Paper · 2020 · Archives of Phytopathology and Plant Protection

Biological control of fungi associated with damping-off and root rot disease of cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.)

Amer F. Mahmoud; Osama A. Abdalla

12
claims
24
verbatim quotes
7
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Damping-off and root rot is a serious disease infecting cucumber on both seedling and adult stages. In this study, fifty-six fungal isolates were restored from cucumber plants showing typical symptoms of damping-off and root rot disease growing in different fields in Assiut governorate. These isolates were Pythium aphanidermatum (8 isolates), F. solani (12 isolates), Rhizoctonia solani (10 isolates), Drechslera halodes (12 isolates) and Macrophomina phaseolina (14 isolates). Pathogenicity tests revealed that these isolates were able to cause damping-off and root rot disease, however the most severe isolates were M. phaseolina isolate No 3 followed by R. solani No. 4, then F. solani isolate No. 6 as they caused root rot severity about 92.75, 91.5 and 76.75% respectively. In this study application of Gliocladium catenulatum, and Trichoderma harzianum proved to be an efficient antagonist to inhibit mycelial growth of plant pathogenic fungi in vitro, and to reduce the disease severity under greenhouse conditions, and significantly reduced the pre- and post-emergence damping off and root rot severity by rate of 50, 43.5, 52.33%, respectively in case of G. catenulatum and 60, 51.5, 53.32% in case of T. harzianum. These results proved that application of T. harzainum or G. catenulatum is an efficient method to control the causal pathogens of damping-off and root rot of cucumber.

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

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fifty-six fungal isolates were recovered from symptomatic cucumber plants in Assiut governorate.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativust0
Outcome
fungal isolatese0
Value
fifty-sixe0
Setting
Assiut governoratee0

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

“fifty-six fungal isolates were restored from cucumber plants showing typical symptoms of damping-off and root rot disease growing in different fields in Assiut governorate.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 115–287 · show in text ↑
t0

“cucumber”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–88 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The recovered isolates comprised five fungal taxa with 8, 12, 10, 12, and 14 isolates respectively.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativust0
Outcome
isolatese0

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

“These isolates were Pythium aphanidermatum (8 isolates), F. solani (12 isolates), Rhizoctonia solani (10 isolates), Drechslera halodes (12 isolates) and Macrophomina phaseolina (14 isolates).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 288–479 · show in text ↑
t0

“cucumber”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–88 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The isolates caused damping-off and root rot in pathogenicity tests.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativust0
Outcome
damping-off and root rot diseasee0

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

“Pathogenicity tests revealed that these isolates were able to cause damping-off and root rot disease”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 480–580 · show in text ↑
t0

“cucumber”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–88 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

M. phaseolina isolate No 3 caused root rot severity of about 92.75%.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativust0
Interactor
M. phaseolinaMacrophomina phaseolinae0pathogen
Outcome
root rot severitye0
Value
92.75e0

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 ↗
Macrophomina phaseolina
Macrophomina phaseolina · InteractorEdward L. Barnard, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services · CC BY 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“M. phaseolina isolate No 3 followed by R. solani No. 4, then F. solani isolate No. 6 as they caused root rot severity about 92.75, 91.5 and 76.75% respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 620–780 · show in text ↑
t0

“cucumber”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–88 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

R. solani No. 4 caused root rot severity of about 91.5%.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativust0
Interactor
R. solaniRhizoctonia solanie0pathogen
Outcome
root rot severitye0
Value
91.5e0

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 ↗
Rhizoctonia solani
Rhizoctonia solani · Interactoranonimowy, niektóre prawa zastrzeżone (CC BY) · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“M. phaseolina isolate No 3 followed by R. solani No. 4, then F. solani isolate No. 6 as they caused root rot severity about 92.75, 91.5 and 76.75% respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 620–780 · show in text ↑
t0

“cucumber”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–88 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

F. solani isolate No. 6 caused root rot severity of about 76.75%.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativust0
Interactor
F. solanie0pathogen
Outcome
root rot severitye0
Value
76.75%e0

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

“M. phaseolina isolate No 3 followed by R. solani No. 4, then F. solani isolate No. 6 as they caused root rot severity about 92.75, 91.5 and 76.75% respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 620–780 · show in text ↑
t0

“cucumber”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–88 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

G. catenulatum reduced pre-emergence damping-off by 50%.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativust0
Treatment
G. catenulatume0
Outcome
damping offe0
Direction
reducede0
Value
50e0

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

“significantly reduced the pre- and post-emergence damping off and root rot severity by rate of 50, 43.5, 52.33%, respectively in case of G. catenulatum”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1029–1180 · show in text ↑
t0

“cucumber”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–88 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

G. catenulatum reduced post-emergence damping-off by 43.5%.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativust0
Treatment
G. catenulatume0
Outcome
post-emergence damping offe0
Direction
reducede0
Value
43.5e0

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

“significantly reduced the pre- and post-emergence damping off and root rot severity by rate of 50, 43.5, 52.33%, respectively in case of G. catenulatum”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1029–1180 · show in text ↑
t0

“cucumber”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–88 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

G. catenulatum reduced root rot severity by 52.33%.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativust0
Treatment
G. catenulatume0
Outcome
root rot severitye0
Direction
reducede0
Value
52.33%e0

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

“significantly reduced the pre- and post-emergence damping off and root rot severity by rate of 50, 43.5, 52.33%, respectively in case of G. catenulatum”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1029–1180 · show in text ↑
t0

“cucumber”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–88 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

T. harzianum reduced pre-emergence damping-off by 60%.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativust0
Treatment
T. harzianume0
Outcome
damping offe0
Direction
reducede0
Value
60e0

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

“significantly reduced the pre- and post-emergence damping off and root rot severity by rate of 50, 43.5, 52.33%, respectively in case of G. catenulatum and 60, 51.5, 53.32% in case of T. harzianum”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1029–1225 · show in text ↑
t0

“cucumber”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–88 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

T. harzianum reduced post-emergence damping-off by 51.5%.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativust0
Treatment
T. harzianume0
Outcome
post-emergence damping offe0
Direction
reducede0
Value
51.5e0

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

“significantly reduced the pre- and post-emergence damping off and root rot severity by rate of 50, 43.5, 52.33%, respectively in case of G. catenulatum and 60, 51.5, 53.32% in case of T. harzianum”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1029–1225 · show in text ↑
t0

“cucumber”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–88 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

T. harzianum reduced root rot severity by 53.32%.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativust0
Treatment
T. harzianume0
Outcome
root rot severitye0
Direction
reducede0
Value
53.32%e0

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

“significantly reduced the pre- and post-emergence damping off and root rot severity by rate of 50, 43.5, 52.33%, respectively in case of G. catenulatum and 60, 51.5, 53.32% in case of T. harzianum”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1029–1225 · show in text ↑
t0

“cucumber”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–88 · show in text ↑

Trichoderma harzianum · disease · Cucumis sativus (cucumber)Results agree

8 papers: 8 positive, 0 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 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.