Paper · 2012 · Journal of Beijing Normal University

NEMATICIDAL EFFECT OF TAGETES ERECTA STEM AND ITS EFFECT ON GROWTH OF CUCUMIS SATIVUS PLANT

Mengjiao Jiang

12
claims
21
verbatim quotes
0
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Aqueous extract of Tagetes erecta was used to test its potential to suppress root-knot nematode Meloidogyne incognita,T.erecta stem was evaluated for its effect on the growth of cucumber(Cucumis sativus) inoculated with M.incognita.Longer incubation time as well as higher concentration of T.erecta aqueous extract resulted in higher M.incognita mortality.Twelve hours after incubation,M.incognita mortality rates were 89.4%,69.5% and 44.2%,for extract concentrations of 1.5%,1.0% and 0.5% respectively,and mortality rate was 0 in control.Mortality rates were 100% under all concentrations 24 hours after incubation,mortality rate remained at 0 in control.T.erecta stem at addition rate of 0.5%,1.0%,2.0% were mixed with thermally treated soil 10 days before cucumber sowing.Cucumbers showed varied degrees of reduction in root knot number under different stem addition rates.Significant reduction in root knot numbers was observed at addition rate of 0.5% and 2.0%;whereas both root growth and root-shoot ratio increased at 0.5% and 1.0% addition rates,but no negative changes in plant height,shoot diameter,shoot fresh weight,total fresh or dry weight were found.At addition rate of 2.0%,growth of cucumber plant was suppressed,resulting in marked decreases in plant height,shoot diameter,shoot fresh weight,total fresh and dry weight.Both chlorophyll content and net photosynthesis rate in cucumber leaves decreased at 0.5%,1.0% and 2.0% addition rates.These data indicated that T.erecta stem could be used to control M.incognita growth on cucumber plant at suitable addition rates,but negative effect of T.erecta stem on photosynthetic pigments and net photosynthesis rate of cucumber plant should be taken into consideration.

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 12

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Longer incubation raised M.incognita mortality.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse1
Treatment
Longer incubation timee0
Interactor
M.incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae0pest
Outcome
M.incognita mortalitye0
Direction
highere0

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · 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

“Longer incubation time as well as higher concentration of T.erecta aqueous extract resulted in higher M.incognita mortality”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 232–355 · show in text ↑
e1

“cucumber(Cucumis sativus)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 178–203 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Higher T.erecta extract concentration raised M.incognita mortality.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse1
Treatment
higher concentration of T.erecta aqueous extracte0
Interactor
M.incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae0pest
Outcome
M.incognita mortalitye0
Direction
highere0

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · 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

“higher concentration of T.erecta aqueous extract resulted in higher M.incognita mortality”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 266–355 · show in text ↑
e1

“cucumber(Cucumis sativus)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 178–203 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

At 12 hours, 1.5% extract yielded 89.4% nematode mortality.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse1
Treatment
1.5%e0
Interactor
M.incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae0pest
Outcome
M.incognita mortality ratese0
Value
89.4%e0
Qualifier
Twelve hours after incubatione0
Comparator
controle0

Not reportedDirection

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · 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

“Twelve hours after incubation,M.incognita mortality rates were 89.4%,69.5% and 44.2%,for extract concentrations of 1.5%,1.0% and 0.5% respectively,and mortality rate was 0 in control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 356–538 · show in text ↑
e1

“cucumber(Cucumis sativus)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 178–203 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

At 12 hours, 1.0% extract yielded 69.5% nematode mortality.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse1
Treatment
1.0%e0
Interactor
M.incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae0pest
Outcome
M.incognita mortality ratese0
Value
69.5%e0
Qualifier
Twelve hours after incubatione0
Comparator
controle0

Not reportedDirection

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · 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

“Twelve hours after incubation,M.incognita mortality rates were 89.4%,69.5% and 44.2%,for extract concentrations of 1.5%,1.0% and 0.5% respectively,and mortality rate was 0 in control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 356–538 · show in text ↑
e1

