Relative susceptibilities of five fodder radish varieties (Raphanus sativus var. Oleiformis) to Meloidogyne chitwoodi

in Nematology
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

The fodder radish varieties Anaconda, Contra, Defender, Doublet and Terranova, known to have some partial resistance, were compared to the standard variety, Radical, to estimate their relative susceptibility (RS) for both population dynamic parameters of Meloidogyne chitwoodi and to evaluate Pi dependency. This approach must eventually lead to new screening methods for partial resistance tests. Plants were grown under controlled glasshouse conditions. Twelve densities of nematodes in five replications were used. Five plants per 7 l pot were allowed to grow for a period of 11 weeks until their early flowering stage. Few seedlings of all the varieties at Pi=32 and 64 J2 (g dry soil)−1, and all seedlings exposed to the highest density, Pi=128 J2 (g dry soil)−1, died within a week after germination. Replanted seedlings developed into normal plants. Total yield, expressed as total fresh weight, was not affected by M. chitwoodi. A lower percentage of plants with galls was observed on partially resistant varieties as compared with Radical. For Radical, a maximum multiplication rate (a) of 0.38 and a maximum population density (M) of 6.43 J2 (g dry soil)−1 were estimated. Radical proved to be a bad host for M. chitwoodi with all final populations lower than the Pi. The parameter estimates of (M) for Anaconda, Contra, Defender, Doublet and Terranova were 0.011, 0.006, 0.027, 0.020 and 0.009 J2 (g dry soil)−1, respectively. With Radical taken to be 100% susceptible, this resulted in RSM values of 0.17, 0.10, 0.42, 0.32 and 0.14% of these varieties, respectively, reducing high population levels of M. chitwoodi by more than 98%. There was no correlation between the rMgalls and the RSM values, indicating that scoring the number of galled plants will not provide a suitable measure for partial resistance.

Nematology

International Journal of Fundamental and Applied Nematological Research

Sections

References

AbadP.FaveryB.RossoM.N.Castagnone-SerenoP. (2003). Root-knot nematodes parasitism and host response: molecular basis of a sophisticated interaction. Molecular Plant Pathology 4, 217-224.

Al-RehiayaniS.HafezS. (1998a). Oil radish and rapeseed green manure crops for Columbia root-knot nematode and lesion nematode management on potato. Nematology 30, 485-523.

Al-RehiayaniS.HafezS. (1998b). Host status and green manure effect of selected crops on Meloidogyne chitwoodi race 2 and Pratylenchus neglectus. Nematropica 28, 213-230.

ArayaM.Caswell-ChenE.P. (1994). Host status of Crotalaria juncea, Sesamum indicum, and Dolichos lablab to Meloidogyne javanica. Journal of Nematology 26, 492-497.

BeenT.H.SchomakerC.H. (1986). Quantitative analysis of growth, mineral composition and ion balance of the potato cultivar Irene infested with Globodera pallida (Stone). Nematologica 32, 339-355.

BeenT.H.SchomakerC.H.MolendijkL.P.G. (2005). NemaDecide: a decision support system for the management of potato cyst nematodes. In: HaverkortA.J.StruikP.C. (Eds). Potato in progress: science meets practice. Wageningen, The Netherlands, Wageningen Academic Publishers, pp.  143-153.

BeenT.H.KorthalsG.SchomakerC.H.ZijlstraC. (2007). The MeloStop Project: sampling and detection of Meloidogyne chitwoodi and Meloidogyne fallax. Report 138. Wageningen, The Netherlands, Plant Research International, Wageningen University.

BirdD.M.OppermanC.H.WilliamsonV.M. (2008). Plant infection by root-knot nematode. Plant Cell Monographs 10, 1-5.

BoydstonR.A.MojtahediH.BrownC.R.AndersonT.RigaE. (2007). Hairy nightshade undermines resistance of potato breeding lines to Columbia root-knot nematode. American Journal of Potato Research 84, 245-251.

BrinkmanH.GoossensJ.J.M.Van RielH.R. (1996). Comparative host suitability of selected crop plants to Meloidogyne chitwoodi and Meloidogyne fallax. Anzeiger für Schädlingskunde Pflanzenschutz Umweltschutz 69, 127-129.

CaillaudM.C.DubreuilG.QuentinM.Perfus-BarbeochL.LecomteP.de Almeida EnglerJ.AbadP.RossoM.N.FaveryB. (2008). Root-knot nematodes manipulate plant cell function during a compatible interaction. Journal of Plant Physiology 165, 104-113.

EPPO (1991). Meloidogyne chitwoodi present in Netherlands. FAO Plant Protection Bulletin 39, 187.

