Paper · 2010 · Egyptian Journal of Phytopathology

Integrated Management of Damping-off, Root and/or Stem Rot Diseases of Chickpea with Sowing Date, Host Resistance and Bioagents

Montaser Abdel-Monaim

18
claims
38
verbatim quotes
10
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Eleven fungal isolates were isolated from naturally infected chickpea roots collected from different locations in. New Valley governorate. The isolated fungi were purified and identified as Rhizoctonia solani (5 isolates), Fusarium solani (4 isolates) and Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (2 isolates). The isolated fungi proved their pathogenicity on cv. Giza 3. Response of chickpea cvs. Giza 1, 2, 3, 4, 88, 195 and 531 to infection by the tested fungi was significantly varied. Giza 1 was the most resistant one followed by Giza 531, while the other tested cvs. were highly susceptible. Seven biocontrol agents, namely Bacillus subtilis, B. megaterium, B. cereus, Trichoderma viride, T. harzianum, Aspergillus sp., Penicillium sp. isolated from chickpea rhizosphere, were tested for their antagonistic action against the tested pathogens. B. subtilis isolate BSMl, B. megaterium isolate TVM5, T. viride isolate TVM2 and T. harzianum isolate THM4 were the most antagonistic ones to the tested fungi in vitro, while the other isolates were moderate or weak antagonists. The most antagonistic isolates as well as the commercial biocide Rhizo-N were applied as seed treatment for controlling damping-off, root and/or stem rot diseases caused by the tested fungi under greenhouse conditions. The obtained data showed that all tested antagonistic isolates were able to cause significant reduction of damping-off, root and/or stem rot diseases in chickpea plants. T. viride (isolate TVM2) and B. megaterium (isolate BMM5) proved to be the most effective isolates for controlling the diseases. Under field conditions, these antagonistic isolates were used as seed treatment of resistant cultivar Giza 1 and sown in three sowing dates to be work of an integrated control program to reduce spread of damping-off, root and/or stem rot diseases under field conditions. The obtained data indicated that all the tested antagonistic isolates significantly reduced damping-off, root and/or stem rot. T. viride (isolate TVM2) and B. megaterium (isolate BMM5) recorded the highest reduction of damping-off, root and/or stem rot in all sowing dates. Sowing of treated seeds with bioagents in first of November gave the highest protection against root diseases in chickpea. The reduction in damping-off, root and/or stem rot severity was significantly reflected on the produced seed yield. In this respect, seeds previously treated with T. viride (TVM2) produced the highest seed yield in all sowing dates followed by seed treated with B. megaterium (TVM5). First of November was the best sowing date to reduce these diseases and to increase seed yield/fed. On the other hand, the antagonistic isolates isolated from chickpea rhizosphere, were most active than the commercial biocide Rhizo-N in reducing chickpea root diseases and increase of seed yield in greenhouse and field conditions.

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 18

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Rhizoctonia solani was identified from naturally infected chickpea roots (5 isolates).

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Interactor
Rhizoctonia solaniRhizoctonia solanie1pathogen
Outcome
identified ase1
Value
5 isolatese1

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Rhizoctonia solani
Rhizoctonia solani · Interactoranonimowy, niektóre prawa zastrzeżone (CC BY) · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–79 · show in text ↑
e1

“The isolated fungi were purified and identified as Rhizoctonia solani (5 isolates), Fusarium solani (4 isolates) and Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (2 isolates)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 139–293 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fusarium solani was identified from naturally infected chickpea roots (4 isolates).

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Interactor
Fusarium solaniFusarium solanie1pathogen
Outcome
identified ase1
Value
4 isolatese1

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Fusarium solani
Fusarium solani · InteractorFred Brooks from United States University of Hawaii at Manoa · CC BY 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–79 · show in text ↑
e1

“The isolated fungi were purified and identified as Rhizoctonia solani (5 isolates), Fusarium solani (4 isolates) and Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (2 isolates)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 139–293 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sclerotinia sclerotiorum was identified from naturally infected chickpea roots (2 isolates).

