Paper · 2020 · Indian Journal Of Nematology

Application of bio-inoculants for the management of root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne incognita infecting banana

R. Narayana

4
claims
12
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Experiments were conducted in a farmer's field, located at Dhanuvachapuram area of Trivandrum district of Kerala, for two consecutive years, 2015–2016 and 2016–2017, for the management of Meloidogyne incognita. The experiments consisted of eight treatments, including untreated check. These treatments were: T1-Pseudomonas fluorescens sucker/rhizome treatment @ 5g/sucker, T2-Trichoderma viride sucker treatment @ 5g/sucker, T3-P. fluorescens pit application @ 10g/plant at planting, T4-T. viride pit application @ 10g/plant at planting, T5-P. fluorescens sucker treatment + pit application (45 DAP), T6-T. viride sucker treatment + pit application (45 DAP), T7-Paring + hot water treatment + neem cake 1kg a.i/ha; and T8-untreated control. P. fluorescens sucker treatment + pit application (45 DAP) was the most effective treatment in increasing the yield of banana (27.2 t/ha) and reducing the population of nematodes in soil (166.7 nematodes/200 cc soil) and roots (63.8 nematodes/5g roots). This was followed by the application of P. fluorescens sucker/rhizome treatment @ 5g/sucker. P. fluorescens sucker treatment + pit application (45 DAP) was statistically superior treatment in reducing the number of galls/5g roots (30.3galls/5g roots), as compared to control (0.53galls/5g roots).

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 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

P. fluorescens sucker treatment with pit application at 45 DAP was the most effective treatment for increasing banana yield, to 27.2 t/ha.

Taxon
bananae1
Treatment
P. fluorescens sucker treatment + pit application (45 DAP)e1
Outcome
yield of bananae1
Direction
increasinge1
Value
27.2 t/hae1
Setting
farmer's fielde0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Experiments were conducted in a farmer's field, located at Dhanuvachapuram area of Trivandrum district of Kerala”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–112 · show in text ↑
e1

“P. fluorescens sucker treatment + pit application (45 DAP) was the most effective treatment in increasing the yield of banana (27.2 t/ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 741–878 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

P. fluorescens sucker treatment with pit application at 45 DAP reduced the nematode population in soil to 166.7 nematodes per 200 cc soil.

Taxon
bananae1
Treatment
P. fluorescens sucker treatment + pit application (45 DAP)e1
Interactor
Meloidogyne incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae3pest
Outcome
population of nematodes in soile4
Direction
reducinge4
Value
166.7 nematodes/200 cc soile4
Setting
farmer's fielde0

Not reportedComparator

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

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

“Experiments were conducted in a farmer's field, located at Dhanuvachapuram area of Trivandrum district of Kerala”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–112 · show in text ↑
e1

“P. fluorescens sucker treatment + pit application (45 DAP) was the most effective treatment in increasing the yield of banana (27.2 t/ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 741–878 · show in text ↑
e3

“for the management of Meloidogyne incognita”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 166–209 · show in text ↑
e4

“reducing the population of nematodes in soil (166.7 nematodes/200 cc soil) and roots (63.8 nematodes/5g roots)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 883–993 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

P. fluorescens sucker treatment with pit application at 45 DAP reduced the nematode population in banana roots to 63.8 nematodes per 5 g roots.

Taxon
bananae1
Organ / stage
rootse4
Treatment
P. fluorescens sucker treatment + pit application (45 DAP)e1
Interactor
Meloidogyne incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae3pest
Outcome
population of nematodese4
Direction
reducinge4
Value
63.8 nematodes/5g rootse4

Not reportedComparator

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

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

e1

“P. fluorescens sucker treatment + pit application (45 DAP) was the most effective treatment in increasing the yield of banana (27.2 t/ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 741–878 · show in text ↑
e3

“for the management of Meloidogyne incognita”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 166–209 · show in text ↑
e4

“reducing the population of nematodes in soil (166.7 nematodes/200 cc soil) and roots (63.8 nematodes/5g roots)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 883–993 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

P. fluorescens sucker treatment with pit application at 45 DAP was statistically superior in reducing galls on banana roots, to 30.3 galls per 5 g roots against 0.53 in control.

Taxon
bananae1
Organ / stage
rootse5
Treatment
P. fluorescens sucker treatment + pit application (45 DAP)e5
Interactor
Meloidogyne incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae3pest
Outcome
number of galls/5g rootse5
Direction
reducinge5
Value
30.3galls/5g rootse5
Qualifier
0.53galls/5g rootse5
Comparator
controle5

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

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

e1

“P. fluorescens sucker treatment + pit application (45 DAP) was the most effective treatment in increasing the yield of banana (27.2 t/ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 741–878 · show in text ↑
e3

“for the management of Meloidogyne incognita”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 166–209 · show in text ↑
e5

“P. fluorescens sucker treatment + pit application (45 DAP) was statistically superior treatment in reducing the number of galls/5g roots (30.3galls/5g roots), as compared to control (0.53galls/5g roots)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1088–1290 · show in text ↑

Pseudomonas fluorescens · Meloidogyne incognita · MusaResults agree

4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

Pseudomonas fluorescens · yield · MusaResults agree

5 papers: 5 positive, 0 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 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.