Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Research Articles

Early Access

Comparative efficacy of eco-compatible disease management strategies combined with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry profiling of a potent natural formulation against Sclerotinia sclerotiorum infecting rapeseed-mustard (Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.)

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.15873
Submitted
5 June 2026
Published
09-11-2026

Abstract

Rapeseed-mustard (Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.) is a major oilseed crop that contributes significantly to edible oil production and farm income. However, its productivity is greatly affected by stem rot caused by Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Lib.) de Bary, a destructive pathogen capable of causing severe yield losses under favourable environmental conditions. The present study evaluated eco-friendly disease management approaches involving natural formulations, biological control agents and alcoholic plant extracts as sustainable alternatives to conventional fungicides. In vitro studies revealed that Propiconazole 11.9 % + Azoxystrobin 7.1 % SE, Thiophanate methyl 70 % WP and Difenoconazole 11.4 % + Azoxystrobin 18.20 % suspension concentrate (SC) completely inhibited the growth of S. sclerotiorum at 150 ppm. Among the natural formulations, Jeevamrut showed the highest mycelial growth inhibition (63.17 %). Among the bioagents, Trichoderma asperellum was the most effective, recording 76.56 % inhibition of the pathogen. Among the alcoholic plant extracts, Melia azedarach L. exhibited the highest antifungal activity, suppressing fungal growth by 40.16 % at a 50 % concentration. Field experiments demonstrated that the integrated application of Jeevamrut, T. asperellum and M. azedarach provided the highest disease control (73.28–82.84 %), surpassing the chemical check. Gas chromatography–mass spectrometry analysis of Jeevamrut identified 22 bioactive compounds, including fatty acid esters, phenolics and antimicrobial metabolites associated with pathogen suppression and plant growth promotion. The study highlights the potential of integrating biological and botanical inputs for effective stem rot management, reducing dependence on chemical fungicides and promoting environmentally safe, economically viable and sustainable mustard production systems.