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Interactor
Sclerotinia sclerotiorumSclerotinia sclerotiorume1pathogen
Outcome
identified ase1
Value
2 isolatese1

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Sclerotinia sclerotiorum
Sclerotinia sclerotiorum · InteractorRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–79 · show in text ↑
e1

“The isolated fungi were purified and identified as Rhizoctonia solani (5 isolates), Fusarium solani (4 isolates) and Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (2 isolates)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 139–293 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The isolated fungi were pathogenic on chickpea cv. Giza 3.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Material
cv. Giza 3e2
Interactor
isolated fungie2pathogen
Outcome
pathogenicitye2

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–79 · show in text ↑
e2

“The isolated fungi proved their pathogenicity on cv. Giza 3”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 295–354 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Response of chickpea cultivars to infection by the tested fungi varied significantly.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Material
cvs. Giza 1, 2, 3, 4, 88, 195 and 531e3
Interactor
tested fungie3pathogen
Outcome
Responsee3
Direction
significantly variede3

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–79 · show in text ↑
e3

“Response of chickpea cvs. Giza 1, 2, 3, 4, 88, 195 and 531 to infection by the tested fungi was significantly varied”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 356–472 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chickpea cultivar Giza 1 was the most resistant to the tested fungi, followed by Giza 531.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Material
Giza 1e4
Outcome
the most resistant onee4
Qualifier
followed by Giza 531e4

Not reportedDirection

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–79 · show in text ↑
e4

“Giza 1 was the most resistant one followed by Giza 531, while the other tested cvs. were highly susceptible”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 474–581 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The other tested chickpea cultivars were highly susceptible.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Material
the other tested cvs.e4
Outcome
highly susceptiblee4

Not reportedDirection

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–79 · show in text ↑
e4

“Giza 1 was the most resistant one followed by Giza 531, while the other tested cvs. were highly susceptible”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 474–581 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Four isolates (B. subtilis BSMl, B. megaterium TVM5, T. viride TVM2 and T. harzianum THM4) were the most antagonistic to the tested fungi in vitro.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Interactor
tested fungie5pathogen
Second interactor
B. subtilis isolate BSMlBacillus subtilise5biocontrol_agent
Outcome
the most antagonistic onese5
Qualifier
B. megaterium isolate TVM5, T. viride isolate TVM2 and T. harzianum isolate THM4e5
Setting
in vitroe5

Not reportedDirection

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Bacillus subtilis
Bacillus subtilis · Second interactorY tambe (original uploader) · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–79 · show in text ↑
e5

“B. subtilis isolate BSMl, B. megaterium isolate TVM5, T. viride isolate TVM2 and T. harzianum isolate THM4 were the most antagonistic ones to the tested fungi in vitro”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 835–1002 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Seed treatment with the antagonistic isolates significantly reduced damping-off, root and stem rot in chickpea under greenhouse conditions.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
seed treatmente7
Interactor
tested fungie7pathogen
Outcome
damping-off, root and/or stem rot diseasese6
Direction
significant reductione6
Setting
greenhouse conditionse7

Not reportedComparator

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–79 · show in text ↑
e6

“all tested antagonistic isolates were able to cause significant reduction of damping-off, root and/or stem rot diseases in chickpea plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1313–1451 · show in text ↑
e7

“The most antagonistic isolates as well as the commercial biocide Rhizo-N were applied as seed treatment for controlling damping-off, root and/or stem rot diseases caused by the tested fungi under greenhouse conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1064–1281 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Trichoderma viride (TVM2) and Bacillus megaterium (BMM5) were the most effective isolates for controlling chickpea diseases.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
T. viride (isolate TVM2) and B. megaterium (isolate BMM5)e7
Outcome
the most effective isolates for controlling the diseasese7

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–79 · show in text ↑
e7

“T. viride (isolate TVM2) and B. megaterium (isolate BMM5) proved to be the most effective isolates for controlling the diseases”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1453–1580 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Seed treatment with the antagonistic isolates significantly reduced damping-off, root and stem rot in the field on resistant cultivar Giza 1.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Material
resistant cultivar Giza 1e0
Treatment
seed treatmente0
Outcome
damping-off, root and/or stem rote1
Direction
significantly reducede1
Setting
Under field conditionse0

