Paper · 2020 · African Journal of Agricultural Research

Interaction effect between Meloidogyne incognita and Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. lycopersici on selected tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) genotypes

Gedefaw Kassie Yitayih; Yesuf Mohamed; Seid Ebrahim Awol

4
claims
9
verbatim quotes
16
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Development of diseases in cultivated crops depends on the complex inter-relationship between host, pathogen and prevailing environmental conditions. The significant role of nematodes in the development of nematode–fungus interaction is demonstrated in many crops throughout the world. However, there is scanty research information in Ethiopia. Therefore, the main objectives of this study were to: (i) investigate the effect of Meloidogyne incognita (MI)-Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. lycopersici (FOL) interaction on selected tomato genotypes based on their order of inoculation and (ii) evaluate the reaction of selected tomato genotypes against the MI-FOL interaction. The greenhouse experiment was laid out in a completely randomized design (CRD) factorial with four replications. Three-week-old tomato seedlings were inoculated with MI suspension at a rate of 3000 second-stage juveniles (J2) and 10 ml FOL suspension (3x106 conidia/ml/pot) around the root rhizosphere. Tomato growth, biomass and pathogen related data were recorded starting first week after inoculation to eight weeks of post inoculation. The result revealed that simultaneous inoculation of MI and FOL (NF) and FOL 10 days after MI (N1F2) was found significantly (p ≤ 0.05) reducing tomato growth, biomass and pathogen related parameters compared to single pathogen or un-inoculated control. Among the three tomato genotypes tested, Assila was moderately resistant as measured by the lower number of root gall and egg mass per plant, that it could be of a good choice to manage this disease complex or interaction. Performance evaluation study at MI-FOL hot spot farmers’ field should be investigated in the near future. Key words: Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. lycopersici, Meloidogyne incognita, resistance, management, synergistic effect and tomato varieties

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Simultaneous nematode and fungus inoculation significantly reduced tomato growth and biomass relative to single-pathogen or uninoculated controls.

Treatment
simultaneous inoculation of MI and FOL (NF)e0
Interactor
Meloidogyne incognitaMeloidogyne incognitat0pathogen
Second interactor
Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. lycopersiciFusarium oxysporum f. sp. lycopersicit0pathogen
Outcome
tomato growth, biomasse0
Direction
reducinge0
Comparator
single pathogen or un-inoculated controle0

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · 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 ↗
Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. lycopersici
Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. lycopersici · Second interactor · picture of its genus (no picture of exactly this name)Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“simultaneous inoculation of MI and FOL (NF) and FOL 10 days after MI (N1F2) was found significantly (p ≤ 0.05) reducing tomato growth, biomass and pathogen related parameters compared to single pathogen or un-inoculated control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1133–1360 · show in text ↑
t0

“Meloidogyne incognita and Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. lycopersici on selected tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 27–108 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Fungal inoculation ten days after nematode inoculation significantly reduced tomato growth and biomass relative to controls.

Treatment
FOL 10 days after MI (N1F2)e0
Interactor
Meloidogyne incognitaMeloidogyne incognitat0pathogen
Second interactor
Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. lycopersiciFusarium oxysporum f. sp. lycopersicit0pathogen
Outcome
tomato growth, biomasse0
Direction
reducinge0
Comparator
single pathogen or un-inoculated controle0

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · 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 ↗
Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. lycopersici
Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. lycopersici · Second interactor · picture of its genus (no picture of exactly this name)Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“FOL 10 days after MI (N1F2) was found significantly (p ≤ 0.05) reducing tomato growth, biomass and pathogen related parameters compared to single pathogen or un-inoculated control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1181–1360 · show in text ↑
t0

“Meloidogyne incognita and Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. lycopersici on selected tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 27–108 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Assila was moderately resistant, with fewer root galls and egg masses per plant.

Material
Assilae0
Interactor
Meloidogyne incognitaMeloidogyne incognitat0pathogen
Outcome
number of root gall and egg mass per plante0
Direction
lowere0

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · 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

“Assila was moderately resistant as measured by the lower number of root gall and egg mass per plant”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1403–1502 · show in text ↑
t0

“Meloidogyne incognita and Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. lycopersici on selected tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 27–108 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors identify Assila as a possible choice for managing the tomato disease complex.

Material
Assilae1
Outcome
good choice to manage this disease complex or interactione0

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“it could be of a good choice to manage this disease complex or interaction”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1509–1583 · show in text ↑
e1

“Assila was moderately resistant”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1403–1434 · show in text ↑
t0

“Meloidogyne incognita and Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. lycopersici on selected tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 27–108 · show in text ↑

Meloidogyne incognita · growth · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

14 papers: 4 positive, 10 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

10 papers more in this group

See all 14 papers →

inoculation · growth · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

441 papers: 387 positive, 54 negative or no effect

53 papers in the same direction as this paper · 387 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

437 papers more in this group

See all 441 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.