See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/315654280

ORIGINAL ARTICLES Efficacy of Six Nematicides and Six Commercial

Bioproducts Against Root-Knot Nematode, Meloidogyne incognita on Tomato

Article  in  Journal of Applied Sciences Research · January 2013

CITATIONS READS

8 658

3 authors, including:

Hosny Mohamed Raddy

Al-Azhar University
3 PUBLICATIONS   8 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Toward effective I.P.M programs. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Hosny Mohamed Raddy on 26 March 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 4410
Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 9(7): 4410-4417, 2013
ISSN 1819-544X
This is a refereed journal and all articles are professionally screened and reviewed

ORIGINAL ARTICLES
Efficacy of Six Nematicides and Six Commercial Bioproducts Against Root-Knot
Nematode, Meloidogyne incognita on Tomato.
1
Raddy, H.M.; 1Fouad, A.F.Ali.; 2Montasser, S.A; 1Abdel-Lateef, M.F.; 1EL-Samadisy, A.M.
1
Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, Al-Azhar University, Egypt.
2
Department of Agricultural Zoology and Nematology, Faculty of Agriculture,Al-Azhar University, Egypt.

ABSTRACT

A pot experiment was conducted to evaluate the nematicidal activity of six granular nematicides namely
cadusafos, carbofuran, ethoprophos, fosthiazate, fenamiphos and oxamyl in comparison with six commercial
bioproducts viz., Biozeid containing (Trichoderma album), Bioarc (Bacillus megaterium), Nemaless(Serratia
marcescens), Micronema (Pseudomonas sp.and Bacillus sp.), Nemafree (Serratia sp.) and QL-Agri®35
containing plant extract from (Quillaja saponaria). All materials were applied at their recommended rates
against root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne incognita, infecting tomato under greenhouse conditions. The results
indicated that, all traditional nematicides showed higher nematicidal effects than the examined bioproducts.
Application of cadusafos provided the maximum reduction of nematode infection. It reduced the numbers of the
galls, J2 in soil, developmental stages within root, eggmasses and finally the nematode population density by
96.49, 94.57, 90, 98.56 and 99.6% respectively. Biozeid which based on fungi exhibited more nematicidal
activity than those based on bacteria. QL-Agri®35 gave satisfactory nematicidal activity. Generally, all
treatments improved tomato growth criteria as measured by fresh weight of shoots and roots as well as lengths
of both systems compared with check plants. It could be concluded that the application of cadusafos and Biozeid
as items of integrated control programe might provide an effective control of M. incognita on tomato.

Key words: Nematicides, Bioproducts, Tomato, Root-knot nematodes, Meloidogyne incognita.

Introduction

Root-knot nematodes (Meloidogyne spp.) are among the most economically damaging genera of plant
parasitic nematodes on horticultural and field crops, causing an estimated US$100 billion loss globally on an
annual basis (Oka et al., 2000). Meloidogyne incognita ( Kofoid & White) Chitwood, is one of the most harmful
root -knot nematode species,which infects a wide range of vegetable crops in Egypt (Ibrahim et al., 2000 ).
Root knot nematodes are among the most difficult crop-pest to be controlled. Several methods are known to
manage the root knot nematode. They include the use of nematicides, organic amendments, resistance cultivars,
soil solarization and biological control, which have been used with different levels of successes for the
protection of tomato plants (Randhawa et al., 2001; Sakhuja and Jain, 2001). Although chemical nematicides are
effective, easy to apply and show rapid effects, they have begun withdrawn from the market owing to concerns
about public health and environmental safety (Rich et al., 2004).Also, nematicides have higher cost of
application, limited availability in many developing countries or their diminished effectiveness following
repeated applications (Ahmad and Siddiqui, 2009; Schneider et al., 2003).
Attention on environmental safety has led to the search of alternative strategies including the use of
rhizosphere microorganisms and plant extracts.Microorganisms that can grow in the rhizosphere provide the
front-line defense for roots against pathogen attack and are ideal for use as biocontrol agents (Weller,
1988).Fungi and bacteria are the two major groups of microbs which are abundant in soil and some of them
have shown great potential as biocontrol agents for nematodes (Siddiqui and Mahmood,1999 ; Khalil et al.,
2012b).Also, manyplant extracts have shown nematicidal activity such as those extracted from neem tree (Ntalli
et al., 2009), and Quillaja saponaria tree (Giannkuo, 2011).
Therefore, the present investigation was conducted to evaluate the performance of certain bioproducts
available in the local market (i.e. Bioarc, Biozeid, Nemaless, Micronema, Nemfree and QL-Agri®35) in
comparison with six granular synthetic nematicides (i.e. cadusafos, fosthiazate, ethoprop, fenamiphos,
carbofuran and oxamyl) for the management of Meloidogyne incognita infecting tomato plants under
greenhouse conditions. Also, the impact of all treatments on tomato plant growth was undertaken.