References

  1. 1. Nagaharu U. Genome analysis in Brassica with special reference to the experimental formation of B. napus and peculiar mode of fertilization. Jpn J Bot. 1935;7:389–452.
  2. 2. Patel AM, Prajapati DB, Patel DG. Heterosis and combining ability studies in Indian mustard [Brassica juncea (L.) Czern. & Coss.]. Indian J Sci Technol. 2012;1:38–40.
  3. 3. Kumar A, Bharati AK, Yadav S, Pandey HC, Kumar V. Influence of biofertiliser and farmyard manure on growth, yield and seed quality of mustard (Brassica juncea L.) under rainfed conditions. Int J Agric Sci Res. 2017;7(2):197–202.
  4. 4. Directorate of Economics and Statistics. Agriculture statistical year book India 2016. Ministry of Agriculture, India; 2016.
  5. 5. Sawicka B, Kotiuk E, Bienia B, Krochmal-Marczak B, Wójcik S. The importance of mustard (Sinapis alba), Indian mustard (Brassica juncea var. sareptana) and black mustard (Brassica nigra) in nutrition and phytotherapy. Acta Sci Pol Agric. 2007;6(2):17–27.
  6. 6. Chattopadhyay C, et al. Sclerotinia stem rot of Indian mustard: an overview. Phytopathology. 2015;105:1440–51.
  7. 7. Albert D, Dumonceaux T, Carisse O, Beaulieu C, Filion M. Combining desirable traits for a good biocontrol strategy against Sclerotinia sclerotiorum. Microorganisms. 2022;10(6):1189. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms10061189
  8. 8. Alkooranee JT, et al. Detecting the hormonal pathways in oilseed rape behind induced systemic resistance by Trichoderma harzianum TH12 to Sclerotinia sclerotiorum. PLoS One. 2017;12(1):e0168850. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0168850
  9. 9. Rathi A, Jattan M, Punia R, Singh S, Kumar P, Avtar R, et al. Morphological and molecular diversity of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum infecting Indian mustard. J Plant Biochem Biotechnol.2018;71(3):407–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42360-018-0054-7
  10. 10. Punia R, Avtar R, Singh M, Singh VK, Mahavir, et al. Phenotyping of F2 populations of Indian mustard for Sclerotinia rot caused by Sclerotinia sclerotiorum under artificial inoculation conditions. J Pharmacogn Phytochem. 2020;8(3):1309–11. https://doi.org/10.22271/chemi.2020.v8.i3r.9379
  11. 11. Kewate B, Singh D, Singh V, Malik NP, Kumar R. In vitro evaluation of botanicals against Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Lib.) de Bary causing stem rot disease in rapeseed-mustard. J Pharmacogn Phytochem. 2020;9(8):3733–41. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2020.908.431
  12. 12. White TJ, Bruns T, Lee S, Taylor J. Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA genes for phylogenetics. In: Innis MA, Gelfand DH, Sninsky JJ, White TJ, editors. PCR protocols: a guide to methods and applications. New York: Academic Press; 1990. p. 315–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-372180-8.50042-1
  13. 13. Fatehpuria PK, Sasode RS, Pandya RK, Singh R, Gupta JC. Efficacy of different inoculation techniques for testing the pathogenicity of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum causing Sclerotinia blight of Brassica juncea. Int J Chem Stud. 2017;5(5):1937–40.
  14. 14. Jan N, Bhat MY, Wani AH, Malik MA, Jan M. Incidence of white mould of bean and characterization of its causal pathogen, Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, in Kashmir Valley, India. Arch Phytopathol Plant Prot. 2023;56(8):636–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/03235408.2023.2213396
  15. 15. Zamani-Noor N, Brand S, Noshin F, Söchting HP. Variation in pathogenicity and subsequent production of sclerotia of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum isolates in different cover crops, flower strips and weeds. Plant Dis. 2024;108(6):1688–94. https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-05-23-0850-RE
  16. 16. Schmitz H. Poisoned food technique for the evaluation of fungicidal properties of chemicals. Ind Eng Chem. 1930;22(4):361–63. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac50072a004
  17. 17. Vincent JM. Distortion of fungal hyphae in the presence of certain inhibitors. Nature. 1927;159–80.
  18. 18. National Centre for Organic and Natural Farming. Inputs for natural farming. https://nconf.dac.gov.in/uploads/books_manual/Inputs-Natural-Farming
  19. 19. Dennis C, Webster J. Antagonistic properties of species-groups of Trichoderma. Trans Br Mycol Soc. 1971;57(1):25–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-1536(71)80077-3
  20. 20. Rai D, Ranjan RK, Dwivedi M. Detection of Sclerotinia rot of basil, caused by Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, for the first time in Bihar, India. Australas Plant Dis Notes. 2024;19(1):17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13314-024-00540-7
  21. 21. Prakash N, Sinha AP. In vitro studies of inhibitory activity of plant extracts and cow urine on mycelial growth of stem rot, Sclerotium oryzae of rice. J Appl Nat Sci. 2017;9(1):24–28. https://doi.org/10.31018/jans.v9i1.1142
  22. 22. Upadhyay P, Tiwari AK. In vitro evaluation of botanical extracts, animal wastes, organic and inorganic salts against Sclerotinia rot of rapeseed-mustard caused by Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Lib.) de Bary. Int J Curr Microbiol App Sci. 2019;8(9):851–60. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2019.809.102
  23. 23. Arashika, Thakur BR. Evaluation of organic products and bioagents against Sclerotinia sclerotiorum causing white rot of peas. J Plant Dis Sci. 2023;18(2):99–103. https://doi.org/10.48165/jpds.2023.1802.06
