Abstract
Relationships between the different population densities of Meloidogyne incognita and Rotylenchulus reniformis, individually and concomitantly alongwith growth of black gram (Vigna mungo) were studied under pot culture conditions. Both the species caused significant growth reduction at the level of one infective individual per cc of soil. In concomitant inoculations the extent of growth reduction was relatively less than individual effects. The fresh shoot weight was more sensitive to nematode injury than shoot length.
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 4
Claim · model-written summary
Meloidogyne incognita caused significant growth reduction in black gram at one infective individual per cc of soil.
- Taxon
- black gram
Vigna mungot0 - Treatment
- inoculation with Meloidogyne incognitat0
- Interactor
- Meloidogyne incognita
_penetrates_a_tomato_root_-_USDA-ARS.jpg?width=60)
Meloidogyne incognitat0pathogen - Outcome
- growtht0
- Direction
- reductione1
- Qualifier
- at the level of one infective individual per cc of soile1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_penetrates_a_tomato_root_-_USDA-ARS.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
t0“inoculation with Meloidogyne incognita and Rotylenchulus reniformis on the growth of black gram”
e1“Both the species caused significant growth reduction at the level of one infective individual per cc of soil”
Claim · model-written summary
Rotylenchulus reniformis caused significant growth reduction in black gram at one infective individual per cc of soil.
- Taxon
- black gramVigna mungot0
- Treatment
- inoculation with Meloidogyne incognita and Rotylenchulus reniformist0
- Interactor
- Rotylenchulus reniformis
Rotylenchulus reniformist0pathogen - Outcome
- growtht0
- Direction
- reductione1
- Qualifier
- at the level of one infective individual per cc of soile1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“inoculation with Meloidogyne incognita and Rotylenchulus reniformis on the growth of black gram”
e1“Both the species caused significant growth reduction at the level of one infective individual per cc of soil”
Claim · model-written summary
Concomitant nematode inoculation reduced black gram growth less than the individual inoculations did.
- Taxon
- black gramVigna mungot0
- Treatment
- concomitant inoculationse2
- Outcome
- extent of growth reductione2
- Direction
- lesse2
- Comparator
- individual effectse2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“inoculation with Meloidogyne incognita and Rotylenchulus reniformis on the growth of black gram”
e2“In concomitant inoculations the extent of growth reduction was relatively less than individual effects”
Claim · model-written summary
Fresh shoot weight of black gram was more sensitive to nematode injury than shoot length.
- Taxon
- black gramVigna mungot0
- Outcome
- fresh shoot weighte3
- Direction
- more sensitivee3
- Comparator
- shoot lengthe3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“inoculation with Meloidogyne incognita and Rotylenchulus reniformis on the growth of black gram”
e3“The fresh shoot weight was more sensitive to nematode injury than shoot length”
The same questions in other papers
Meloidogyne incognita · growth · Vigna mungo (black gram)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- negative
- negative
inoculation · growth · Vigna mungo (black gram)Positive and negative results
38 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- negative
39 papers more in this group
See all 43 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.