ارزیابی مقاومت برخی ارقام گوجه‌فرنگی نسبت به نماتد ریشه‌گرهی Meloidogyne javanica در شرایط گلخانه

نوع مقاله : مقالات پژوهشی

نویسندگان

گروه گیاه‌پزشکی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد

چکیده

 نماتد‌های ریشه‌گرهی، از مهم‌ترین نماتدهای انگل گیاهی در سطح جهان می‌باشند که اغلب محصولات زراعی را مورد حمله قرار می‌دهند. استفاده از ارقام متحمل یا مقاوم به نماتد، یکی از روش‌های موثر در کاهش خسارت ناشی از نماتدهای ریشه‌گرهی است. در این مطالعه با هدف ارزیابی سطح مقاومت تعدادی از ارقام گوجه‌فرنگی شامل ALYSTE F-1، ARYZA F-1، Early Urbana، Rutgers و Mobil ( هلند و مجارستان)، نسبت به حمله‌ی نماتد ریشه‌گرهی Meloidogyne javanica، در قالب پنج تکرار و در دو حالت مایه‌زنی و عدم مایه‌زنی در شرایط گلخانه‌ای، برخی شاخص‌های رشدی گیاه (وزن تر و خشک ریشه، وزن تر و خشک بخش هوایی، طول ریشه، ارتفاع گیاه و وزن تر و خشک کل) و تولیدمثلی نماتد (تعداد گال و توده تخم نماتد در گرم ریشه و کل ریشه، تعداد تخم موجود در توده تخم، تعداد لاروهای سن دوم موجود در خاک، جمعیت نهایی نماتد و فاکتور تولیدمثلی) بررسی شده است. نتایج نشان داد که رقم ALYSTE F-1، با کم‌ترین تعداد گال ریشه، توده‌تخم، تخم و لارو سن دوم موجود در خاک و به تبع آن کم‌ترین میزان جمعیت نماتد، به عنوان رقمی نسبتا مقاوم شناخته شد. از نظر صفات رویشی گیاه نیز مشخص گردید رقم ALYSTE F-1، در بالاترین سطح، از لحاظ ویژگی‌های رویشی بوده و از تفاوت آماری معنی‌داری نسبت به دیگر ارقام برخوردار بوده است. نتایج هم‌چنین نشان داد که ارقام موبیل هلند، موبیل مجارستان، ارلی‌اربانا، ARYZA F-1 و روتگرس نسبت به نماتد ریشه‌گرهی، براساس فاکتور تولیدمثل (RF) و شاخص گال در زمره‌ی ارقام خیلی حساس طبقه‌بندی شدند. براساس ویژگی‌های زایشی نماتد مشخص گردید که ارقام موبیل هلند، موبیل مجارستان و ارلی‌اربانا، بیش‌ترین جمعیت نماتد و بالاترین فاکتور تولیدمثل را به خود اختصاص دادند اما از لحاظ ویژگی‌های رویشی، رقم روتگرس در بین ارقام، از تاثیرپذیری بیش‌تری برخوردار بود. نتایج تجزیه‌ خوشه‌ای براساس مجموع صفات رویشی گیاه و تولیدمثلی نماتد نیز نشان داد که رقم ALYSTE F-1 به صورت مجزا از دیگر ارقام قرار گرفت. در نهایت براساس مجموع نتایج حاصل از این پژوهش، رقم ALYSTE F-1، به عنوان مقاوم‌ترین رقم شناخته شد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluation of Resistance to Root-Knot Nematode, Meloidogyne javanica, in Some Tomato Cultivars under Greenhouse Conditions

نویسندگان [English]

  • A. Asadi Sardari
  • E. Mahdikhani Moghadam
  • M. Zaki aghl
Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
چکیده [English]

