A member of CGIAR consortium www.iita.org Management of Meloidogyne incognita in yam- based cropping systems with cover crops by A.O. Claudius-Cole,B. Fawole,R. Asiedu and D.L. Coyne Crop Protection and Environmental Biology, University of Ibadan, International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Ibadan, Nigeria. Presented by Temitayo Oluwatosin, Aremu May, 2015
20
Embed
Management of meloidogyne incognita in yam-based cropping systems with cover crops
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
A member of CGIAR consortium www.iita.org
Management of Meloidogyne incognita in yam-
based cropping systems with cover cropsby
A.O. Claudius-Cole,B. Fawole,R. Asiedu and
D.L. Coyne Crop Protection and Environmental Biology, University of Ibadan, International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Materials and Methods cont…• Examples of some of the plants used as cover crops.
Crotalaria juncea
Tagetes erectaAeschynomene histrix
Centrosema pubescens
Stylosanthes guianensis
A member of CGIAR consortium www.iita.org
Pot Experiments
• Tubers were cut into 50 g setts and pre-treated
• Planting was in 23 cm diameter pots containing 5 l of steam-sterilized soil.
• Cover crops planted 1 week after transplanting yams
• Inoculation was with 5000 eggs using a syringe applied directly into four holes made in the soil and zero nematodes as control.
• RCBD with 6 replicates in the screen house
A member of CGIAR consortium www.iita.org
Field experiments
• Yam setts were cut into 150 g setts, treated,pre-sprouted before transplanting
• Cover crops were planted one week after transplanting
• Field experiment was RCBD in split plot layout
• 4 replicates with 10 plants per plot
A member of CGIAR consortium www.iita.org
Materials and Methods cont…
• Extraction of eggs/juveniles of RKN from galled roots of Celosia argentea (Hussey & Barker 1973)
• Inoculation of 10,000 eggs of M. incognita per plant
and no-nematode control on the field
Galled Celosia rootsExtract poured through sieves
NaOCl
A member of CGIAR consortium www.iita.org
Data Collection
• Tubers were harvested 6 MAP, weighed and scored for nematode damage using 1- 5 damage scale
• Extraction of Meloidogyne spp. from
tubers and roots (Hussey and Baker 1973)
• Extraction from soil via modified
Baermann tray method (Coyne et al., 2007).
• Nematodes were counted with a dissecting microscope
• Data recorded and Reproductive factor(RF) determined;
where Pf/Pi (Pf = final population and Pi is initial nematode population)
Soil Extraction
A member of CGIAR consortium www.iita.org
Data Analysis
• Transformation of percentage data and nematode counts using arcsine or Log (x þ 1) where appropriate.
• All data were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA)
• Statistical analysis was conducted using SAS program (SAS Institute Inc., 2001)
• Means was separated using Student Newman Keuls(SNK) at 5% level of significance and standard error were used where appropriate.
A member of CGIAR consortium www.iita.org
RESULTS
A member of CGIAR consortium www.iita.org
Table 1. Effect of Cover Crops on Tuber Damage, Number of
Meloidogyne incognita in Tuber, Soil, and Roots of Cover
Crops and Nematode Reproductive Factor in Pot Experiment
Cover crop Tuber
damage
score
2MAS
M. incognita
Population in
tuber (5 g)
2MAS
M. incognita
Population in
Soil (100
cm3)
M. incognita
Population in
Root (5 g)
Reproducti
ve
factor (RF)
T. erecta 1.0d 12.6d 0.4d 0.4d 0.4c
C. juncea 1.0d 4.1d 0.7d 0.6d 1.0c
A. histrix 1.0d 11.1d 0.5d 0.8d 0.9c
S. guianensis 1.1cd 15.0d 0.9cd 10.1d 1.9bc
P. phaseoloides 1.2cd 80.4c 3.5b 9.2d 2.2bc
C. pruriens 1.3c 9.0d 0.6d 3.3d 1.8bc
C. cajan 1.4c 151.3bc 5.0a 27.2c 4.3b
No cover crop 2.4b 406.2a 1.2c 3.9b
L. purpureus 3.1a 229.8b 3.4b 151.6a 16.4a
V. unguiculata 3.3a 840.2a 5.5a 78.0b 12.5a
A member of CGIAR consortium www.iita.org
Table 2. Effect of Cover Crops on Tuber Damage, Number of
Meloidogyne incognita in Tuber, Soil, and Roots of Cover Crops
and Nematode Reproductive Factor in Field Plots.