Corresponding Author: Raddy, H.M., Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, Al-Azhar University, Egypt.
E-mail: hmraddy@gmail.com
 4411
J. Appl. Sci. Res., 9(7): 4410-4417, 2013

Materials and Methods

Examined nematicides and bioproducts:

All the nematicides used in the present work are listed in Table (1). Six granular nematicides viz.,
cadusafos, carbofuran were purchased from Delta Agrochemicals Company, Egypt; ethoprophos from My Trade
Company,Egypt; fosthiazate from Syngenta Agro, Egypt); fenamiphos from Agrimatco Co,Egypt ;oxamyl from
DuPont Chem. Co, Egypt. And six commercial Bioproducts viz., Biozeid and Bioarc were obtained from
Organic Bio Technology Co; Nemaless, Micronema and Nemafree were supplied from Agriculture Research
Center, Giza, Egypt. The plant extract QL Agri®35 was obtained from DOTRA Co, Haram, Giza, Egypt.

Pot experiment:

Clay pots (15cm in diameter) were filled with one kg steam sterilized sandy clay soil (1:1 v/v). Three week
old Seedlings of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum L. cv. Super Strain B) were transplanted in each pot at one
seedling / pot. A week later, the plants were inoculated with 1000 freshly hatched second stage juveniles (J2) of
Meloidogyne incognita propagated originally on susceptible eggplant (Solanum melongena L. cv. Aross). The
suspended J2 were added in 10ml of water and pipetted into 4 equidistant 3cm-deep holes surrounding the root
zone of each plant. Immediately after inoculation the holes were covered with soil.
Cadusafos, ethoprophos and bioproducts were applied to the soil directly after inoculation while other
nematicides were applied after 3 days of inoculation. All nematicides were applied equivalent to the
recommended rates based on formulated form (Table, 1) by incorporating the exact amount in the upper 5cm3 of
soil pot. The tested bioproducts were applied at recommended rates as soil drench by suspending the required
quantity of each pot in 10ml of water. Untreated inoculated pots served as control. All treatments were
replicated four times, arranged in a complete randomized block design on a bench in a greenhouse at 30±5°C
and watered as needed. Forty five days after inoculation, tomato plants were uprooted and washed free of
adhering soil. The length and the fresh weight of shoot and root were recorded and the % increase was
calculated:-

Also, the number of second stage juveniles (J 2) per pot soil was determined for each of the plants. The
roots were stained in boiling fuchsin lactophenol (Goody, 1957) and examined to assess the number of galls per
root, egg masses per root, developmental stage within the root system and average of eggs number per egg mass
estimated by (Hussey & Barker, 1973). The reduction of nematode parameters was calculated:-

Nematode reproduction factor (Rf) was calculated according to the formula:- Rf =

Pi = nematode initial inoculum, Pf = nematode final population.
The smaller the reproduction factor the greater the efficacy of the candidate nematicide.

Statistical analysis:

Data were subjected to ANOVA by using Costat program (1988) and significant difference among the
treatments was portioned by Duncan's(1955) multiple range test at probability levels of P = 0.05.

Results And Discussion

Results listed in Table (2) and Fig (1) indicated that, all treatments had different degree of nematicidal
activities comparing to untreated check. Generally, traditional nematicides showed higher nematicidal actions
than commercial bioproducts in relation to reduction of galls / root, number of J2 in soil, number of
developmental stages within root, number of eggmasses/ root and number of eggs / eggmass. This result is in
agreement with those obtained previously (El-Sherbiny et al., 2007; Hadad and Al- Hashmi, 2012; Khalil et al.,
2012a). On contrary, Radwan et al. (2012) reported that the usage of the highest rate of Bioarc and Biozeid gave
greater reduction in nematode infection than oxamyl and carbofuran.
 4412
J. Appl. Sci. Res., 9(7): 4410-4417, 2013

Table 1: List of nematicides and bioproducts used in the present study.

