Reniform Nematode Management Using Winter Crop Rotation and Residue Incorporation Methods in Greenhouse Experiments

	Trial 1		Trial 2
	Date	DAP^a	Date	DAP^a
1. Winter Crops
1.1 Planting and nematode inoculation	12 November 2021	0	29 December 2022	0
1.2 Harvest
• Dry OM treatments	25 January 2022	74	14 March 2022	75
• No OM treatments	27 January 2022	76	16 March 2022	76
• Fresh OM treatments	27 January 2022	76	16 March 2022	76
1.3 OM incorporation	28 January 2022	77	17 March 2022	78
2. Cotton
2.1 Planting	8 February 2022	0	28 March 2022	0
2.2 Plant growth assessment	6 April 2022	57	24 May 2022	57
2.2 Harvest	10 April 2022	61	27 May 2022	60

a Days after planting.

Reniform nematode (RN) in 100 cm³ of soil at winter crop termination in Trial 1 (A) and Trial 2 (B). Letters indicate treatment separation by Kruskal-Wallis with Bonferroni's method, P < 0.05. Data is displayed as boxplots.

Reniform nematode (RN) in 100 cm³ of soil at cotton harvest, by crop and organic matter incorporation method, in Trial 1 (A) and Trial 2 (B). Ctrl= fallow control, No OM= rotation with no shoot organic matter (OM) incorporated. Fresh OM= treatments with fresh shoot OM, Dry OM= treatments with dry shoot OM. Fresh roots were incorporated in each treatment. Letters indicate treatment separation by Kruskal-Wallis with Bonferroni's method, P < 0.05. Data is displayed as boxplots.

Reniform nematodes (RN) from cotton roots as affected by crop and organic matter incorporation treatments. Reniform nematode abundances are expressed as total RN (eggs plus vermiform nematodes) per gram of cotton roots in Trial 1 (A) and Trial 2 (B) Ctrl= fallow control, No OM= rotation with no shoot organic matter (OM) incorporated. Fresh OM= treatments with fresh shoot OM, Dry OM= treatments with dry shoot OM. Fresh roots were incorporated in each treatment. Letters indicate treatment separation by Kruskal-Wallis with Bonferroni's method, P < 0.05. Data is displayed as boxplots.

Reniform nematode (RN) reproduction factor (total RN per pot final population/inoculated initial population), by crop, at cotton harvest in Trial 1 (A) and Trial 2 (B). Ctrl= fallow control, No OM= rotation with no shoot organic matter (OM) incorporated. Fresh OM= treatments with fresh shoot OM, Dry OM= treatments with dry shoot OM. Fresh roots were incorporated in each treatment. Letters indicate treatment separation by Kruskal-Wallis with Bonferroni's method, P < 0.05. Data is displayed as boxplots.

Table 2.

Winter crop residue measurements by crop rotation and residue incorporation method.

Treatment	Trial 1^a
Treatment	Fresh weight (g) of residues added^b	Final OM added (%w/w)^c
p-value	***	***
Rotation+No OM^d
Carinata	20.3 ± 1.6 b	1.3 ± 0.1 bc
Hairy vetch	27.0 ± 5.2 b	1.8 ± 0.3 b
Oat	68.4 ± 10.9 a	4.5 ± 0.7 a
Rotation+Fresh OM
Carinata	37.8 ± 3.0 b	2.5 ± 0.2 b
Hairy vetch	26.0 ± 7.5 b	1.7 ± 0.5 b
Oat	78.5 ± 5.4 a	5.2 ± 0.3 a
Rotation+Dry OM
Carinata	28.4 ± 2.5 b	0.9 ± 0.0 bc
Hairy vetch	26.9 ± 3.4 b	1.4 ± 0.1 bc
Oat	91.1 ± 2.7 a	4.2 ± 0.3 a

