Evaluation of nematicides for Meloidogyne enterolobii management in sweetpotato.

IF 1.4 4区 生物学 Q2 ZOOLOGY
Journal of nematology Pub Date : 2024-08-24 eCollection Date: 2024-03-01 DOI:10.2478/jofnem-2024-0033
Jingwei Chen, Jukui Ma, Fangyuan Gao, Wei Tang, Dongjing Yang, Chengling Zhang, Zhao Liang, Yiping Xie, Houjun Sun
{"title":"Evaluation of nematicides for <i>Meloidogyne enterolobii</i> management in sweetpotato.","authors":"Jingwei Chen, Jukui Ma, Fangyuan Gao, Wei Tang, Dongjing Yang, Chengling Zhang, Zhao Liang, Yiping Xie, Houjun Sun","doi":"10.2478/jofnem-2024-0033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Sweetpotato is an important crop whose roots are consumed by people worldwide. <i>Meloidogyne enterolobii</i> stands out as a highly deleterious variant among the species of root-knot nematode that causes significant damage in sweetpotato. In the present study, the activity of four nematicides against <i>M. enterolobii</i> was assessed both <i>in vitro</i> and in growth cabinet experiments. After 48 hours of exposure, fluopyram and cyclobutrifluram had a greater negative effect on the motility of <i>M. enterolobii</i> second-stage juveniles (J2s) compared to fluensulfone and hymexazol, with respective median effective concentration (EC<sub>50</sub>) values of 0.204, 0.423, 22.335 and 216.622 mg L<sup>-1</sup>. When <i>M. enterolobii</i> eggs were incubated for 72 hours at the highest concentration of each nematicides, the inhibitory hatching effect of cyclobutrifluram (2.5 mg L<sup>-1</sup>), fluopyram (1.25 mg L<sup>-1</sup>) and fluensulfone (80 mg L<sup>-1</sup>) surpassed 85%, whereas hymexazol (640 mg L<sup>-1</sup>) was only 67%. Similar results were observed in growth cabinet experiments as well. The disease index (DI) and gall index (GI) were significantly decreased by all four nematicides compared to the control. However, the application of hymexazol did not yield a statistically significant difference in the egg masses index compared to the control, a finding which may be attributed to its potentially limited penetrability through the eggshell barrier. Overall, this study has demonstrated that all four nematicides effectively suppress <i>M. enterolobii</i> in sweetpotato, and this is the first report on the nematicidal activity of cyclobutrifluram and hymexazol against <i>M. enterolobii</i>.</p>","PeriodicalId":16475,"journal":{"name":"Journal of nematology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11364208/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of nematology","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/jofnem-2024-0033","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ZOOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Sweetpotato is an important crop whose roots are consumed by people worldwide. Meloidogyne enterolobii stands out as a highly deleterious variant among the species of root-knot nematode that causes significant damage in sweetpotato. In the present study, the activity of four nematicides against M. enterolobii was assessed both in vitro and in growth cabinet experiments. After 48 hours of exposure, fluopyram and cyclobutrifluram had a greater negative effect on the motility of M. enterolobii second-stage juveniles (J2s) compared to fluensulfone and hymexazol, with respective median effective concentration (EC50) values of 0.204, 0.423, 22.335 and 216.622 mg L-1. When M. enterolobii eggs were incubated for 72 hours at the highest concentration of each nematicides, the inhibitory hatching effect of cyclobutrifluram (2.5 mg L-1), fluopyram (1.25 mg L-1) and fluensulfone (80 mg L-1) surpassed 85%, whereas hymexazol (640 mg L-1) was only 67%. Similar results were observed in growth cabinet experiments as well. The disease index (DI) and gall index (GI) were significantly decreased by all four nematicides compared to the control. However, the application of hymexazol did not yield a statistically significant difference in the egg masses index compared to the control, a finding which may be attributed to its potentially limited penetrability through the eggshell barrier. Overall, this study has demonstrated that all four nematicides effectively suppress M. enterolobii in sweetpotato, and this is the first report on the nematicidal activity of cyclobutrifluram and hymexazol against M. enterolobii.

评估杀线虫剂在甘薯中的应用。
甘薯是一种重要作物,世界各地的人们都食用它的根。在根结线虫中,肠结线虫(Meloidogyne enterolobii)是一种高度有害的变种,会对甘薯造成严重危害。本研究在体外和生长柜实验中评估了四种杀线虫剂对 M. enterolobii 的活性。接触 48 小时后,氟吡菌酰胺和环丁氟虫酰胺与氟磺胺草酮和百菌清相比,对肠孢霉第二阶段幼虫(J2s)的运动有更大的负面影响,有效浓度(EC50)中值分别为 0.204、0.423、22.335 和 216.622 mg L-1。在每种杀线虫剂的最高浓度下孵化 72 小时,环丁氟虫腈(2.5 毫克/升-1)、氟虫酰胺(1.25 毫克/升-1)和氟磺隆(80 毫克/升-1)的抑制孵化效果超过 85%,而杀螨唑(640 毫克/升-1)的抑制孵化效果仅为 67%。在生长柜实验中也观察到了类似的结果。与对照组相比,四种杀线虫剂都能显著降低病害指数(DI)和虫瘿指数(GI)。不过,与对照组相比,施用百菌清对卵块指数的影响没有统计学意义上的显著差异,这可能是由于百菌清对卵壳屏障的渗透性有限。总之,这项研究表明,所有四种杀线虫剂都能有效抑制甘薯中的肠孢菌,这是首次报道环丁氟虫酰胺和醚菌唑对肠孢菌的杀线虫活性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of nematology
Journal of nematology 生物-动物学
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
7.70%
发文量
40
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Nematology is the official technical and scientific communication publication of the Society of Nematologists since 1969. The journal publishes original papers on all aspects of basic, applied, descriptive, theoretical or experimental nematology and adheres to strict peer-review policy. Other categories of papers include invited reviews, research notes, abstracts of papers presented at annual meetings, and special publications as appropriate.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信