Common name (Trade Rate of application (g
Nematicides Active ingredient
name) or ml /pot )
Cadusafos
S,S-di-sec-butyl O-ethyl phosphorodithioate 0.1 g
(Rugby® 10%G)
(RS)-S-sec-butyl O-ethyl 2-oxo-1,3-thiazolidin-
Fosthiazate (Nemathorin®
Traditional nemticides

3ylphosphonothioate; (RS) 0.055g

10%G)
-3-[secbutylthio(ethoxy)phosphinoyl]-1,3-thiazolidin-2-one
Fenamiphos (Nemacur® Ethyl 4-methylthio-m-tolyl
0.1 g
10%G) isopropylphosphoramidate
Ethoprophos (Mocap®
O-ethyl S,S-dipropyl phosphorodithioate 0.15g
10%G)
Oxamyl N,N-dimethyl-2-methylcarbamoyloxyimino-
0.1 g
(Vydate® 10%G) 2-(methylthio)acetamide
Carbofuran (Furadan® 2,3-Dihydro-2,2-dimethylbenzofuran-
0.1 g
10%G) 7-yl methylcarbamate
Bioarc WP Bacillus megaterium(25x106 cfu/g) 0.2 g
Biozeid WP Trichoderma album(25x106 spore/g) 0.2 g
Biobroducts

Nemaless Serratia marcescens(1x109 bacterium cell/ml) 0.2 ml

Micronema Bacillus.sp,pseudomonas. sp 0.2 ml
Nemafree Serratia. sp 0.2 ml
QL- Agri®35 Qullija saaponaria 0.2 ml

Among the traditional nematicides examined cadusafos was superior in reducing nematode infection. It
reduced the number of galls by 96.49% ,number of J2 in soil by 94.57%, number of developmental stages within
roots by 90%, number of eggmasses by 98.56% and number of eggs / eggmass by 82.8% and finally the
nematode population density was reduced by 99.6% [Table (2) and Fig(1)]. Previous workers supported that
cadusafos exhibited the highest nematicidal activity among other nematicides examined (Zaki and Maqbool,
1995; Aboul-Eid and Youssef, 1993; Abdul-Rehman et al., 2006; Meher et al., 2010; Dubey and Trivedi, 2011).
It was accepted that carbamate and organophosphate nematicides acted by the inhibition of
acetylcholinesterase (ACHE) at cholinergic synapses in the nematode nervous system, that inhibition was most
likely explanation for the observed effect of organosphosphate and carbamate nematicides on the orientation
behavior of nematodes (Wright, 1981; Opperman and Chang, 1990). These chemicals act by impairing
nematode neuromuscular activity, thereby, reducing their movement, host invasion, feeding and consequentially
the rate of development and reproduction (Kheir et al., 1983). Bunt (1987) suggested that these chemicals acted
against the root-knot nematode by inhibiting egg hatching, their movement and host invasion by juveniles that
had penetrated the roots.

Table 2: Effect of nematicides and commercial bioproducts on the development and reproduction of the root -knot nematode M. incognita
infecting tomato cv. Super Strain B.
Treatments No. of No. of No. of No. of No. of Final Reproduction
galls/ root larvae in developmental egg masses eggs/ egg population factor(Rf)
soil(J2) stage within root /root mass (Pf)
Oxamyl 82.50efg 478.5bcd 86.75bc 57.50ef 130.25cd 8112.13 8.11
Fosthiazate 49.00fgh 331.25cde 45cd 21.50fg 171.25bcd 4079.63 4.08
Carbofuran 30.75gh 368.75cde 46.00cd 20.00fg 162.50bcd 3684.75 3.68
Fenamiphos 88.00def 169.75de 89.25bc 63.00def 158.25bcd 10291.75 10.29
Ethoprophos 39.75fgh 143.75de 45.25cd 25.00fg 143.50bcd 3801.50 3.80
h e d g
Cadusafos 6.50 81.25 13.00 2.75 91.25d 347.94 0.35
Bioarc 166.25abc 731.25b 86.50bc 88.75cde 129.25cd 12377.44 12.38
Biozeid 120.00cde 481.25bcd 92.25bc 63.00def 149.50bcd 10055.00 10.06
QL- Agri® 35 186.25ab 575.00bc 105.00b 135.75bc 192.75bc 26981.56 26.98
Micronema 217.75a 750.00b 164.75a 166.00ab 202.50bc 34695.75 34.70
Nemaless 142.75bc 584.25bc 131ab 110.75cd 213.50bc 24471.13 24.47
Nemafree 136.00bcd 637.50bc 130.75ab 122bc 234.50b 29499.25 29.50
Untreated(check) 185.25ab 1497.00a 131.50ab 190.50a 530.75a 102926.88 102.93
Means in each column followed by the same small letter (s) are no significant at P<0.05 according to Duncan's multiple range test.