Treatment	Trial 2
Treatment	Fresh weight (g) of residues added	Final OM added (%w/w)
p-value	***	***
Rotation+No OM
Carinata	27.9 ± 2.2 abc	0.6 ± 0.0 ef
Hairy vetch	27.3 ± 7.3 abc	1.4 ± 0.4 cd
Oat	44.7 ± 4.8 a	1.9 ± 0.1 bc
Rotation+Fresh OM
Carinata	34.4 ± 3.1 abc	2.2 ± 0.2 ab
Hairy vetch	22.7 ± 4.2 c	1.5 ± 0.2 cd
Oat	42.9 ± 5.5 ab	2.8 ± 0.3 a
Rotation+Dry OM
Carinata	23.8 ± 2.9 bc	0.6 ± 0.1 ef
Hairy vetch	15.2 ± 2.9 c	1.1 ± 0.2 de
Oat	21.2 ± 2.9 c	1.5 ± 0.2 cd

a Mean ± standard error (n=6). Letters within the same plant parameter (column) indicate significant differences among the treatments by trial (Tukey HSD, α=0.05) with ANOVA “***”= P ≤ 0.01.

b Fresh weight for Rotation+No OM=root fresh weight, for Rotation+ Fresh OM and Rotation+dry OM=root fresh weight+shoot fresh weight.

c Final OM added (%w/w) is root fresh weight for Rotation+No OM, fresh root weight+fresh shoot weight for Rotation+Fresh OM, and fresh root weight+dry shoot weight for Rotation+Dry OM.

d Rotation+No OM, Rotation+Fresh OM, and Rotation+Dry OM are rotation with no incorporation of shoot organic matter, incorporation of fresh organic matter, and incorporation of dry organic matter, respectively. Fresh roots were incorporated for each treatment.

Table 3.

Influence of winter crop rotation and residue incorporation method, on cotton growth and SPAD value in greenhouse conditions under the presence of reniform nematode.

