A high throughput investigation on transfer tools for nematodes in various suspension
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.6506Keywords:
forceps, needle, nematode handling tools, picking efficiency, root-knot nematodes, suspension media, wire pickAbstract
This study evaluates the efficiency of three different tools-forceps, needle and wire pick for
transferring Root-Knot Nematode (RKN) females in various suspension media (water, formalin and
lactophenol). The performance of each tool was assessed based on picking time, number of females
transferred per minute, damage rates and overall picking efficiency. The wire picks consistently
demonstrated the highest picking efficiency, achieving 99 % in water suspension, 98 % in formalin
suspension and 98 % in lactophenol suspension. It outperformed both the forceps and needle in
terms of speed, precision and minimal damage. The forceps showed lower efficiency and higher
damage, particularly in water and lactophenol suspensions, while the needle, though more efficient
than the forceps, was less effective compared to the wire pick in all scenarios. These findings
highlight the wire pick as the most effective tool for RKN female and vermiform nematode transfer
across different media and emphasize the need for selecting appropriate tools to optimize nematode
handling in research and practical applications.
Downloads
References
Yang J, Wu X, Chen Y, Yang Z, Liu J, Wu D, Wang D. Combined attributes of soil nematode communities as indicators of grassland degradation. Ecological Indicators. 2021;131:108215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.108215
Rae R, Riebesell M, Dinkelacker I, Wang Q, Herrmann M, Weller AM, et al. Isolation of naturally associated bacteria of necromenic Pristionchus nematodes and fitness consequences. J Exper Biol. 2008;211(12):1927–36. https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.014944
Blaxter LM, De Ley P, Garey RJ, Liu XL, Scheldeman P, Vierstraete A, et al. A molecular evolutionary framework for the phylum Nematoda. Nature. 1998;392:71–75. https://doi.org/10.1038/32160
Jorge F, Perera A, Poulin R, Roca V, Carretero MA. Getting there and around: Host range oscillations during colonization of the Canary Islands by the parasitic nematode Spauligodon. Molecular Ecology. 2018;27(2):533–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.14458
Soliman GM, Ameen HH, Abdel-Aziz SM, El-Sayed GM. In vitro evaluation of some isolated bacteria against the plant parasite nematode Meloidogyne incognita. Bulletin of the National Research Centre. 2019;43:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42269-019-0200-0
Gugino BK, Ludwig JW, Abawi GS. An on-farm bioassay for assessing Meloidogyne hapla infestations as a decision management tool. Crop Protection. 2008;27(3-5):785–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2007.11.004
Grewal PS, Ehlers RU, Shapiro-Ilan DI. Nematodes as biocontrol agents. CABI Publishing; 2005. https://doi.org/10.1079/9780851990170.0000
Nicol JM, Turner SJ, Coyne DL, den Nijs L, Hockland S, Maafi ZT. Current nematode threats to world agriculture. In: Jones J, Gheysen G, Fenoll C, editors. Genomics and molecular genetics of plant-nematode interactions. Springer; 2011. p. 21–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0434-3_2
Xu M, Liu Q, Zhang Z, Liu X. Response of free-living marine nematodes to the southern Yellow Sea cold water mass. Marine Pollution Bulletin. 2016;105(1):58–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.02.067
Campos-Herrera R, El-Borai FE, Stuart RJ, Graham JH, Duncan LW. Entomopathogenic nematodes, phoretic Paenibacillus spp. and the use of real-time quantitative PCR to explore soil food webs in Florida citrus groves. Journal of Invertebrate Pathology. 2011;108(1):30–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jip.2011.06.005
Jenkins WR. A rapid centrifugal-flotation technique for separating nematodes from soil. Plant Disease Reporter. 1964;48:692.
Oostenbrink M. Estimating nematode populations by some selected methods. Nematology. 1960;6:85–102.