Results of Table (2) and Fig (1) indicated that the bioproduct based on fungi (Biozeid, which containing
Trichoderma album) had a relatively more nematicidal activity than those based on bacteria (Table, 1). For
example the reproduction factor of M. incognita associated with the examined bioproducts were10.06, 12.38,
24.47, 29.50 and 34.70 for Biozeid, Bioarc, Nemaless, Nemafree and Micronema, respectively. This piece of
result is in agreement with those obtained previously (Hammad and Zaid, 2007; Khalil et al., 2012a; Radwan et
al., 2012).
 4413
J. Appl. Sci. Res., 9(7): 4410-4417, 2013

Fig. 1: % Reduction in nematode parameters as effected by Nematicids and bioproducts.

 4414
J. Appl. Sci. Res., 9(7): 4410-4417, 2013

There were multitude investigation interpreted the actions of Trichoderma species against plant parasitic
nematodes. Two mechanisms of action are thought to be responsible for the reduction of nematode infection
following root treatment with Trichoderma spp.: (1) direct parasitism of eggs, juveniles and females by direct
hyphal penetration through the increase in enzymatic activities (Suárez et al., 2004; Yang et al., 2010) and (2)
inducing plant defense mechanisms leading to systemic resistance in plants (Sahbani and Hadavi, 2008)
Bioproducts based on bacteria reduced nematode population mainly by production of substances such as
antibiotics, siderophores and variety of enzymes (Mahgoop and El-Tayeb, 2010) that may limit the damage
caused by nematodes. Bacteria may change nematode behavior (Sikora and Hoffmann, 1993), can function as
competitors of nematodes for colonization sites and nutrients (Khan et al., 2008) and induce of systemic
resistance (Hasky-Gunther et al., 1998; Cartieaux et al., 2003).
Results of Table (2) showed that the commercial product QL Agri®35 based on the plant extract from
Quillaja saponaria reduced significantly the number of J2, number of eggmasses/root and number of eggs/
eggmass compared to untreated check. This result is conformity with that obtained by San Martin and
Magnunacelaya(2005) who found that aqueous extracts from Q. saponaria containing a mixture of saponins and
polyphenols resulted in a satisfactory nematode control. Giannakou (2011) reported that the use of commercial
product QL Agri® 35 gave good control of root-knot nematodes and prevent nematode increase in soil.
The influence of treatments on growth of tomato plants infected by M. incognita is presented in Table (3)
and Fig (2). All the treatments improved tomato growth criteria as measured by fresh weight of shoots and roots
as well as length of both systems compared to those of check plants. Previous investigations supported this
result either with the application of nematicides (Abu El-Amayem et al., 2004; Zaki and Maqbool, 1995; Dubey
and Trivedi, 2011) or with bioproducts (Mahgoob and El- Tyep, 2010; Khalil et al., 2012 a , b).
For the traditional nematicides, the increases in plant growth are due to killing action of the nematicidal
compounds on the majority of penetrated larvae so the plant growth is improved (Kheir et al., 1983). Formation
of galls on the roots and colonization of root tissue by the nematode deprives plants of nutrients. The damage
also occurs due to devitalization of root tips, which may stop their growth or cause excessive branching of roots
(Terefe et al., 2009).The shorter height of seedlings of untreated check might be due to the stunting action of M.
incognita (Jinfa et al., 2006).
The plant growth were augmented with all evaluated bioproducts and there are certain reports were
abolished this action by direct and indirect mechanisms. The direct growth promoting mechanism is depending
on substances released from microorganisms that facilitate the uptake of nutrients (Glick et al., 1999) and/or
facilitate the production of phytohormons such as auxins,cytokinins, gibberellins(Vessey, 2003).The indirect
mechanism includes production of inhibitory substance or by increasing of natural resistance of the host
(Cartieaux et al., 2003).
The present investigation showed that the examined traditional nematicides were highly efficient in
reducing M. incognita infection and increasing plant vigor at their recommended rates.Because these chemical
nematicides are environmentally hazardous, bioproducts which are bacterial, fungal and plant origin were
applied as safer and eco- friendly control alternatives. The present pot experiments gave promising results with
these bioproducts but further investigations are necessary to confirm their effectiveness under field conditions.
Therefore, application of these materials (i.e. nematicides + bioproducts) within integrated control programe
could provide effective control of M. incognita on tomato.