“cucumber(Cucumis sativus)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 178–203 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

At 12 hours, 0.5% extract yielded 44.2% nematode mortality.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse1
Treatment
0.5%e0
Interactor
M.incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae0pest
Outcome
M.incognita mortality ratese0
Value
44.2%e0
Qualifier
Twelve hours after incubatione0
Comparator
controle0

Not reportedDirection

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · 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

“Twelve hours after incubation,M.incognita mortality rates were 89.4%,69.5% and 44.2%,for extract concentrations of 1.5%,1.0% and 0.5% respectively,and mortality rate was 0 in control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 356–538 · show in text ↑
e1

“cucumber(Cucumis sativus)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 178–203 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

After 24 hours, every extract concentration gave 100% nematode mortality versus zero in controls.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse1
Treatment
all concentrationse0
Outcome
Mortality ratese0
Value
100%e0
Qualifier
24 hours after incubatione0
Comparator
controle0

Not reportedInteractorDirection

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Mortality rates were 100% under all concentrations 24 hours after incubation,mortality rate remained at 0 in control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 539–655 · show in text ↑
e1

“cucumber(Cucumis sativus)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 178–203 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Stem additions reduced cucumber root knot counts, significantly at 0.5% and 2.0%.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse1
Treatment
addition rate of 0.5% and 2.0%e0
Outcome
root knot numberse0
Direction
reductione0

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Significant reduction in root knot numbers was observed at addition rate of 0.5% and 2.0%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 876–965 · show in text ↑
e1

“cucumber(Cucumis sativus)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 178–203 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

At 0.5% and 1.0%, stem additions increased root growth and root-shoot ratio.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse1
Treatment
0.5% and 1.0% addition ratese0
Outcome
root growth and root-shoot ratioe0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“both root growth and root-shoot ratio increased at 0.5% and 1.0% addition rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 974–1053 · show in text ↑
e1

“cucumber(Cucumis sativus)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 178–203 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The 0.5% and 1.0% rates caused no negative change in height, shoot diameter or biomass.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse1
Outcome
plant height,shoot diameter,shoot fresh weighte0
Direction
no negative changese0

Not reportedTreatmentComparator

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“no negative changes in plant height,shoot diameter,shoot fresh weight,total fresh or dry weight were found”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1058–1164 · show in text ↑
e1

“cucumber(Cucumis sativus)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 178–203 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

A 2.0% stem addition suppressed cucumber growth and decreased height, shoot diameter and biomass.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse0
Treatment
addition rate of 2.0%e0
Outcome
plant height,shoot diameter,shoot fresh weighte0
Direction
decreasese0

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“At addition rate of 2.0%,growth of cucumber plant was suppressed,resulting in marked decreases in plant height,shoot diameter,shoot fresh weight,total fresh and dry weight”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1165–1336 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Each stem addition rate decreased cucumber leaf chlorophyll content and net photosynthesis.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse0
Organ / stage
leavese0
Treatment
0.5%,1.0% and 2.0% addition ratese0
Outcome
chlorophyll content and net photosynthesis ratee0
Direction
decreasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Both chlorophyll content and net photosynthesis rate in cucumber leaves decreased at 0.5%,1.0% and 2.0% addition rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1337–1455 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors advise suitable T.erecta stem rates for nematode control while accounting for photosynthetic harm.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse0
Interactor
M.incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae0pest
Outcome
used to control M.incognita growth on cucumber plant at suitable addition ratese0

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · 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

“T.erecta stem could be used to control M.incognita growth on cucumber plant at suitable addition rates,but negative effect of T.erecta stem on photosynthetic pigments and net photosynthesis rate of cucumber plant should be taken into consideration”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1482–1729 · show in text ↑

Tagetes erecta · Meloidogyne incognita · Cucumis sativus (cucumber)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 →

botanical · Meloidogyne incognita · Cucumis sativus (cucumber)Results agree

14 papers: 14 positive, 0 negative or no effect

13 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

10 papers more in this group

See all 14 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.