Not reportedComparator

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–79 · show in text ↑
e0

“Under field conditions, these antagonistic isolates were used as seed treatment of resistant cultivar Giza 1 and sown in three sowing dates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1582–1721 · show in text ↑
e1

“The obtained data indicated that all the tested antagonistic isolates significantly reduced damping-off, root and/or stem rot”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1853–1978 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Trichoderma viride (TVM2) and Bacillus megaterium (BMM5) recorded the highest reduction of damping-off, root and stem rot in all sowing dates in the field.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
T. viride (isolate TVM2) and B. megaterium (isolate BMM5)e0
Outcome
damping-off, root and/or stem rote0
Direction
highest reductione0
Qualifier
in all sowing datese0

Not reportedComparator

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–79 · show in text ↑
e0

“T. viride (isolate TVM2) and B. megaterium (isolate BMM5) recorded the highest reduction of damping-off, root and/or stem rot in all sowing dates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1980–2125 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sowing treated chickpea seeds with bioagents on the first of November gave the highest protection against root diseases.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Outcome
protection against root diseasese0
Direction
higheste0
Qualifier
Sowing of treated seeds with bioagents in first of Novembere0

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–79 · show in text ↑
e0

“Sowing of treated seeds with bioagents in first of November gave the highest protection against root diseases in chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2127–2248 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Seeds treated with Trichoderma viride (TVM2) produced the highest seed yield in all sowing dates, followed by Bacillus megaterium (TVM5).

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
T. viride (TVM2)e0
Outcome
seed yielde0
Direction
higheste0
Qualifier
in all sowing datese0
Comparator
B. megaterium (TVM5)e0

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–79 · show in text ↑
e0

“seeds previously treated with T. viride (TVM2) produced the highest seed yield in all sowing dates followed by seed treated with B. megaterium (TVM5)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2383–2532 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

First of November was the best sowing date to reduce these diseases and increase seed yield per feddan.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Outcome
seed yield/fede0
Direction
increasee0
Qualifier
First of November was the best sowing datee0

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–79 · show in text ↑
e0

“First of November was the best sowing date to reduce these diseases and to increase seed yield/fed”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2534–2632 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Antagonistic isolates from the chickpea rhizosphere were more active than the commercial biocide Rhizo-N in reducing chickpea root diseases in greenhouse and field conditions.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
antagonistic isolates isolated from chickpea rhizospheree0
Outcome
reducing chickpea root diseasese0
Direction
most activee0
Comparator
commercial biocide Rhizo-Ne0
Setting
greenhouse and field conditionse0

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–79 · show in text ↑
e0

“the antagonistic isolates isolated from chickpea rhizosphere, were most active than the commercial biocide Rhizo-N in reducing chickpea root diseases and increase of seed yield in greenhouse and field conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2653–2864 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Reduction of damping-off, root and stem rot severity was significantly reflected in the produced seed yield.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Outcome
produced seed yielde0
Qualifier
The reduction in damping-off, root and/or stem rot severity was significantly reflectede0

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–79 · show in text ↑
e0

“The reduction in damping-off, root and/or stem rot severity was significantly reflected on the produced seed yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2250–2364 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmixedmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The other isolates were moderate or weak antagonists.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Material
the other isolatese0
Outcome
moderate or weak antagonistse0

Not reportedDirection

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–79 · show in text ↑
e0

“while the other isolates were moderate or weak antagonists”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1004–1062 · show in text ↑

Trichoderma viride · disease · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results

17 papers: 16 positive, 1 negative or no effect

15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

13 papers more in this group

See all 17 papers →

Priestia megaterium · disease · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

Trichoderma viride · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results agree

14 papers: 14 positive, 0 negative or no effect

13 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

10 papers more in this group

See all 14 papers →

seed treatment · disease · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results

39 papers: 35 positive, 4 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

35 papers more in this group

See all 39 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.