Treatment	Canopy cover	Height (cm)	Root fresh weight (g)	Root fresh weight (g)	Shoot fresh weight (g)	SPAD
Treatment	Trial 1^a
p-value^b	**	***	***	ns	***	***
Control - (Fallow)	4.0 ± 0.3 abc	10.8 ± 0.4 ab	4.6 ± 0.4 e	1.4 ± 0.1	4.7 ± 0.3 ab	46.1 ± 0.9 a
Rotation+No OM^c
Carinata	5.2 ± 0.3 a	12.0 ± 0.5 a	13.3 ± 1.0 abc	1.3 ± 0	5.3 ± 0.3 a	38.8 ± 1.3 bc
Hairy vetch	4.0 ± 0.3 abc	10.7 ± 0.3 ab	11.1 ± 0.9 bcd	1.0 ± 0	4.3 ± 0.3 ab	36.6 ± 1.1 c
Oat	4.0 ± 0.5 abc	10.4 ± 0.6 ab	20.5 ± 2.7 a	1.0 ± 0	3.8 ± 0.3 ab	44.8 ± 1.2 ab
Rotation+Fresh OM
Carinata	4.9 ± 0.4 ab	11.8 ± 0.5 a	11.0 ± 1.9 bcd	1.3 ± 0.1	5.3 ± 0.4 a	41.6 ± 0.7 abc
Hairy vetch	3.9 ± 0.5 abc	11.0 ± 0.7 ab	6.3 ± 0.7 de	1.1 ± 0.2	4.1 ± 0.6 ab	38.2 ± 1.6 bc
Oat	2.9 ± 0.2 c	9.2 ± 0.5 b	14.5 ± 2.1 ab	0.9 ± 0.0	3.3 ± 0.2 b	42.1 ± 1.3 abc
Rotation+Dry OM
Carinata	3.8 ± 0.3 abc	10.0 ± 0.4 ab	7.4 ± 0.6 cde	1.0 ± 0.0	4.0 ± 0.2 ab	40.5 ± 1.4 abc
Hairy vetch	3.9 ± 0.4 abc	10.4 ± 0.6 ab	4.7 ± 0.8 e	0.9 ± 0.0	3.8 ± 0.3 ab	37.9 ± 1.7 c
Oat	3.2 ± 0.3 bc	9.1 ± 0.3 b	17.2 ± 2.2 ab	0.9 ± 0.0	3.2 ± 0.2 b	41.1 ±1.9 abc
Trial 2^a
p-value^b	ns	ns	***	ns	ns	ns
Control - (Fallow)	5.5 ± 0.5	12.0 ± 0.6	4.0 ± 0.3 b	1.6 ± 0.1	5.2 ± 0.4	56.2 ± 1.3
Rotation+No OM
Carinata	8.2 ± 1.7	14.0 ± 1.1	6.5 ± 0.6 ab	1.9 ± 0.1	6.8 ± 0.6	49.9 ± 0.7
Hairy vetch	8.9 ± 2.7	16.5 ± 2.1	8.3 ± 1.4 a	2.1 ± 0.3	6.8 ±1.2	47.8 ± 3.4
Oat	6.9 ± 0.8	13.5 ± 0.8	6.1 ± 0.6 ab	1.7 ± 0.1	5.4 ± 0.4	49.6 ± 1.5
Rotation+Fresh OM
Carinata	9.8 ± 1.7	15.4 ± 1.2	8.5 ± 0.8 a	2.4 ± 0.2	7.9 ± 0.8	49.2 ± 1.6
Hairy vetch	6.3 ± 1.2	13.1 ± 1.7	6.1 ± 1.3 ab	1.8 ± 0.3	5.9 ± 1.3	48.7 ± 2.0
Oat	7.4 ± 0.9	14 ± 0.8	5.4 ± 1.0 ab	2.0 ± 0.3	6.3 ± 0.8	52.4 ± 1.7
Rotation+Dry OM
Carinata	7.4 ± 1.6	14.6 ± 1.2	4.4 ± 1.0 b	1.8 ± 0.2	5.9 ± 0.7	49.2 ± 1.3
Hairy vetch	7.2 ± 0.7	14.3 ± 0.5	6.0 ± 0.6 ab	2.2 ± 0.1	6.7 ± 0.5	48.1 ± 1.8
Oat	6.8 ± 0.6	14.0 ± 0.7	4.8 ± 0.2 ab	1.6 ± 0	5.4 ± 0.3	53.4 ± 1.4

a Mean ± standard error. (n=6)

b Letters within the same plant parameter (column) indicate significant differences between treatments by trial (Tukey's HSD, P ≤ 0.05) with ANOVA “***”= P ≤ 0.01, “**”= P ≤ 0.05. No letters are indicated for P > 0.05, denoted as “ns”.

c Rotation+No OM, Rotation+Fresh OM, and Rotation+Dry OM are rotation with no incorporation of shoot organic matter, incorporation of fresh organic matter, and incorporation of dry organic matter, respectively. Fresh roots were incorporated for each treatment.

References

Authors

Metrics

Articles in this issue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jofnem-2023-0035 | Journal eISSN: 2640-396X | Journal ISSN: 0022-300X

Journal RSS Feed

Language: English

Submitted on: Mar 3, 2023

Published on: Sep 13, 2023

Published by: Society of Nematologists, Inc.

In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

Keywords:

cotton,

host,

oat,

Rotylenchulus reniformis,

Related subjects:

© 2023 Rebeca Sandoval-Ruiz, Zane J. Grabau, published by Society of Nematologists, Inc.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Volume 55 (2023): Issue 1 (February 2023)

Reniform Nematode Management Using Winter Crop Rotation and Residue Incorporation Methods in Greenhouse Experiments

Figures & Tables

Figure 1:

Table 1.

Figure 2:

Figure 3:

Figure 4:

Figure 5:

Table 2.

Table 3.

Paradigm

My account