Paper · 2021 · The Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences

Biological management of cowpea web blight incited by Rhizoctonia solani

PRIYANKA; S L GODARA; SURESH YADAV; et al.

6
claims
7
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc-sa

Abstract

Among the diseases of cowpea, web blight caused by Rhizoctonia solani Kuhn is the most serious soil borne disease which causes severe yield loss. A field trial was conducted during kharif 2016 to manage web blight disease of cowpea at ARS field of SKRAU, Bikaner. Combination of T. harzianum plus B. subtilis used as seed treatment (5 + 5 g/kg) and soil application (5+5 kg/ha) proved to be most effective against web blight incited by R. solani in field conditions and provided maximum disease control (79.5%). Seed emergence, plant survival, fresh and dry weight, root and shoot lengths and grain yield was higher and per cent cowpea plant mortality was lower in treatment T. harzianum plus B. subtilis used in combination as seed treatment (5 + 5 g/kg) and soil application (5 + 5 kg/ha). The bioagents used in the present investigation could be therefore, used as a part of integrated disease management (IDM) strategy for web blight of cowpea in areas where the disease is reported to cause substantial yield losses.

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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined T. harzianum and B. subtilis seed and soil treatment provided 79.5% web blight control.

Treatment
T. harzianum plus B. subtilis used as seed treatment (5 + 5 g/kg) and soil application (5+5 kg/ha)e0
Interactor
R. solaniRhizoctonia solanie0pathogen
Second interactor
T. harzianume0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
disease controle0
Direction
maximume0
Value
79.5%e0
Qualifier
B. subtilise0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna unguiculata
Vigna unguiculata · TaxonHeraldDesa at English Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Rhizoctonia solani
Rhizoctonia solani · Interactoranonimowy, niektóre prawa zastrzeżone (CC BY) · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Combination of T. harzianum plus B. subtilis used as seed treatment (5 + 5 g/kg) and soil application (5+5 kg/ha) proved to be most effective against web blight incited by R. solani in field conditions and provided maximum disease control (79.5%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 264–510 · show in text ↑
t0

“cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–31 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined bioagent treatment increased cowpea seed emergence, plant survival and grain yield.

Treatment
T. harzianum plus B. subtilis used in combination as seed treatment (5 + 5 g/kg) and soil application (5 + 5 kg/ha)e0
Interactor
T. harzianume0biocontrol_agent
Second interactor
B. subtilise0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
Seed emergence, plant survivale0
Direction
highere0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna unguiculata
Vigna unguiculata · TaxonHeraldDesa at English Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Seed emergence, plant survival, fresh and dry weight, root and shoot lengths and grain yield was higher and per cent cowpea plant mortality was lower in treatment T. harzianum plus B. subtilis used in combination as seed treatment (5 + 5 g/kg) and soil application (5 + 5 kg/ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 512–790 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined bioagent treatment increased cowpea fresh and dry weight and root and shoot lengths.

Treatment
T. harzianum plus B. subtilis used in combination as seed treatment (5 + 5 g/kg) and soil application (5 + 5 kg/ha)e0
Interactor
T. harzianume0biocontrol_agent
Second interactor
B. subtilise0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
fresh and dry weight, root and shoot lengthse0
Direction
highere0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna unguiculata
Vigna unguiculata · TaxonHeraldDesa at English Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Seed emergence, plant survival, fresh and dry weight, root and shoot lengths and grain yield was higher and per cent cowpea plant mortality was lower in treatment T. harzianum plus B. subtilis used in combination as seed treatment (5 + 5 g/kg) and soil application (5 + 5 kg/ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 512–790 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined bioagent treatment increased cowpea grain yield.

Treatment
T. harzianum plus B. subtilis used in combination as seed treatment (5 + 5 g/kg) and soil application (5 + 5 kg/ha)e0
Interactor
T. harzianume0biocontrol_agent
Second interactor
B. subtilise0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
highere0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna unguiculata
Vigna unguiculata · TaxonHeraldDesa at English Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Seed emergence, plant survival, fresh and dry weight, root and shoot lengths and grain yield was higher and per cent cowpea plant mortality was lower in treatment T. harzianum plus B. subtilis used in combination as seed treatment (5 + 5 g/kg) and soil application (5 + 5 kg/ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 512–790 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined bioagent treatment reduced cowpea plant mortality.

Treatment
T. harzianum plus B. subtilis used in combination as seed treatment (5 + 5 g/kg) and soil application (5 + 5 kg/ha)e0
Interactor
T. harzianume0biocontrol_agent
Second interactor
B. subtilise0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
per cent cowpea plant mortalitye0
Direction
lowere0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna unguiculata
Vigna unguiculata · TaxonHeraldDesa at English Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“per cent cowpea plant mortality was lower in treatment T. harzianum plus B. subtilis used in combination as seed treatment (5 + 5 g/kg) and soil application (5 + 5 kg/ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 620–790 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend these bioagents as part of integrated web blight management in affected areas.

Outcome
integrated disease management (IDM) strategye0
Qualifier
areas where the disease is reported to cause substantial yield lossese0

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

Vigna unguiculata
Vigna unguiculata · TaxonHeraldDesa at English Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The bioagents used in the present investigation could be therefore, used as a part of integrated disease management (IDM) strategy for web blight of cowpea in areas where the disease is reported to cause substantial yield losses”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 792–1020 · show in text ↑

seed treatment · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results differ

29 papers: 27 positive, 2 negative or no effect

26 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. positive

25 papers more in this group

See all 29 papers →

application · pest · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Positive and negative results

19 papers: 16 positive, 3 negative or no effect

15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

15 papers more in this group

See all 19 papers →

seed treatment · growth · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Positive and negative results

35 papers: 31 positive, 4 negative or no effect

30 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative

31 papers more in this group

See all 35 papers →

application · growth · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Positive and negative results

59 papers: 53 positive, 6 negative or no effect

52 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

55 papers more in this group

See all 59 papers →

application · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Positive and negative results

126 papers: 112 positive, 14 negative or no effect

111 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

122 papers more in this group

See all 126 papers →

seed treatment · Rhizoctonia solani · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

application · Rhizoctonia solani · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

seed treatment · pest · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results agree

6 papers: 6 positive, 0 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 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.