ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Assessment of yield loss of Roselle (Hibiscus sabdariffa L.) due to root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne incognita under field conditions
1
RAJI, Omoniyi Olufunso ADEYEYE and Ganiyu Olatunde LAMIDI
Institute of Agricultural Research and Training, Obafemi Awolowo University, P. M. B. 5029,
Moor Plantation, Ibadan, Nigeria
Corresponding author
Adegbite Ayodele Adesina
RAJI, Omoniyi Olufunso ADEYEYE and Ganiyu Olatunde LAMIDI Institute of Agricultural Research and Training, Obafemi Awolowo University, P. M. B. 5029, Moor Plantation, Ibadan, Nigeria
RAJI, Omoniyi Olufunso ADEYEYE and Ganiyu Olatunde LAMIDI Institute of Agricultural Research and Training, Obafemi Awolowo University, P. M. B. 5029, Moor Plantation, Ibadan, Nigeria
Journal of Plant Protection Research 2008;48(3):267-273
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Root-knot nematode Meloidogyne incognita (Kofoid & White) Chitwood is an economically important pathogen of many agricultural crops, and the frequency of occurrence, abundance and importance of this nematode in resource-poor agricultural production systems make control necessary.
Field studies were conducted in 2004 and 2005 to determine yield loss of Roselle due to natural infestation by M. incognita using Carbofuran 3G at 2 kg a.i./ha and untreated as check. The yield of Roselle was found to be higher with the application of nematicide-Carbofuran 3G at 2 kg a.i./ha. The
percentage increase over control was 48.7 and 40.8% in the years 2004 and 2005, respectively. A significant reduction in the yield of Roselle in untreated plots was mainly attributed to direct damage of the root system by the feeding of root-knot nematode M. incognita. Root-knot nematode population in carbofuran treated plots was significantly lower than in untreated check in the two years, also at harvest. In the check the nematodes multiplied many folds during the cropping season. High nematode population in the untreated check decreased plant growth and ultimately reduced the number of seeds and weight of seeds.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors have declared that no conflict of interests exist.
REFERENCES (22)
1.
Adamson W.C., Martin J.A., Minton N.A. 1975. Reaction of kenaf and Roselle on land infested with root knot nematodes. Plant Dis. Rep. 59: 130–132.
2.
Adegbite A.A., Adesiyan S.O. 2001. Efficacy of Carbofuran (Furadan) on the performance of four nematode susceptible varieties of soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merrill]. Trop. Oilseeds J. 6: 11–23.
3.
Adegbite A.A., Agbaje G.O. 2007. Efficacy of Carbofuran in control of root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne incognita race 2) in hybrid yam varieties in southwestern Nigeria. Electr. J. Environ. Agric. Food Chem. 6: 2083–2094.
4.
Adeniji M.O. 1970. Reaction of kenaf and Roselle varieties to the root-knot nematode in Nigeria. Plant Dis. Rep. 54: 547–549.
6.
De-Lannoy G. 2001. Roselle. p. 418–421. In: “Crop Production in Tropical Africa” (R.H. Raemaekers, ed.). Directorate General for International Cooperation (DGIC), Ministry of Foreign Affairs, External Trade and International Cooperation, Brussels, Belgium.
7.
Eisenback J.D., Hirschmann H., Sasser J.N., Triantaphyllou A.C. 1981. A guide to the four most common species of root-knot nematodes (Meloidogyne spp.) with a pictorial key. North Carolina State University and USAID, Raleigh, N.C., 48 pp.
8.
Gomez K.A., Gomez A.A. 1984. Statistical Procedures For Agricultural Research, 2nd ed., John Willey and Sons, New York.
9.
Heffes T.A., Coates-Beckford P.L., Hutton D.G. 1991. Effects of Meloidogyne incognita on growth and nutrient content of Amaranthus viridis and two cultivars of Hibiscus sabdariffa. Nematropica 21: 7–18.
10.
Hussey R.S., Baker K.R. 1973. A comparison of methods of collecting eggs of Meloidogyne spp. including a new technique. Plant Dis. Rep. 57: 1025–1028.
11.
Kinloch R.A. 1974. Response of soybean cultivars to nematicidal treatments of soil infested with Meloidogyne incognita. J. Nematol. 6: 7–11.
12.
Kinloch R.A. 1982. The relationship between soil populations of Meloidogyne incognita and yield reduction of soybean in the coastal plain. J. Nematol. 14: 162–167.
13.
Minton N.A., Adamson W.C. 1979. Control of Meloidogyne javanica and M. arenaria on kenaf and Roselle with genetic resistance and nematicides. J. Nematol. 11: 37–41.
14.
Minton N.A., Adamson W.C., White G.A. 1970. Reaction of kenaf and Roselle to three root-knot nematode species. Phytopathology 60: 1844–1845.
15.
Prasad D. 1997. Assessment of groundnut yield loss due to plant parasitic nematodes. Ann. Plant Prot. Sci. 4: 25–28.
16.
Prasad D., Ahmad I. 2002. Assessment of avoidable yield loss of sunflower due to Rotylenchulus reniformis. Ann. Plant Prot. Sci. 10: 134–138.
17.
Prasad D., Narayana R. 1999. Effect of M. incognita race 1 on the oil content of sunflower. Ann. Plant Prot. Sci. 7: 116–118.
18.
Sasser J.N., Carter C.C., Hartman K.M. 1984. Standardization of Host Suitability Studies and Reporting of Resistance to Root-knot Nematode. North Carolina State University, Department of Plant Pathology, Raleigh, N.C. USA, 7 pp.
19.
Taylor A.L., Sasser J.N. 1978. Biology, Identification and Control of Root-knot Nematodes (Meloidogyne spp.). A cooperative publication of North Carolina State University, Department of Plant Pathology and UDSAID, Raleigh, N.C. USA, 111 pp.
20.
Tindall H.D. 1983. Vegetables in the Tropics. Houndmills Basingstake, Hampshire RG212X5, Macmillan Educational Ltd. United State Department of Agriculture 1990. Soil Survey Staff Keys to Soil Taxonomy, SMSS, Technical Monograph Blackburg, VA.
21.
Vawdrey L.L., Stirling G.R. 1992. Reaction of kenaf and Roselle grown in the Burkin River Irrigation Area to root-knot nematodes. Aust. Plant Pathol. 21: 8–12.
22.
Whitehead A.G., Hemming J.R. 1965. A comparison of some quantitative methods of extracting small vermiform nematodes from soil. Ann. Appl. Biol. 55: 25–38.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| eISSN: | 1899-007X |
| ISSN: | 1427-4345 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