EPPO (2004). Diagnostic protocols for regulated pests, European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization. EPPO Bulletin 34, 315-320.

EPPO (2013). PQR – EPPO database on quarantine pests. Available online at http://www.eppo.int.

GrecoN.Di VitoM. (2009). Population dynamics and damage levels. In: PerryR.N.MoensM.StarrJ.L. (Eds). Root-knot nematodes. Wallingford, UK, CAB International, pp.  246-269.

HoestraH. (1968). Replant disease of apple in the Netherlands. Mededelingen Landbouwhogeschool Wageningen 13, 1-105.

HolbrookC.C.KnauftD.A.DicksonD.W. (1983). A technique for screening peanut for resistance to Meloidogyne arenaria. Plant Disease 67, 957-958.

HuntD.J.HandooZ.A. (2009). Taxonomy, identification and principal species. In: PerryR.N.MoensM.StarrJ.L. (Eds). Root-knot nematodes. Wallingford, UK, CAB International, pp.  55-97.

HusseyR.S.BoermaH.R. (1981). A greenhouse screening procedure for root-knot nematode resistance in soybean. Crop Science 21, 794-796.

JacksonL.E.WylandL.J.StiversL.J. (1993). Winter cover crops to minimizenitrate losses in intensive lettuce production. Journal of Agricultural Science 121, 55-62.

KarssenG. (1995). Morphological and biochemical differentiation in Meloidogyne chitwoodi populations in the Netherlands. Nematologica 41, 314-315.

KarssenG. (1996). Differentiation between Meloidogyne chitwoodi and Meloidogyne fallax. Annual report diagnostic center, Plant Protection Service, Wageningen (NL), pp. 101-104.

KarssenG. (2002). The plant-parasitic nematode genus Meloidogyne in Europe. Leiden, The Netherlands, Brill.

KochD.W.GrayF.A.YunL.JonesR.GillJ.R.SchwopeM. (1999). Trap crop radish use in sugar beet-malt barley rotations of the Big Horn Basin. University of Wyoming Cooperative Extension Service Bulletin B-1068.

KochD.W.GrayF.A. (2002). Trap crops. In: PimentelD. (Ed.). Encyclopedia of pest management. New York, NY, USA, Marcel Dekker, pp.  852-854.

KristensenH.L.Thorup-KristensenK. (2004). Root growth and nitrate uptake of three different catch crops in deep soil layer. Soil Science Society of American Journal 68, 529-537.

KutywayoV.BeenT.H. (2006). Host status of six major weeds to Meloidogyne chitwoodi and Pratylenchus penetrans, including a preliminary field survey concerning other weeds. Nematology 8, 647-657.

McSorleyR.FrederickJ.J. (1995). Response of some common Cruciferae to root-knot nematodes. Journal of Nematology (Supplement) 27, 550-554.

MelakeberhanH.XuA.KravchenkoA.MennanS.RigaE. (2006). Potential use of arugula (Eurica sativa L.) as a trap crop for Meloidogyne hapla. Nematology 8, 793-799.

MoensM.PerryR.N.StarrJ.L. (2009). Meloidogyne species: a diverse group of novel and important plant parasites. In: PerryR.N.MoensM.StarrJ.L. (Eds). Root-knot nematodes. Wallingford, UK, CAB International, pp.  1-18.

NorshieP.M.BeenT.H.SchomakerC.H. (2011). Estimation of partial resistance in potato genotypes against Meloidogyne chitwoodi. Nematology 13, 477-489.

O’BannonJ.H.SantoG.S.NyczepirA.P. (1982). Host range of the Columbia root-knot nematode. Plant Disease 66, 1045-1048.

OostenbrinkM.HoestraH. (1961). Nematode damage and “Specific Sickness” in Rosa, Malus and Laburnum. Tijdschrift over Plantenziekten 67, 264-272.

PhillipsM.S. (1984). The effect of initial population density on the reproduction of Globodera pallida on partially resistant potato clones, derived from Solanum vernei. Nematologica 30, 57-65.

SantoG.S. (1994). Biology and management of root-knot nematodes on potato in the Pacific Northwest. In: ZehnerG.W.PowelsonM.L.JanssonR.K.RamanK.V. (Eds). Advances in potato pest biology and management. St. Paul, MN, USA, APS Press, pp.  193-201.

SantoG.S.O’BannonJ.H.FinleyA.M.GoldenA.M. (1980). Occurrence and host range of a new root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne chitwoodi) in the Pacific Northwest. Plant Disease 64, 951-952.

SchomakerC.H.BeenT.H. (2013). Plant growth and population dynamics. In: PerryR.N.MoensM. (Eds). Plant nematology, 2nd edition. Wallingford, UK, CAB International, pp.  301-330.

