| Literature DB >> 33364906 |
T D'Addabbo1, V D Migunova2, M Renčo3, N Sasanelli1.
Abstract
Soil treatments with formulated plant biomasses or waste materials can be an effective alternative to green manure crops for a sustainable management of root-knot nematode infestations. The suppressive performance of soil amendments with three commercial formulations of defatted seed meal from Brassica carinata, dry biomass of Medicago sativa and pressed pulp from Beta vulgaris was comparatively evaluated on the root knot nematode Meloidogyne incognita both on potted and field tomato (cv. Regina) trials. Products were applied at rates of 10, 20, 30 or 40 g/kg and 20 and 40 T/ ha soil in pots and field, respectively. Soil non treated or treated with the nematicide Oxamyl were used as controls in both experiments. Amendments in potted soil significantly reduced M. incognita infestation on tomato roots compared to both the untreated control and treatment with Oxamyl, also increasing tomato plant growth up to the 30 g/kg soil rate. At the end of the field tomato crop, soil population density of M. incognita resulted significantly reduced by all the tested treatments, whereas tomato yield was significantly higher than the untreated control only at the lowest amendment rate. Soil amendments with the materials tested in this study demonstrated to be a potential additional tool for a satisfactory and safe management of root-knot nematodes.Entities:
Keywords: Nematode management; defatted seed meals; soil amendments; sugar beet pulp
Year: 2020 PMID: 33364906 PMCID: PMC7734667 DOI: 10.2478/helm-2020-0039
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Helminthologia ISSN: 0440-6605 Impact factor: 1.184
Effect of soil amendments with formulated M. sativa biomass, Beta vulgaris pressed pulp and B. carinata seed meal on the infestation of M. incognita and growth of potted tomato (cv Regina).
| Rate (g/kg soil) | Tomato plant weight (g) | Root gall index (0 - 5) | Nematode population (Eggs and J2/) | Reproduction rate | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| aerial part | roots | g root | mL soil | |||||||||
| 10 | 73.0 ± 1.5* | i** | 37.5 ± 1.2 | f | 2.5 ± 0.3 | cd | 98 ± 5.3 | hi | 2.8 ±0.3 | cd | 0.8 ± 0 | g |
| 20 | 60.5 ± 0.9 | f | 28.0 ± 0.4 | e | 2.0 ± 0 | de | 37 ± 0.6 | ij | 2.0 ± 0.1 | ef | 0.4 ± 0 | h |
| 30 | 52.7 ± 1.1 | de | 27.5 ± 1.0 | de | 1.0 ± 0 | f | 23 ± 0.4 | j | 1.8 ± 0.3 | f | 0.3 ± 0 | h |
| 40 | 50.7 ± 0.8 | cd | 25.3 ± 0.8 | cd | 1.0 ± 0 | f | 19 ± 1.0 | j | 1.0 ± 0 | g | 0.2 ± 0 | h |
| 10 | 30.2 ± 0.8 | b | 28.2 ± 0.9 | e | 1.0 ± 0 | f | 906 ± 6.3 | d | 2.8 ± 0.3 | cd | 3.4 ± 0.1 | d |
| 20 | 55.0 ± 1.2 | e | 38.0 ± 0.9 | f | 1.3 ± 0.3 | f | 781 ± 6.5 | e | 2.0 ± 0 | ef | 3.8 ± 0.1 | c |
| 30 | 61.0 ± 0.4 | fg | 45.5 ± 1.0 | h | 1.0 ± 0 | f | 405 ± 3.6 | g | 2.0 ± 0.1 | eg | 2.5 ± 0.1 | f |
| 40 | 47.7 ± 1.5 | c | 19.0 ± 0.9 | b | 1.5 ± 0.3 | ef | 53 ± 2.3 | hij | 1.0 ± 0 | g | 0.3 ± 0 | h |
| 10 | 64.0 ± 2.0 | gh | 29.8 ± 1.0 | e | 2.5 ± 0.3 | cd | 968 ± 28.0 | cd | 3.0 ± 0.2 | cd | 3.9 ± 0.2 | c |
| 20 | 89.7 ± 0.9 | k | 51.8 ± 0.6 | i | 1.5 ± 0.3 | ef | 601 ± 5.6 | f | 2.5 ± 0.3 | de | 4.1 ± 0.2 | c |
| 30 | 83.0 ± 1.1 | j | 52.8 ± 0.6 | i | 1.3 ± 0.3 | f | 436 ± 13.8 | g | 1.0 ± 0 | g | 2.9 ± 0.1 | e |
| 40 | 26.0 ± 0.4 | a | 3.8 ± 0.3 | a | 1.0 ± 0 | f | 114 ± 1.7 | h | 0.8 ± 0.3 | g | 0.2 ± 0 | h |
| Oxamyl | 54.7 ± 1.5 | e | 40.7 ± 1.4 | g | 2.8 ± 0.3 | bc | 1,007 ± 6.6 | bc | 3.2 ± 0.3 | bc | 5.3 ± 0.1 | b |
| Non treated | 47.7 ± 0.6 | c | 24.0 ± 0.4 | c | 4.0 ± 0 | a | 4,710 ± 81.1 | a | 10.2 ± 0.6 | a | 14.9 ± 0.3 | a |
| Non infested | 64.7 ± 1.5 | h | 45.0 ± 0.7 | h | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
*Each value is an average ± SE of five replications from two independent experiments;
**Data flanked in each column by the same letter are not statistically different according to Fisher’s Least Significant Difference pairwise procedure (P < 0.05).
Fig. 1Analytical relationship between number of M. incognita eggs and J2 per gram of tomato roots and rates of the three amendments.
Fig. 2Comparison of cumulative effect of soil amendments with M. sativa biomass (MSB), B. vulgaris pressed pulp (SBP) and B. carinata seed meal (BSM) on number of M. incognita eggs and J2 on tomato roots (A) and weight of plant aerial parts (B).
Fig. 3Effect of soil amendments with formulated M. sativa biomass (MSB), B. vulgaris pressed pulp (SBP) and B. carinata seed meal (BSM) in comparison to Oxamyl (OXA) and untreated control (NTR) on yield of tomato cv Regina (A), gall formation on tomato roots (B), final soil population density (C) and reproduction rate (D) of M. incognita in field.