Hooper DJ. Handling, fixing, staining and mounting nematodes. In: Southey JF, editor. Laboratory methods for work with plant and soil nematodes. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office; 1986. p. 59–80 https://doi.org/10.1163/187529286x00408
Eisenback JD, Hunt DJ. Handling, fixing, staining and mounting nematodes. In: Perry RN, Moens M, Hunt DJ, editors. Techniques for work with plant and soil nematodes. CABI; 2021. p. 71–87 https://doi.org/10.1079/9781786391759.0071
Perry RN, Moens M. Plant nematology. CAB International; 2006. https://doi.org/10.1079/9781845930561.0000
Bongers T, Ferris H. Nematode community structure as a bioindicator in environmental monitoring. Trends in Ecology and Evolution. 1999;14(6):224–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0169-5347(98)01583-3
Gaugler R, Kaya HK. Entomopathogenic nematodes in biological control. CRC Press; 2018. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781351071741
Flegg JJM. Extraction of Xiphinema and Longidorus species from soil by a modification of Cobb’s decanting and sieving technique. Annals of Applied Biology. 1967;60(3):429–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7348.1967.tb04497.x
Barker KR, Carter CC, Sasser JN, editors. Nematode extraction and bioassays. In: An Advanced Treatise on Meloidogyne, Vol. II: Methodology. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State University Graphics; 1985. p. 19–35
Walia RK, Bajaj HK. General techniques for nematode identification with light microscopy. In: Identification of Important Plant Parasitic Nematodes. Department of Nematology, CCS HAU Hisar; 2010. p. 1–11
Montarry J, Mimee B, Danchin EG, Koutsovoulos GD, Ste-Croix DT, Grenier E. Recent advances in population genomics of plant-parasitic nematodes. Phytopathology. 2021;111(1):40–48. https://doi.org/10.1094/phyto-09-20-0418-rvw
Perry RN, Hunt DJ, Subbotin SA, editors. Techniques for work with plant and soil nematodes. CABI; 2020. https://doi.org/10.1079/9781786391759.0000
Atkinson HJ. Root-knot nematodes (Meloidogyne species) systematics, biology and control. Physiological Plant Pathology. 1980;16(2):301–02. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-4059(80)90044-2
Stevenson JA. Plant pathology: An advanced treatise. JG Horsfall, AE Dimond, editors. In: The Diseased Plant. Academic Press; 1959. p. 674 https://doi.org/10.1126/science.131.3410.1368
Whitehead AG, Hemming JR. A comparison of methods for extracting nematodes from soil. Annual Applied Biology. 1965;55(2):25–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7348.1965.tb07864
Senthilkumar M, Amaresan N, Sankaranarayanan A. Extraction of nematodes from plant materials. In: Plant-Microbe Interactions. Springer Protocols Handbooks. Humana, New York, NY; 2021. p. 77 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-0716-1080-0_77
Viaene N, Hallmann J, Molendijk LPG. Methods for nematode extraction. In: Perry RN, Hunt DJ, Subbotin SA, editors. Techniques for work with plant and soil nematodes. CABI; 2021. p. 12–41 https://doi.org/10.1079/9781786391759.0012
Cobb NA. A nematode formula. Bulletin of the U.S. Department of Agriculture; 1890. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.46872
Stirling GR. Biological control of plant-parasitic nematodes: An ecological perspective, a review of progress and opportunities for further research. In: Davies K, Spiegel Y, editors. Biological Control of Plant-Parasitic Nematodes. Progress in Biological Control, vol 11. Springer, Dordrecht; 2011. p. 1–38 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9648-8_1
Boyd WA, McBride SJ, Rice RJ, Snyder DW, Freedman JH. A high-throughput method for assessing chemical toxicity using a Caenorhabditis elegans reproduction assay. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology. 2010;245(2):153–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2010.02.014
Xian B, Shen J, Chen W, Sun N, Qiao N, Jiang D, et al. Worm Farm: a quantitative control and measurement device towards automated Caenorhabditis elegans aging analysis. Aging Cell. 2013;12(3):398–409. https://doi.org/10.1111/acel.12063
Buckingham SD, Partridge FA, Sattelle DB. Automated, high-throughput, motility analysis in Caenorhabditis elegans and parasitic nematodes: Applications in the search for new anthelmintics. Int J Parasitol: Drugs and Drug Res. 2014;4(3):226–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpddr.2014.10.004
Downloads
Published
Versions
- 28-01-2025 (2)
- 25-01-2025 (1)
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 P Kalaiarasan, J Berliner, P Senthilkumar, A Arun
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).