Cover crops
Damage
score of
yam tuber
(3 MAH)
Mean
number of
nematodes in
tuber (5 g)
Mean
number of
nematodes
in
soil(100cm3)
Mean number of
nematodes in
cover crops
roots(5 g)
Reproducti
ve Factor
(RF)
A. histrix 1.0d 13.4c 0.4d 0.3c 0.7c
T. erecta 1.0d 2.4c 0.0d 0.1c 0.2c
C. juncea 1.0d 0.0c 0.0d 0.1c 0.0c
M. pruriens 1.0d 25.7c 0.6d 0.9c 1.1c
C. pubescens 1.1d 33.3c 1.0d 3.0c 0.9c
P. phaseoloides 1.1d 46.7c 0.4d 1.5c 2.3c
S. guianensis 1.2cd 148.6bc 1.0d 0.9c 1.5c
C. cajan 1.5c 541.1b 8.2c 59.8b 32.5b
No cover crop 1.9b 392.1b 6.0c ---- 28.6b
L. purpureus 2.8a 1574.2a 10.5b 76.5b 67.8a
V. unguiculata 2.9a 1095.5a 16.3a 111.6a 53.8a
A member of CGIAR consortium www.iita.org
Results cont...
16
• Nematode densities were minimal and damage absent on tubers intercropped with C. juncea, A. histrix, and T. erecta2 MAS in both field and pot experiments• Tubers intercropped with S. guianensis, P. phaseoloides, M. pruriens and C. pubescens had slight nematode damage• Tubers intercropped with C. cajan, L. purpureus, V. unguiculata or no cover crop had moderate to severe symptoms of damage. • C. cajan, L. purpureus, and V. unguiculata supported high nematode populations and RF in pot experiments.
A member of CGIAR consortium www.iita.org
Discussion
• C. juncea, A. histrix and T. erecta were found to be effective in managing M. incognita on yams
• Supports results of McSorley et al. (1994; 1999) and Piedra-Buena et al. (2008)
• M. pruriens, C. pubescens, P. phaseoloides and S. guianensis suppressed the effect of M. incognita
• Supports results of Rodriguez-Kabana et al. (1992) and Kokalis-Burelle et al. (2005)
• L. pupureus, V. unguiculata and C. cajan were highly susceptible to M. incognita
• Supports results of Otipa et al. 2009, Adegbite et al.,2005
A member of CGIAR consortium www.iita.org
Discussion cont...
• Suppression of RKN by cover crops can be via acting as a non-host or a poor host (Rodríguez-Kabana et al., 1992);
• Some produce allelopathic compounds that are toxic to
nematodes (Halbrendt, 1996; Wang et al., 2001)
• Stimulation of soil organisms that compete with or attack nematodes (Hooks et al., 2010).
• D. rotundata had higher susceptibility to M. incognita than D. alata
• M. incognita in tubers causes increased respiration of the tuber (Fawole and Evans, 1989) which contributes to storage weight loss.
A member of CGIAR consortium www.iita.org
Conclusion
• A. histrix, T. erecta and C. juncea should be incorporated into IPM strategies for Meloidogyne species management
• M. pruriens, S. guianensis, C. pubescens and P. phaseoloides were moderately susceptible to M. incognita and may be used to reduce their Meloidogyne species populations
• C. cajan, L. purpureus and V. unguiculata were susceptible to M. incognita and should be avoided in cropping systems involving susceptible crops