDS is an excellent soil fumigant that can be used for controlling root-knot nematode and can be an potential novel alternative to MB in China.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31658285 PMCID: PMC6816568 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0224456
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Basic physical and chemical properties of the experimental soil.
| Soil | Ammonium | Nitrate | Available phosphorus | Available potassium | Organic matter | pH | Water content |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 Tongzhou | 3.3 | 118.5 | 349.9 | 335.1 | 30.5 | 7.3 | 17.4 |
| 2012 Tongzhou | 13.9 | 205.2 | 347.5 | 632.6 | 38.2 | 7.4 | 18.2 |
| 2014 Tongzhou | 16.4 | 423.4 | 387.5 | 790.0 | 40.4 | 6.3 | 15.9 |
| 2014 Fangshan | 25.9 | 603.1 | 425.1 | 655.0 | 29.9 | 7.0 | 8.2 |
Variety and growth calendar of the vegetables.
| Year | Field Site | Crop/Variety | Seedling | Transplanting | Beginning of harvesting | Finish of the season |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | Tongzhou | cucumber/ | Aug. 22, 2011 | Sep. 5, 2011 | Oct.14, 2011 | Dec. 2, 2011 |
| 2012 | Tongzhou | cucumber/ Zhongnong 16 | Aug. 18, 2012 | Aug. 28, 2012 | Oct. 2, 2012 | Dec. 3, 2012 |
| 2014 | Tongzhou | cucumber/ Zhongnong 16 | Aug. 16, 2014 | Aug. 25, 2014 | Sep. 29, 2014 | Dec. 1, 2014 |
| 2014 | Fangshan | Tomato/ | Jul. 20, 2014 | Aug. 13, 2014 | Oct. 27, 2014 | Dec. 31, 2014 |
Dose-response result of nematode on chemicals direct contact and fumigation activity and soil fumigation activity in small tube, desiccator, and soil fumigation methods.
| Method | DMDS | 1,3-D | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LC50 | Regression equation | LC50 | Regression equation | |
| Small tube | 29.865 | Y = 2.994+1.360x | 18.851 | Y = 3.072+1.512x |
| Desiccator | 0.086 | Y = 6.300+1.220x | 0.070 | Y = 6.700+1.445x |
| Soil fumigation | 6.438 | Y = 4.097+1.117x | 3.061 | Y = 4.150+1.526x |
Z Abbreviations: DMDS = dimethyl disulfide, 1,3-D = 1,3-dichloropropene.
Dose response result of soil pathogens to DMDS and 1,3-D with the soil fumigation method.
| Soil pathogens | DMDS | 1,3-D | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LC50 | Regression equation | LC50 | Regression equation | |
| 2.670 | Y = 4.410+1.383x | 0.981 | Y = 5.007+0.804x | |
| 3.901 | Y = 4.239+1.288x | 1.647 | Y = 4.797+0.938x | |
Z Abbreviations: DMDS = dimethyl disulfide, 1,3-D = 1,3-dichloropropene.
Marketable yield of crop and galling index at harvest.
| Field site and crop | Treatment | Dosage (g m-2) | Galling index of tomato and cucumber | Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | DMDS | 60 | 3.75 b | 4838.41 ab |
| DMDS | 80 | 0 b | 4410.69 b | |
| DMDS | 100 | 0 b | 4240.07 b | |
| MB | 40 | 0 b | 5495.86 a | |
| 1,3-D | 9 | 0 b | 4253.11 b | |
| Untreated Control | - | 49.38 a | 2936.09 c | |
| 2012 | DMDS | 60 | 0 b | 7871.51 a |
| DMDS | 80 | 0 b | 8044.55 a | |
| DMDS | 100 | 0 b | 8402.76 a | |
| MB | 40 | 0 b | 9022.01 a | |
| 1,3-D | 9 | 0 b | 8757.63 a | |
| Untreated Control | - | 72.50 a | 5406.49 b | |
| 2014 | DMDS | 10 | 17.50 b | 4215.11 a |
| DMDS | 20 | 10.63 b | 3732.32 ab | |
| DMDS | 40 | 4.38 c | 4041.56 a | |
| DMDS | 80 | 0.63 c | 4112.72 a | |
| DZ | 30 | 13.75 b | 3121.92 bc | |
| Untreated Control | 66.25 a | 2747.17 c | ||
| 2014 | DMDS | 10 | 76.25 ab | 3642.87 a |
| DMDS | 20 | 62.50 ab | 3674.98 a | |
| DMDS | 40 | 48.75 bc | 3915.23 a | |
| DMDS | 80 | 18.75 c | 3494.65 a | |
| 1,3-D | 9 | 61.25 b | 3517.81 a | |
| Untreated Control | - | 93.75 a | 2362.91 b |
yAbbreviations: 1,3-D = 1,3-dichloropropene, DMDS = dimethyl disulfide, MB = methyl bromide, DZ = Dazomet.
zData are the means of three replications in the column. Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different (P = 0.05) according to the LSD test.
Fig 1Cucumber and tomato yields after different fumigation treatments in the year 2014.
Abbreviations: DMDS = dimethyl disulfide, 1,3-D = 1,3-dichloropropene, DZ = Dazomet, DMDS 10 = DMDS 10 g m-2 treatment, DZ 30 = DZ 30 g m-2 treatment of cucumber trials in the year 2014, 1,3-D 9 = 1,3-D 9 g m-2 treatment of tomato trials in the year 2014. Different letters indicate significant differences in each treatment group according to the LSD test.