Abstract
The tomato root-knot nematode is one of the main phytosanitary problems in crops. Chemical control is the phytosanitary method most used by farmers, and the study of alternative management of phytonematodes is crucial. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of silicon dioxide (SiO2) on the initial development of tomato plants, as well as to determine the best dose of SiO2 for inducing resistance to parasitism by M. incognita. This experiment was set up under a completely randomized design with ten treatments and five replicates in a 5×2 factorial arrangement consisting of five concentrations of SiO2 (0, 0.15, 0.3, 0.45 and 0.6 g dm-³ of soil) with the presence and absence of M. incognita, under greenhouse conditions. The following variables were evaluated: plant height; number of leaves; fresh and dry weight of shoot; percentage of shoot dry matter; root fresh weight; number of galls; final population of nematodes; and population per gram of root. The M. incognita infection affected plant height, number of leaves and shoot fresh weight, while the application of SiO2 negatively affected the formation of galls in the roots of the inoculated plants and the population per gram of root, reducing the final population of nematodes in the root system. SiO2 also provided greater development in the tomato plants, with a significant effect on plant height. The ideal dose was 0.34 g dm-3 of SiO2.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-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
Claim · model-written summary
M. incognita infection affected tomato height, leaf number and shoot fresh weight.
Solanum lycopersicum_penetrates_a_tomato_root_-_USDA-ARS.jpg?width=60){kind=small}
Meloidogyne incognitaNot reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_penetrates_a_tomato_root_-_USDA-ARS.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“The M. incognita infection affected plant height, number of leaves and shoot fresh weight”
t0“Resistance induction efficiency of silicon dioxide against Meloidogyne incognita in tomato”
e1“The M. incognita infection affected plant height, number of leaves and shoot fresh weight”
e2“application of SiO2 negatively affected the formation of galls in the roots of the inoculated plants”
e3“SiO2 also provided greater development in the tomato plants, with a significant effect on plant height.”
Claim · model-written summary
SiO2 reduced gall formation in inoculated tomato roots.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“application of SiO2 negatively affected the formation of galls in the roots of the inoculated plants”
t0“Resistance induction efficiency of silicon dioxide against Meloidogyne incognita in tomato”
e1“The M. incognita infection affected plant height, number of leaves and shoot fresh weight”
e2“application of SiO2 negatively affected the formation of galls in the roots of the inoculated plants”
e3“SiO2 also provided greater development in the tomato plants, with a significant effect on plant height.”
Claim · model-written summary
SiO2 reduced nematode population per gram of tomato root.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the population per gram of root, reducing the final population of nematodes in the root system”
t0“Resistance induction efficiency of silicon dioxide against Meloidogyne incognita in tomato”
e1“The M. incognita infection affected plant height, number of leaves and shoot fresh weight”
e2“application of SiO2 negatively affected the formation of galls in the roots of the inoculated plants”
e3“SiO2 also provided greater development in the tomato plants, with a significant effect on plant height.”
Claim · model-written summary
SiO2 reduced the final nematode population in tomato roots.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“reducing the final population of nematodes in the root system”
t0“Resistance induction efficiency of silicon dioxide against Meloidogyne incognita in tomato”
e1“The M. incognita infection affected plant height, number of leaves and shoot fresh weight”
e2“application of SiO2 negatively affected the formation of galls in the roots of the inoculated plants”
e3“SiO2 also provided greater development in the tomato plants, with a significant effect on plant height.”
Claim · model-written summary
SiO2 increased tomato plant height significantly.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“SiO2 also provided greater development in the tomato plants, with a significant effect on plant height.”
t0“Resistance induction efficiency of silicon dioxide against Meloidogyne incognita in tomato”
e1“The M. incognita infection affected plant height, number of leaves and shoot fresh weight”
e2“application of SiO2 negatively affected the formation of galls in the roots of the inoculated plants”
e3“SiO2 also provided greater development in the tomato plants, with a significant effect on plant height.”
Claim · model-written summary
The stated ideal SiO2 dose was 0.34 g dm-3.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The ideal dose was 0.34 g dm-3 of SiO2.”
t0“Resistance induction efficiency of silicon dioxide against Meloidogyne incognita in tomato”
e1“The M. incognita infection affected plant height, number of leaves and shoot fresh weight”
e2“application of SiO2 negatively affected the formation of galls in the roots of the inoculated plants”
e3“SiO2 also provided greater development in the tomato plants, with a significant effect on plant height.”
The same questions in other papers
silicon dioxide · growth · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →Meloidogyne incognita · growth · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
10 papers more in this group
See all 14 papers →infection · growth · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
32 papers in the same direction as this paper · 26 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
55 papers more in this group
See all 59 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.