SeinhorstJ.W. (1962). Modifications of the elutriation method for extracting nematodes from soil. Nematologica 8, 117-128.

SeinhorstJ.W. (1970). Dynamics of populations of plant parasitic nematodes. Annual Review of Phytopathology 8, 131-156.

SeinhorstJ.W. (1984). Relation between population density of potato cyst nematode and measured degrees of susceptibility (resistance) of resistant potato cultivars and between this density and cyst content in the new generation. Nematologica 30, 66-76.

SeinhorstJ.W. (1988). The estimation of densities of nematode populations in soil and plants. Växtskyddsrapporter Jordbruk 51. Uppsala, Sweden, Research Information Centre of the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences.

SeinhorstJ.W. (1995). The effect of delay of attack of oats by Heterodera avenae on the relation between initial nematode density and plant growth, plant weight, water consumption and dry matter content. Nematologica 41, 487-504.

SeinhorstJ.W.OostromA. (1984). Comparison of multiplication rates of three pathotypes of potato cyst nematodes on various susceptible and resistant potato cultivars. Mededelingen van de Landbouwhogeschool en de Opzoekingsstations van de Staat te Gent 49, 605-611.

SeinhorstJ.W.OostromA.BeenT.H.SchomakerC.H. (1995). Relative susceptibilities of eleven potato cultivars and breeders’ clones to Globodera pallida pathotype Pa3, with a discussion of the interpretation of data from pot experiments. European Journal of Plant Pathology 101, 457-465.

SmithI.M.McNamaraD.G.ScottP.R.HoldernessM. (1997). Quarantine pests for Europe, 2nd edition. Wallingford, UK, CAB International/EPPO.

SteinerA.A. (1968). Soilless culture. In: Proceedings of the 6th Colloquium of the International Potash Institute, Florence, Italy. Berne, Switzerland, International Potash Institute, pp. 324-341.

StirlingG. (2002). Nematode management. In: PimentelD. (Ed.). Encyclopedia of pest management. New York, NY, USA, Marcel Dekker, pp.  530-532.

van der BeekJ.G.MugniéryD. (2008). Variation in host status of Brassica spp. for isolates of the Columbia root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne chitwoodi, and potential mechanisms. Nematology 10, 767-775.

VisserJ.H.M.van den BergW.KorthalsG.W. (2008). Ring test to evaluate four methods of resistance testing in fodder radish against Meloidogyne chitwoodi. Lelystad, The Netherlands, Applied Plant Research Unit for Arable Farming and Field Production Vegetables.

WalterE.S. (1984). Vegetable growing handbook, 2nd edition. Westport, CT, USA, AVI Publishing.

WesemaelW.M.L.MoensM. (2008). Quality damage on carrots (Daucus carota L.) caused by the root-knot nematode Meloidogyne chitwoodi. Nematology 10, 261-270.

WesemaelW.M.L.MoensM. (2012). Screening of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) for resistance against temperate root-knot nematodes (Meloidogyne spp.). Pest Management Science 68, 702-708.

ZoonF.C.PoleijL.M.SchlathölterM. (2003). Interaction between Raphanus populations and isolates of Meloidogyne chitwoodi and M. fallax. Quarantine root-knot nematodes in Europe. Awareness, Resistance, Management and Phytosanitary Policy Workshop, 9-10 October 2003, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 25. [Abstr.]

Figures

  • Relation according to equation (1) between the percentage of fodder radish plants with galled roots and the initial population density of Meloidogyne chitwoodi of the partially resistant and the standard variety Radical.

    View in gallery
  • The relation between Pi and Pf of Meloidogyne chitwoodi on the standard fodder radish variety Radical (equation (1)). Observations (○); means (●); bold solid line: 50% quantile; thin lines: upper and lower quantiles; dotted line: equilibrium line (Pi=Pf).

    View in gallery
  • The relation between Pi and Pf of Meloidogyne chitwoodi on the partially resistant fodder radish varieties compared with that of the standard variety Radical (equation (1)). Dotted line: equilibrium density (Pi=Pf); mean Pf values of Radical (●); bold solid line: 50% quantile of Radical; mean Pf values of partially resistant variety (△); large dotted line: 50% quantile of the partially resistant variety; thin lines: upper and lower quantiles of the partially resistant variety.

    View in gallery
  • The probability distribution of the difference between the Pf of the observations of Meloidogyne chitwoodi on fodder radish and the Pf according to equation (1) (left) compared with standard normal distribution with the same parameters (right).

    View in gallery

Information

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 23 23 11
Full Text Views 6 6 6
PDF Downloads 2 2 2
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0