Table 3: Effect of tested nematicides and bioproducts on the growth of tomato plants.
Treatment Length(cm) Weight(g)

Shoot Root Shoot Root

Oxamyl 43.75bcd 20.75abc 16.45de 9.67bc
Fosthiazate 43.75bcd 21.75abc 20.50abc 9.75bc
cd bc abc
Carbofuran 42.25 17.50 20.50 9.75bc
Fenamiphos 48.75abc 22.00ab 27.40a 14.00a
Ethoprophos 49.00ab 21.50abc 22.50ab 10.25abc
Cadusafos 52.00a 20.00abc 26.40a 13.40ab
Bioarc 46.75abcd 20.75abc 21.46abc 11.45abc
Biozeid 49.25ab 18.75abc 27.25a 13.85ab
QL- AGRI 35 46.25abcd 20.00abc 21.60abc 12.40abc
Micronema 48.00abcd 19.00abc 22.00ab 14.00a
Nemaless 47.00abcd 22.00ab 21.60abc 11.80abc
Nemafree 45.00bcd 22.50a 17.60bc 9.75bc
Untreated(check) 41.25d 17.00c 14.75e 9.30c
Means in each column followed by the same small letter (s) are no significant at P<0.05 according to Duncan's multiple range test.
 4415
J. Appl. Sci. Res., 9(7): 4410-4417, 2013

Fig. 2: Effect of certain nematicides and bioproducts on percentage of increase in plant growth t of tomato
plants infected with M. incognita.

References

Abdul-Rehman., Bibi, R. and M. Hafeez –Ullah, 2006. Evaluation of Different Chemicals Against Root Knot
Nematode (Meloidogyne incognita) on Sunflower. Journal of Agriculture & Social Sciences, 02(3): 185-
186.
 4416
J. Appl. Sci. Res., 9(7): 4410-4417, 2013

