Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Control of Meloidogyne incognita in sweetpotato with fluensulfone Cover

Control of Meloidogyne incognita in sweetpotato with fluensulfone

Open Access
|Apr 2019

Figures & Tables

Average percentage (n = 5 ± standard error) of harvested sweetpotato after four treatments assigned to three categories, market: marketable root size and quality, cull RKN: culled because of root-knot nematode damage, and cull other: culled because of non-nematode causes_ Field trials during 2016 (cultivar ‘O’Henry’) and 2017 (cultivar ‘Beauregard’) at SCREC, Irvine, CA_

Sweetpotato yield (%)
TreatmentMarketCull RKNCull other
2016
1. Untreated Control6.6 ± 4.3ba 70.3 ± 8.1a23.3 ± 6.0b
2. Metam-sodium (294 liter/ha)5.3 ± 2.3b66.3 ± 6.9a28.5 ± 7.4b
3. Fluensulfone pre-plant (3.36 kg/ha)28.3 ± 5.3a16.4 ± 5.5b55.4 ± 3.8a
4. Fluensulfone pre-plant (3.36 kg/ha) and 2× post (1.68 kg/ha + 1.68 kg/ha)35.1 ± 2.9a12.0 ± 2.1b53.0 ± 4.3a
Treatment P-value 0.0001 0.0043 0.003
2017
1. Untreated Control29 ± 8.0c58 ± 9.4a13 ± 3.0a
2. Metam-sodium (294 liter/ha)37 ± 4.0bc44 ± 7.0ab19 ± 4.3a
3. Fluensulfone pre-plant (1.96 kg/ha)54 ± 6.6ab35 ± 7.6bc11 ± 5.1a
4. Fluensulfone pre-plant (2.8 kg/ha)70 ± 3.2a21 ± 2.9c9 ± 2.9a
Treatment P-value 0.005 0.02 0.27

Average (n = 5) vigor of sweetpotato cultivars O’Henry (2016) and Beauregard (2017) in four treatments 20 and 50 d post-plant_ Field located at SCREC, Irvine, CA1_ Vigor rating from 1 to 10 (very poor − excellent) ± standard error_

Vigor rating (days after planting)
Treatment2050
2016
1. Untreated Control7.4 ± 0.897.2 ± 0.84
2. Metam-sodium (294 liter/ha)8.0 ± 0.717.8 ± 0.45
3. Fluensulfone pre-plant (3.36 kg/ha)7.6 ± 0.897.6 ± 0.55
4. Fluensulfone pre-plant (3.36 kg/ha) and 2× post (1.68 kg/ha + 1.68 kg/ha)7.8 ± 0.457.6 ± 0.55
treatment P-value 0.620.56
2017
1. Untreated Control4.8 ± 0.496.0 ± 0.32
2. Metam-sodium (294 liter/ha)6.0 ± 0.896.2 ± 0.37
3. Fluensulfone pre-plant (1.96 kg/ha)7.2 ± 0.667.2 ± 0.37
4. Fluensulfone pre-plant (2.8 kg/ha)6.4 ± 0.816.4 ± 0.40
Treatment P-value 0.190.20

Average yield (n = 5 ± standard error) of harvested sweetpotato after four treatments assigned to three categories, market (marketable size and quality), cull RKN (culled because of root-knot nematode damage), and cull other (culled because of non-nematode causes)_ Field trials were conducted during 2016 (cultivar O’Henry) and 2017 (cultivar Beauregard) at SCREC, Irvine, CA1_

Sweetpotato Yield (kg/plota)
TreatmentTotalMarketCull RKNCull other
2016
1. Untreated Control14.9 ± 1.5bb 0.8 ± 0.4b10.5 ± 1.5a3.6 ± 1.2b
2. Metam-sodium (294 liter/ha)19.7 ± 5.0b0.9 ± 0.3b11.7 ± 1.5a7.0 ± 3.5b
3. Fluensulfone pre-plant (3.36 kg/ha)29.6 ± 3.5a8.2 ± 0.2a4.6 ± 1.3b16.8 ± 3.0a
4. Fluensulfone pre-plant (3.36 kg/ha) and 2× post (1.68 kg/ha + 1.68 kg/ha)29.8 ± 3.0a10.1 ± 0.4a3.6 ± 0.7b16.1 ± 2.6a
Treatment P-value0.01 0.0001 0.0003 0.006
2017
1. Untreated Control24.8 ± 2.7a6.7 ± 1.9b15.0 ± 3.9a3.1 ± 0.6a
2. Metam-sodium (294 liter/ha)27.7 ± 2.8a9.9 ± 1.0b12.5 ± 2.7a5.3 ± 1.2a
3. Fluensulfone pre-plant (1.96 kg/ha)34.0 ± 2.4a18.4 ± 2.6a12.0 ± 2.6a3.5 ± 1.4a
4. Fluensulfone pre-plant (2.8 kg/ha)33.0 ± 3.6a23.3 ± 3.4a7.1 ± 1.4a2.6 ± 0.8a
Treatment P-value 0.13 0.002 0.32 0.30

Average root-knot nematode levels (n = 5 ± standard error) in soil and on harvested sweetpotato after four treatments_ Field trials during 2016 (cultivar O’Henry) and 2017 (cultivar Beauregard) at SCREC, Irvine, CA_

J2 per 100 g soil
TreatmentPre-plant (Pi)Post-plant (Pf)Eggs per g sweetpotato
2016
1. Untreated Control23 ± 16aa 198 ± 42a536 ± 38a
2. Metam-sodium (294 liter/ha)12 ± 5a300 ± 61a573 ± 133a
3. Fluensulfone pre-plant (3.36 kg/ha)14 ± 6 173 ± 51a79 ± 17b
4. Fluensulfone pre-plant (3.36 kg/ha) and 2x post (1.68 kg/ha + 1.68 kg/ha)14 ± 8a156 ± 33a98 ± 34b
Treatment P-value 0.95 0.29 0.0001
2017
1. Untreated Control21.2 ± 9.1a360 ± 107a304 ± 46a
2. Metam-sodium (294 liter/ha)25.0 ± 12.3a261 ± 52a228 ± 87a
3. Fluensulfone pre-plant (1.96 kg/ha)34.4 ± 14.4a396 ± 80a37 ± 16b
4. Fluensulfone pre-plant (2.8 kg/ha)49.0 ± 17.8a532 ± 132a21 ± 5b
Treatment P-value 0.65 0.54 0.0005
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21307/jofnem-2019-018 | Journal eISSN: 2640-396X | Journal ISSN: 0022-300X
Language: English
Page range: 1 - 8
Submitted on: Sep 17, 2018
Published on: Apr 26, 2019
Published by: Society of Nematologists, Inc.
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 times per year

© 2019 Antoon Ploeg, Scott Stoddard, J. Ole Becker, published by Society of Nematologists, Inc.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.