Open Access

Reaction of Commercial Cultivars of Kiwifruit to Infection by Root-knot Nematode and Its Biocontrol Using Endophytic Bacteria

Seyedeh Najmeh Banihashemian
Seyedeh Najmeh Banihashemian
, 
Salar Jamali
Salar Jamali
, 
Morteza Golmohammadi
Morteza Golmohammadi
, 
Sina Noorizadeh
Sina Noorizadeh
 and 
Mohammad Reza Atighi
Mohammad Reza Atighi
   | Jun 05, 2023
Journal of Nematology's Cover Image
About this article
Previous Article
Next Article
Cite
Article Category: Research Paper
Published Online: Jun 05, 2023
Page range: -
Received: Feb 13, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jofnem-2023-0020
Keywords
© 2023 Seyedeh Najmeh Banihashemian et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Figure 1:

Reaction of commercial cultivars of kiwifruit to infection by M. incogntia. (A) Number of galls on roots; (B) Number of egg masses on roots; (C) Number of J2s in the soil. Different letters denote significant differences (p < 0.05). Error bars indicate STD. (n=15).
Reaction of commercial cultivars of kiwifruit to infection by M. incogntia. (A) Number of galls on roots; (B) Number of egg masses on roots; (C) Number of J2s in the soil. Different letters denote significant differences (p < 0.05). Error bars indicate STD. (n=15).

Figure 2:

Growth parameters of plants in response to infection by M. incogntia. (A) Fresh root weight; (B) dry root weight; (C) fresh shoot weight; (D) dry shoot weight. Different letters denote significant differences (p < 0.05). Error bars indicate STD (n=15).
Growth parameters of plants in response to infection by M. incogntia. (A) Fresh root weight; (B) dry root weight; (C) fresh shoot weight; (D) dry shoot weight. Different letters denote significant differences (p < 0.05). Error bars indicate STD (n=15).

Figure 3:

Relationships between the number of galls and percentage of reductions in fresh and dry root and shoot weights. (A) (●) and (▲) represent reductions in fresh and dry root weights of kiwifruit plants, respectively. (…) and (―) represent trend lines showing reductions in fresh and dry root weights of kiwifruit plants, respectively; (B): (●) and (▲) represent reductions in fresh and dry shoot weights of kiwifruit plants, respectively. (…) and (―) represent trend lines showing reductions in fresh and dry shoot weights of kiwifruit plants, respectively.
Relationships between the number of galls and percentage of reductions in fresh and dry root and shoot weights. (A) (●) and (▲) represent reductions in fresh and dry root weights of kiwifruit plants, respectively. (…) and (―) represent trend lines showing reductions in fresh and dry root weights of kiwifruit plants, respectively; (B): (●) and (▲) represent reductions in fresh and dry shoot weights of kiwifruit plants, respectively. (…) and (―) represent trend lines showing reductions in fresh and dry shoot weights of kiwifruit plants, respectively.

Figure 4:

Antagonistic effects of P. megaterium strain 31.en and A. tumefaciens strain 19.en against M. incognita in kiwifruit under greenhouse conditions. Different letters denote significant differences (p < 0.05). Data are the mean of five replications which were repeated three times independently (n=15).
Antagonistic effects of P. megaterium strain 31.en and A. tumefaciens strain 19.en against M. incognita in kiwifruit under greenhouse conditions. Different letters denote significant differences (p < 0.05). Data are the mean of five replications which were repeated three times independently (n=15).

Figure 5:

Effects of P. megaterium strain 31.en and A. tumefaciens strain 19.en on growth parameters of kiwifruit under greenhouse conditions. Different letters denote significant differences (p < 0.05). Data are the mean of five replications that were repeated three times independently (n=15).
Effects of P. megaterium strain 31.en and A. tumefaciens strain 19.en on growth parameters of kiwifruit under greenhouse conditions. Different letters denote significant differences (p < 0.05). Data are the mean of five replications that were repeated three times independently (n=15).

Modified rating scale for the evaluation of the level of resistance/susceptibility of kiwifruit cultivars based on the number of galls according to (Taylor and Sasser, 1978).

Scale Number of Galls per Plant Resistance Rating
0 0 Immune (I)
1 1–2 Resistant (R)
2 3–10 Moderately Resistant (MR)
3 11–30 Moderately Susceptible (MS)
4 31–100 Susceptible (S)
5 >100 Highly Susceptible (HS)
eISSN:
2640-396X
Language:
English
Publication timeframe:
Volume Open
Journal Subjects:
Life Sciences, other
Journal RSS Feed