Aboul-Eid, H.Z. and M.M.A. Youssef, 1993. Effect of systemic nematicides on tomato plants infested with the
root-knot nematode meloidogyne incognita in the nursery and open field. Pak. J. Nematol., 1(2): 125-129.
Abu El-Amayem, M.M., M.A. Radwan, S.M.I. Kassem and E.K. El-Maadawy, 2004. Root dip technique for
evaluating some pesticides against Meliodogyne incogneta infecting tomato. Alexandria journal of
Agricultural Research, 49(1): 91-97.
Ahmad, F. and M.A. Siddiqui, 2009. Management of root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne incognita in tomato.
Pak. J. Nematol., 27: 369-373.
Bunt, J.A., 1987. Mode of action of nematicides. IN: Vistas on Nematology:a commemoration of the
25Thanniversary of the society of nematologist.(Edited by J.A.Veech and D.W.Dickson). Society of
Nematologist,Inc.Hyattsiville, MD 461-468.
Cartieaux, F., M.C. Thibaud, L. Zimmerli, P. Lessard and C. Sarrobert, 2003. Transscriptome analysis of
Arabidopsis colonized by a plant growth promoting rhizobacteria reveals a general effect on disease
resistance. Plant Jounal, 36: 177-188.
Costat software. 1988. Microcomputer program analysis, CoHort software, Berkely, CA, USA.
Dubey, W. and P.C. Trivedi, 2011. Evaluation of some nematicides for the control of Meloidogyne incognita on
Okra. Indian Journal of Fundamental and Applied Life Sciences, 1(3): 264-270.
Duncan, D.B., 1955. Multiple range and multiple F tests, Biometrics, 11: 1-42.
El-Sherbiny, A.M., F.A. Al-Yahya and A.M. Al-Suhaibani, 2007. Feasibility of using two commercial bio-
products of entomopathogenic nematodes comparing to cadusafos in controlling Meloidogyne javanica on
common bean in Saudi Arabia. Alex. J. Agric. Res., 52(3): 53-58.
Giannakou, L.O., 2011. Efficacy of a formulated product containing Quillaja saponaria plant extracts for the
control of root-knot nematodes. Eur. J. Plant .Pathol., 130: 587-596.
Glick, B.R., C.L. Patten, G. Holguin and D.M. Penrose, 1999. Biochemical and genetic mechanism used by
plant growth promoting bacteria. Imperial college press, London, UK
Goodey, J.B., 1957. Laboratory methods for Work with Plant and Soil Nematodes. Techn. Bull. 2, Minist.
Agric. (3 Aufl.) London, 47: 471.
Hadad, M.A. and H.S. Al-Hashmi, 2012. Comparitive effect of inoculation tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum)
with two strains of VAM fungi and nematicides application on the control of root-knot nematodes
(Meloidogyne incognita). Scie. J. Agric. Rese. Mang., 167-170.
Hammad, E.A. and A.M.A. Zaid, 2007. Biological control of root-knot nematode Meloidogyne javanica on
sunflower plants by Trichoderma album and Bacillus megaterium. Journal of Agricultural Sciences,
Mansoura University, 32: 4747-4756.
Hasky-Gunther, K., S. Hoffmann-Hergarten and R.A. Sikora, 1998. Resistance against the potato cyst nematode
Globodera pallida systematically induced by the rhizobacteria Agrobacterium radiobacter(G12) and
Bacillus sphaericus (B43). Fund. Appl. Nematol., 21: 511-517.
Hussey, R.S. and K.R. Barker, 1973. A comparison of methods of collecting inocula for Meloidogyne spp.,
including a new technique. Pl. Dis. Reptr., 57: 1025-1028.
Ibrahim, I.K.A., Z.A. Handoo and A.A. El-Sherbiny, 2000. A survey of phytoparasitic nematodes on cultivated
and non-cultivated plants in north western Egypt. J. Nematol., 32: 478-485.
Jinfa, Z., C. Waddell, G.C. Sengupta, C. Potenza and R.G. Cantrell, 2006. Relationships between root-knot
nematode resistance and plant growth in upland cotton galling index as a criterion. Crop Sci., 46(4): 1581-
1586.
Khalil, M.S., A. Kenawy, M.A. Gohrab and E.E. Mohammed, 2012(a). Impact of microbial agents on
Meloidogyne incognita management and morphogenesis of tomato. Journal of Biopesticides., 5(1): 28-35.
Khalil, M.S.H., A.F.G. Allam and A.S.T. Barakat, 2012(b). Nematicidal activity of some biopesticide agents
and microorganisms against root-knot nematode on tomato plants under greenhouse conditions. Journal of
Plant Protection Research, 52(1): 47-52.
Khan, Z., S.G. Kim, Y.H. Jeon, H.U. Khan, S.H. Son and Y.H. Kim, 2008. A plant growth promoting
rhizobacterium, Paenibacillus polymyxastrain GBR-1, suppresses root-knot nematode. J. Biotechnol., 6: 31.
Kheir, A.M., A.A. Osman and S.A. Montasser, 1983. Efficacy of certain systemic nematicides in controlling
Meloidogyne javanica infecting okra, Hibiscus esculentus. Pak. J. Nematol., 1(1): 49-55.
Mahgoob, A.E.A. and T.S. El-Tayeb, 2010. Biological Control of the Root-Knot Nematode, Meloidogyne
incognitaon Tomato Using Plant Growth Promoting Bacteria. Egyptian Journal of Biological Pest Control,
20: 95-103.
Meher, H.C., V.T. Gajbhiya, G. Singh, A. Kamara and G. Chawla, 2010. Persistence and nematicidal efficacy of
carbosulfan, cadusafos, phorate and triazophos in soil and uptake by chickpea and tomato crops under
tropical conditions. J. Agric. Food Chem., 58: 1815-1822.
Ntalli, N.G., U. Menkisoglou-Spiroudi, I.O. Giannakou and D.A. Prophetou-Athanasiadou, 2009. Efficacy
evaluation of a neem (Azadirachta indicaA. Juss) formulation against root-knot nematodes Meloidogyne
incognita. Crop Protection, 28: 489-494.
 4417
J. Appl. Sci. Res., 9(7): 4410-4417, 2013

