Strategies for managing of lesion nematode (Pratylenchus zeae) in sugarcane fields
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.6324Keywords:
Bacillus subtilis, biological control, lesion nematode, Purpureocillium lilacinum, sugarcaneAbstract
Lesion nematodes cause significant yield losses in sugarcane, with global reductions ranging from 10 to 40%. Identifying effective bioagents for soil application is critical to improving sugarcane production. Misdiagnosing nematode infestations as nutrient deficiencies or soil toxicity can limit nutrient availability to plants, exacerbating the problem. To address the challenges posed by lesion nematodes in sugarcane, the present investigations was conducted in a farmer’s field under the sugarcane variety CoC 25 in Vriddhachalam, Cuddalore district, Tamil Nadu, India. The study evaluated the efficacy of talc-based fungal antagonists, including Trichoderma viride, T. asperellum, Purpureocillium lilacinum, T. harzianum, Pochonia chlamydosporia, T. reesei and Clonostachys frosea as well as bacterial antagonist such as Bacillus firmus, B. subtilis and Lysinibacillus fusiformis against lesion nematode Pratylenchus zeae. These biocontrol agents were applied at 2.5 kg/ha and compared with the standard recommendation of carbofuran applied at 33 kg/ha. All tested fungal and bacterial antagonists significantly reduced the soil population density of lesion nematode. In the first year, sett treatment experiments demonstrated that the application of the fungal antagonist P.lilacinum at 2.5 kg/ha reduced nematode populations by 74.3% compared to the untreated control. This treatment also improved germination (84.26%), tillers count (166.62%), commercial cane sugar percentage (12.80%), cane yield (120.50%) and sugar yield (16.82%). Similarly, the bacterial antagonist, Bacillus subtilis at 2.5 kg/ha reduced nematode populations by 71.3% and improved germination (85.22%), tillers count (165.32%), commercial cane sugar content (12.30%), cane yield (118.60%) and sugar yield (16.66%). In the second year, combining P. lilacinum at 2.5 kg/ha with Fluensulphone 2% GR at 10 kg/ha resulted in a reduction of lesion nematode populations by 81.23% and achieved a maximum cane yield of 118.3 t/ha. The application of P. lilacinum proved to be highly effective in reducing nematode populations and is recommended for inclusion in an integrated nematode management module.
Downloads
References
Resha. Awareness of plant parasitic nematodes and preferred sugarcane varieties, among smallholder farmers in Meerut region. Inter J Creative Res Thoughts. 2023;11(12):145–57. https://www.ijcrt.org/papers/IJCRT2312249.pdf
Shamsul A, Bhuiyan KS, Jason E. Parasitic nematodes of sugarcane: A major productivity impediment and grand challenges in management plant disease. Plant Dis. 2024;108:2945–57. https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-11-23-2479-FE
Mehta UK. Nematode pests of sugarcane. In: Nematode pests of crops D.S. Bhatti and R.K. Walia (Eds). C.B.S. Publishers and Distributors, India; 1992. p.159–76.
Singh SP, Pant V, Khan AM, Saxena SK. Changes in the phenolic contents, related rhizosphere mycoflora and nematode population in tomato inoculated with Meloidogyne incognita as a result of soil amendment with organic matter. Indian J Nematol. 1985;15:197–201.
Mehta UK, Natesan N, Sundararaj P. Screening of sugarcane cultivars to Pratylenchus zeae for commercial release. Afro-Asian J Nematol. 1994;4:109–11.
Naganathan TG, Arumugam R, Kulasekaran M, Vadivelu S. Effect of antagonistic crops as intercrops on the control of banana nematodes. South Indian Horticulture. 1988;36:268–69.
Prasad D, Nagia DK, Sanjay K, Saini ML. Marigold plants for management of nematode population in fields. Curr Nematol. 1992;3:15–18.
Jonathan EI, Gajendran G, Manuel WW. Management of Helicotylenchus multicinctus in sugarcane with intercrops and organic amendments. Nematol Medit. 1999;27:221–23.
Cobb NA. Estimating the nematode population of soil. United States Department of Agriculture. 1918;Circular No:1–48.
Schindler AF. A simple substitute for a Baermann funnel. Plant Disease Reporter. 1961;45:747–48.
Chen JCP. Definitions and terms in sugar factory control, In: Cane sugar hand book. John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York; 1985. p.921–28.
Panse VG, Sukhatme PV. Statistical methods for agricultural workers (p.359). Indian Council of Agricultural Research; 1989
Mahendran S. Studies on the effect of intercropping, geometry and weed management on sugarcane. Ph.D. Thesis, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore; 1994. p.258
Jonathan EI, Krishnamoorthy SV, Manoharan ML, Muthukrishnan K. Effect of organic amendments on the control of sugarcane nematodes. Bharatiya Sugar. 1991;16: 39–49.
Jayakumar J. Integrated management of lesion nematode Pratylenchus zeae in sugarcane under field conditions. Ann Pl Protec Sci. 2016;24(1):157–59.
Jayakumar J. An evaluation of biocontrol agents for the management of sugarcane nematodes under field conditions. Ann Pl Protec Sci. 2019;27(2):261–63. https://doi.org/10.5958/0974-0163.2019.00054.5
Akhtar M, Abdul M. Roles of organic soil amendments and soil organisms in the biological control of plant-parasitic nematodes: a review. Bioresource Techno. 2000;70(1):35–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-8524(99)00154-6
Singh RS, Sittaramiah. Control of plant parasitic nematodes with organic soil amendments. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 1970;16:287–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/09670877009411771
Sahoo CR, Sahu SC. Studies on the effect of different oilcakes and two nematicides in the control of lesion nematode, Pratylenchus zeae in rice. Ann Pl Protec Sci. 1994;2:30–32.
Jayakumar J, Seenivasan N. Eco-friendly management of sugarcane nematode in field. Ann Pl Protec Sci. 2020;28(3):251–55. https://doi.org/10.5958/0974-0163.2020.00066.X
Mehta UK, Sundararaj P. Chemical control of nematodes in sugarcane. Ann Pl Protec Sci. 1996;4:1–7.
Haider MG, Askary TR. Management of plant parasitic nematodes through botanicals and growth of sugarcane. Ann Pl Protec Sci. 2011;19:433–36.
Haider MG, Kumkum D. Integrated management of nematodes and their effects on yield and juice quality of sugarcane. Ann Pl Protec Sci. 2004;12:143–46.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 J Jayakumar, T Senthilkumar, V Ravichandran, S Ganapathy, G Malathi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright and Licence details of published articles
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Open Access Policy
Plant Science Today is an open access journal. There is no registration required to read any article. All published articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC Attribution 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
