Logowanie
Zarejestruj się
Zresetuj hasło
Publikuj i Dystrybuuj
Rozwiązania Wydawnicze
Rozwiązania Dystrybucyjne
Dziedziny
Architektura i projektowanie
Bibliotekoznawstwo i bibliologia
Biznes i ekonomia
Chemia
Chemia przemysłowa
Filozofia
Fizyka
Historia
Informatyka
Inżynieria
Inżynieria materiałowa
Językoznawstwo i semiotyka
Kulturoznawstwo
Literatura
Matematyka
Medycyna
Muzyka
Nauki farmaceutyczne
Nauki klasyczne i starożytne studia bliskowschodnie
Nauki o Ziemi
Nauki o organizmach żywych
Nauki społeczne
Prawo
Sport i rekreacja
Studia judaistyczne
Sztuka
Teologia i religia
Zagadnienia ogólne
Publikacje
Czasopisma
Książki
Materiały konferencyjne
Wydawcy
Blog
Kontakt
Wyszukiwanie
EUR
USD
GBP
Polski
English
Deutsch
Polski
Español
Français
Italiano
Koszyk
Home
Czasopisma
Journal of Nematology
Tom 54 (2022): Zeszyt 1 (February 2022)
Otwarty dostęp
Meloidogyne Haplanaria
: an Emerging Threat to Tomato Production in Florida
Lisbeth Espinoza-Lozano
Lisbeth Espinoza-Lozano
,
S. Joseph
S. Joseph
,
W. T. Crow
W. T. Crow
,
J. Noling
J. Noling
oraz
T. Mekete
T. Mekete
| 30 wrz 2022
Journal of Nematology
Tom 54 (2022): Zeszyt 1 (February 2022)
O artykule
Poprzedni artykuł
Następny artykuł
Abstrakt
Artykuł
Ilustracje i tabele
Referencje
Autorzy
Artykuły w tym zeszycie
Podgląd
PDF
Zacytuj
Udostępnij
Article Category:
Research paper
Data publikacji:
30 wrz 2022
Zakres stron:
-
Otrzymano:
10 sty 2022
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2478/jofnem-2022-0032
Słowa kluczowe
interaction
,
gene
,
resistance
,
tomato
© 2022 Espinoza-Lozano et al. published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Figure 1
Regression of (A) total eggs and (B) egg masses on the initial population density of Meloidogyne haplanaria for tomato cultivars Rutgers (susceptible) and Sanibel (resistant), 60 days after inoculation with 0, 0.25, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, or 64 eggs and J2/g of soil under greenhouse conditions.
Figure 2
Regression of (A) GI and (B) eggs per gram of roots on the initial population density of Meloidogyne haplanaria for tomato cultivars Rutgers (susceptible) and Sanibel (resistant), 60 days after inoculation of 0, 0.25, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, or 64 eggs and J2/g of soil in greenhouse conditions. GI, gall index.
Figure 3
Regression of reproductive factor on the initial population density of Meloidogyne haplanaria for tomato cultivars Rutgers and Sanibel, 60 days after inoculation of 0, 0.25, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, or 64 eggs and J2/g of soil in greenhouse conditions.
Figure 4
Relationship between the initial population density (Pi) of Meloidogyne haplanaria and (A) shoot fresh weight, (B) shoot height (cm), and (C) root length on tomato cultivars “Rutgers” and “Sanibel”. Plants were harvested after 60 days, and each point in the graph represents a mean of 16 replications, and the line is the predicted function obtained when the data were fitted to the Seinhorst model. The parameters obtained for were (A) for Rutgers: Y = 64.65; m = 0.15; T = 7.9; and for Sanibel Y = 66.27; m = 0.83; T = 0.64, (B) for Rutgers: Y = 64.64; m = 0.14; T = 3.25; and for Sanibel Y = 66.27; m = 0.83; T = 3.14, (C) for Rutgers: Y = 24.02; m = 14.55; T = 0.9; and for Sanibel Y = 24.86; m = 13.74; T = 1.2.
Figure 5
Effects of temperature on (A) total number of eggs, (B) eggs per gram of root, (C) GI, and (D) total egg masses on tomato varieties Rutgers and Sanibel inoculated with Meloidogyne enterolobii (Me), M. haplanaria (Mh), or M. incognita (Mi) 40 days after inoculation in growth chambers maintained at 24°C, 28°C, and 32°C. Columns within the same cultivar and at the same temperature with common letters are not different (P ≤ 0.05) according to Tukey’s test. GI, gall index.
Figure 6
Effect of temperature on the total number of J2s/g of root observed within tomato roots of cultivars “Rutgers” and “Sanibel” 40 days after inoculation with (A) Meloidogyne enterolobii, (B) M. haplanaria or, and (C) M. incognita in a growth chamber maintained at 24°C, 28°C, and 32°C. Columns within the same cultivar with common letters are not different (P ≤ 0.05) according to Tukey’s test.
Figure 7
Effects of Meloidogyne enterolobii (Me), M. haplanaria (Mh), and M. incognita (Mi) on the number of (A) egg masses and (B) total eggs on the tomato cultivars “Amelia”, “Estamino”, “Maxifort”, “Monica”, “Rutgers”, and “Sanibel” 60 days after inoculation under greenhouse conditions. Columns within the same cultivar with common letters are not different (P ≤ 0.05) according to Tukey’s test.
Figure 8
Effect of Meloidogyne enterolobii (Me), M. haplanaria (Mh), and M. incognita (Mi) on the number of (A) GI and (B) eggs per gram of root in the tomato cultivars “Amelia”, “Estamino”, “Maxifort”, “Monica”, “Rutgers”, and “Sanibel” 60 days after under greenhouse conditions. Columns within the same cultivar with common letters are not different (P ≤ 0.05) according to Tukey’s test. GI, gall index.
Podgląd