Oka, Y., H. Koltai, M. Bar-Eyal, M. Mor, E. Sharon, I. Chet and Y. Spiegel, 2000. New strategies for the
control of plant-parasitic nematodes. Pest Management Science, 56: 983-988.
Opperman, C.H. and S. Chang, 1990. Plant-parasitic nematode acetylcholinesterase inhibition by carbamate and
organophosphate nematicides. J. Nematol., 22: 481-488.
Radwan, M.A., S.A.A. Farrag, M.M. Abu-Elamayem and N.S. Ahmed, 2012. Biological control of the root-knot
nematode, Meloidogyne incognita on tomato using bioproducts of microbial origin. Applied Soil Ecology,
56: 58-62.
Randhawa, N., P.K. Sakhujaand I. Singh, 2001. Management of root-knot nematode Meloidogyne incognita in
tomato with organic amendments. Plant Disease Research, 16: 274-276 .
Rich, J.R., R. Dunn and J. Noling, 2004. Nematicides: Past and present uses. 1041-1082 pp. In: Nematology:
Advances and Perspectives, Vol 2. Nematode Management and Utilization. (Eds.) Z.X. Chen, S.Y. Chen &
D.W. Dickson. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK.
Sahebani, N. and N. Hadavi, 2008. Biological control of the root-knot nematode Meloidogyne javanica by
Trichoderma harzianum. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 40: 2016-2020.
Sakhuja, P.K. and R.K. Jain, 2001. Nematode diseases of vegetable crops and their management. In: Diseases of
Fruits and Vegetables and their Management. (Thind, T. S. ed.), Kalyani Pub., Ludhiana, India, pp: 474.
San Martin, R. and J.C. Magunacelaya, 2005. Control of plant-parasitic nematodes with extracts of Quillaja
saponaria. Nematology, 7: 577-585.
Schneider, S.M., E.N. Rosskopf, J.G. Leesch, D.O. Chellemi, C.T. Bull and M. Mazzola, 2003. Research on
alternatives to methyl bromide: pre-plant and post-harvest. Pest Manag Sci., 59(6-7): 814-26.
Siddiqui, Z.A. and I. Mahmood, 1999. Role of bacteria in the management of plant parasitic nematodes: A
review. Bioresource Technol., 69: 167-179.
Sikora, R.A. and S. Hoffmann, 1993. Biological control of plant parasitic nematodes with plant-health
promoting rhizobacteria. In: Lumsden, P.D. and Vaugh, J.L. (Eds.), Biologically Based Technology, ACS
Symposium Series, USA, pp: 166-172.
Suárez, B., M. Rey, P. Castillo, E. Monte and A. Llobell, 2004. Isolation and characterization of PRA1, a
trypsin-like protease from the biocontrol agent Trichoderma harzianum CECT 2413 displaying nematicidal
activity. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 65: 46-55.
Terefe, M., T. Tefera and P.K. Sakhuja, 2009. Effect of a formulation of Bacillus firmus on root-knot nematode
Meloidogyne incognita infestation and the growth of tomato plants in the greenhouse and nursery. J.
Inverteb. Pathol, 100: 94-99.
Vessey, J.K., 2003. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria as biofertilizers. Plant soil, 255: 571-586.
Weller, D.M., 1988. Biological control of soil borne plant pathogens in the rhizosphere with bacteria. Ann. Rev.
Phytopa-tol., 26: 379-407.
Wright, D.J., 1981. Nematicides: Mode of action and new approaches to chemical control. In: Plant parasitic
nematodes(eds.B.M. Zuckerman and R.A. Rohde), Academic Press, New York, pp. 3: 421-449.
Yang, Z.S., G.H. Li, P.J. Zhao, X. Zheng, S.L. Luo, L. Li, X.M. Niu and K.Q. Zhang, 2010. Nematicidal
activity of Trichoderma spp. and isolation of an active compound.World Journal Microbiology and
Biotechnology, 26: 2297-2302.
Zaki, M.J. and M.A. Maqbool, 1995. Efficacy of nematicides in the control of root-knot nematodes on tomato.
Pak. J. Nematol., 13: 137-140.

View publication stats