IN VITRO EFFICACY OF BIOCONTROL AGENTS AND SCREENING OF ROOTSTOCKS AGAINST ROOT KNOT NEMATODE, MELOIDOGYNE INCOGNITA IN MANGO

B. ABINAYA RAGAVI¹, K. POORNIMA²*, P. VETRIVELKALAI^3
1Department of Nematology, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, 641 003, Tamil Nadu, India
²Department of Nematology, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, 641 003, Tamil Nadu, India
³Department of Nematology, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, 641 003, Tamil Nadu, India
* Corresponding Author : poornimamurtysista@gmail.com

Received : 02-04-2019     Accepted : 27-04-2019     Published : 30-04-2019
Volume : 11     Issue : 8       Pages : 8300 - 8302
Int J Agr Sci 11.8 (2019):8300-8302

Keywords : Root knot nematode, Biocontrol agents, Laboratory condition, Rootstocks, Screening
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Authors are thankful to Department of Nematology, Tamil Nadu, Coimbatore, 641 003, Tamil Nadu, India
Author Contribution : All authors equally contributed

Use of biocontrol agents and resistant sources proved to be better when compared to chemical means, both in terms of cost and its side effects. Hence in vitro biocontrol studies were conducted using four efficient biocontrol agents such as three fungi (Purpureocillium lilacinum, Pochonia chlamydosporia, Trichoderma harzianum) and one bacteria (Bacillus subtilis). Under laboratory condition, egg hatching and juvenile mortality tests were made to know the efficacy of biocontrol agents in the form of culture filtrate. Among these, P. lilacinum and P. chlamydosporia were almost equally effective in comparison with other biocontrol agents in controlling the root knot nematode in mango. P. lilacinum was very effective in inhibiting the egg hatching of M. incognita (78%) whereas P. chlamydosporia was best among the four organisms in juvenile mortality test (90.75%). Screening of mango rootstocks of five different varieties were also made to know their status of resistance against root knot nematode. In case of screening, the rootstock of polyembryonic variety H- 13- 1 was moderately resistant (Root knot index- 3) in comparison with the other four variety rootstocks.

1. Adegbite A.A. (2017) Archives of Phytopathology and Plant Protection, 50(7-8), 330-340.
2. Bailey D.J., Biran G.L., Kerry B.R. & Gilligan C.A. (2008) Plant Pathology, 57(2), 354-362.
3. Cayrol J. C. Djian C. & Pijarowski L. (1989) Revue de Nematologie, 12(4), 331-336.
4. Coyne D.L. & Ross J.L. (2014) Protocol for nematode resistance screening: root knot nematodes, Meloidogyne spp.
5. Esteves I., Peteira B., Atkins S. D., Magan N. & Kerry B. (2009) Mycological Research, 113(8), 867-876.
6. Jones J.T., Haegeman A., Danchin E.G., Gaur H.S., Helder J., Jones M. G. & Perry R. N. (2013) Molecular Plant Pathology, 14(9), 946-947.
7. Kavitha P.G., Jonathan E.L. & Nakkeeran S. (2012) Nematologia Mediterranea, 40(2), 203-206.
8. Massoud S., Meyer S.L., Roberts D. & Chitwood D. (2000) Nematology, 2(8), 871-879.
9. Mukhtar T., Arshad Hussain M. & Zameer kayani M. (2013) Phytopathologia Mediterranea, 52(1), 66-76.
10. Poornima K., Sivakumar M., Subramanian S. & Ramaraju K. (2017) Pest Management in Horticultural Ecosystems, 23(2), 71- 73.
11. Singh S. & Mathur N. (2010) Biocontrol Science and Technology, 20(3), 275-282.
12. Singh S., Pandey R.K. & Goswami B.K. (2013) Biocontrol Science and Technology, 23(12), 1469-1489.
13. Silva J.D.O., Santana M.V., Freire L.L., Ferreira B.D.S., & Rocha M.R.D. (2017) Ciência Rural, 47(10), 1- 7.
14. Terefe M., Tefera T. & Sakhuja P.K. (2009) Journal of Invertebrate Pathology, 100(2), 94-99.
15. Young M.J. & Sherman W.B. (1977) Evaluation of peach rootstocks for root-knot nematode resistance [Meloidogyne incognita and Meloidogyne javanica]. In Proceedings of the Florida State Horticultural Society, 68, 288- 292.