  24. 24. Basak AB, Lee MW, Lee TS. Inhibitive activity of cow urine and cow dung against Sclerotinia sclerotiorum of cucumber. Korean J Plant Pathol. 2002;30(3):175–79. https://doi.org/10.4489/MYCO.2002.30.3.175
  25. 25. Upadhyay P. Eco-friendly management of stem rot of berseem caused by Sclerotinia spp. [MSc thesis]. Palampur: CSK Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya; 2020.
  26. 26. Shivpuri A, Gupta RBL. Evaluation of different fungicides and plant extracts against Sclerotinia sclerotiorum causing stem rot of mustard. Indian Phytopathol. 2001;54:272–74.
  27. 27. Chattopadhyay C, Meena PD, Kumar S. Management of Sclerotinia rot of Indian mustard using eco-friendly strategies. J Mycol Plant Pathol. 2002;32:194–200.
  28. 28. Chand PC, Rai DR, Singh SN. In vitro evaluation of different fungicides on the mycelial growth and sclerotia production of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum. Indian Phytopathol. 2009;62(1):37–40.
  29. 29. Pandey P, Kumar R, Mishra P. Integrated approach for the management of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Lib.) de Bary causing stem rot of chickpea. Indian Phytopathol. 2011;64:37–40.
  30. 30. Rakesh, Rathi AS, Kumar A, Singh H. Evaluation of fungicides for the control of Sclerotinia stem rot of Indian mustard caused by Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Lib.) de Bary. J Appl Nat Sci. 2016;8(1):441–44. https://doi.org/10.31018/jans.v8i1.813
  31. 31. Fagodiya RK. Physiological and management studies of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Lib.) de Bary causing stem rot of coriander [MSc thesis]. Jobner: SKN Agriculture University; 2016. p. 50–74.
  32. 32. Kumawat R. Physiological and management studies of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Lib.) de Bary causing Sclerotinia rot of fennel [MSc thesis]. Jobner: SKN College of Agriculture; 2017.
  33. 33. Meena N. Sclerotinia rot of tomato incited by Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Lib.) de Bary and its management [MSc thesis]. Jobner: SKN College of Agriculture; 2018.
  34. 34. Bhabani SR, Ashim KM, Chandra SC, Rabindra P, Ram KC, Dinesh R, et al. Comparative in vitro efficacy of fungicides and homoeopathic preparations against Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Lib.) de Bary in ajwain. Plant Sci Today. 2026;13(2):1–8. https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.12746
  35. 35. Kaur HP, Shukla A, Joshi M, Bajpai VK. In vitro evaluation of Trichoderma species against Sclerotinia sclerotiorum causing white rot of Indian mustard. J Environ Biol. 2003;24:207–10.
  36. 36. Kapil RK, Kapoor AS. Management of white rot of pea incited by Sclerotinia sclerotiorum using Trichoderma spp. and biopesticides. Indian Phytopathol. 2005;58:10–16.
  37. 37. Yang L, Li GQ, Jiang D, Huang HC. Water-assisted dissemination of conidia of the mycoparasite Coniothyrium minitans in soil. Biocontrol Sci Technol. 2009;19:779–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/09583150903118486
  38. 38. Zaher EAM, Abada KAM, Zyton MAL. Effect of combination between bioagents and solarization on management of crown and stem rot of Egyptian clover. J Plant Sci. 2013;1(3):43–50.
  39. 39. Khan I. Biology and management of stem rot of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea L.) caused by Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Lib.) de Bary [PhD thesis]. Udaipur: Maharana Pratap University of Agriculture and Technology; 2021.
  40. 40. Upadhyay P, Banyal DK. Effect of integration of eco-friendly components for the management of stem rot of berseem caused by Sclerotinia spp. under in vivo conditions. J Mycol Plant Pathol. 2024;5(3):261–66. https://doi.org/10.59467/JMPP.2024.54.261
  41. 41. Bangari G. Eco-friendly strategies for disease management in Indian mustard with special reference to Sclerotinia stem rot and variability among Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Lib.) de Bary isolates [PhD thesis]. Pantnagar: Govind Ballabh Pant University of Agriculture and Technology; 2011.
  42. 42. Sridharan AP, Sugitha T, Karthikeyan G, Nakkeeran S, Sivakumar U. Metabolites of Trichoderma longibrachiatum EF5 inhibit the soil-borne pathogen Macrophomina phaseolina by triggering amino sugar metabolism. Microb Pathog.2021;150:104714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micpath.2020.104714
  43. 43. Sunitha R, et al. Elucidation of biopotentiators in organic-based formulation Bijamrith from Gir cow (Bos indicus) excrements and urine using GC-MS. Indian J Anim Res. 2023. https://doi.org/10.18805/IJAR.B-5204
  44. 44. Kumar R, Kaushik JK, Mohanty AK, Kumar S. Identification of bioactive components behind the antimicrobial activity of cow urine by peptide and metabolite profiling. Anim Biosci. 2023;00(1):1–13. https://doi.org/10.5713/ab.22.0249
  45. 45. Nautiyal V, Dubey RC. FTIR and GC-MS analyses of potential bioactive compounds of cow urine and its antibacterial activity. Saudi J Biol Sci. 2021;28(4):2432–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2021.01.041
  46. 46. Jandaik S, Thakur P, Kumar V. Efficacy of cow urine as plant growth enhancer and antifungal agent. Adv Agric. 2015;2015:620368. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/620368
  47. 47. National Center for Biotechnology Information. PubMed Central. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.