Introduction: The root-knot nematodes of the genus Meloidogyne are highly adapted, obligate plant parasites, consisting of nearly one hundred valid species, and are considered the most economically important group of plant-parasitic nematodes. The control of root- knot nematodes has been sought by the use of nematicides, resistant varieties, crop protection and organic amendments. Because of toxicity of nematicides for environment, human health and wild life, application of them are restricted. Identification of genes responsible for resistance to root-knot nematode and their mode of actions have attracted a lot of attentions to develop resistant cultivars. Resistance in the plant species is often due to the presence of specific genes. In resistant cultivars, resistance genes can prevent or suppress one or more stages of nematode infection cycle. In fact, in response to nematode infection, resistance genes can prevent or suppress one or more stages of nematode infection process. In the most incompatible interactions, depending on the mechanism of resistance, the root galls are reduced or eliminated at the sites of infection. Assessment of resistance to the root-knot nematodes in different tomato cultivars is helpful for selection of suitable cultivars with satisfying plant growth and nematode tolerance traits for suitable management of the root-knot nematode. Thus, in the present study we evaluate the response of some tomato cultivars for resistance to root-knot nematodes, Meloidogyne javanica, in greenhouse conditions.
Materials and Methods: In this study, the nematode population was obtained from roots of tomatoes collected at a glasshouse in Tirtash–Mazandaran, Iran.The root-knot nematode were purified and multiplied on tomato cv. Early Urbana plants. Then the nematode species were identified based on morphological and molecular methods. The seeds of ALYSTE F-1, ARYZA F-1, Rutgers, Early Urbana, Dutch Mobil and Hungarian Mobil tomato cultivars were spawned in equal proportions of cocopit, perlite and vermiculite and irrigated for 3 weeks. Then, the seedlings were transferred to the pots containing mixture of sterile soil, sand and vermiculite (1:1:1) with 9 cm diameter. After 2 weeks, the seedlings were inoculated with 3000 second stage juveniles (J2s) of M. javanica. The pots were kept for 70 days at 24-33°C and 50% relative humidity. Resistance evaluation was based on plant growth and nematode reproduction indices. Growth indices were fresh and dry weight of root and aerial part, root length, plant height and total fresh and dry weight and nematode reproductive indices were number of galls and egg masses/g root and total root, eggs/egg mass, eggs/root, J2s /soil, final nematode population and reproduction factor (RF) were measured and recorded. The experiment was carried out in a completely randomized design with 5 replicates in the both of inoculated and non-inoculated with nematode. Data were analyzed in Minitab version 17. The means were compared by using Fisher,s LSD. Also to determine the resistance level, resistance index (RI) and reproduction factor (RF) were calculated. The RI is depended to frequency of the gall and egg mass index in the root. To determine Gall Index (GI) and Egg mass Index (EI), 0= no galls or egg masses, 1= 1 to 2, 2= 3 to 10, 3= 11 to 30, 4= 31 to 100 and 5= more than 100 were considered, in the following for RI, 0-0.9= immune, 1-1.9= highly resistant, 2-2.0= resistant, 3-3.9= moderately resistant, 4-4.9= intermediate, 5-5.9= moderately susceptible, 6-6.9= susceptible  and more than 7= highly susceptible. The reproductive factor (RF) of the root-knot nematode in the different genotypes was obtained by dividing the final and initial population densities of the nematode (RF = Pf/Pi).Thus, RF≤1, GI≤2 = resistant; RF≤1, GI>2= moderately resistant; RF>1, GI≤2= tolerant and RF>1, GI>2 susceptible.
Results and Discussion: This study results showed that ALYSTE F-1, had the lowest number of gall, egg mass, second stage juveniles and consequently the lowest nematode population and was recognized as moderately resistant cultivar. In terms of the growth indices, ALYSTE F-1 also had the highest growth characteristics and contained a significant difference with other cultivars. Totally, Rutgers, ARYZA F-1, Dutch Mobil, Hungarian Mobil and Early Urbana varieties were introduced as highly susceptible cultivars based on RF and GI. However, Dutch Mobil, Hungarian Mobil and Early Urbana had the highest nematode population and reproduction factor (RF). In terms of the growth traits, the results showed that Rutgers, as a highly susceptible cultivar, was more impressible than other cultivars followed by Dutch Mobil. The cluster analysis based on the sum of the plant growth and nematode reproductive traits showed that ALYSTE F-1 cultivar was distinct from the other cultivars. Thus, the cluster analysis confirmed the results of comparison of the average of the plant growth and nematode reproductive traits.
Conclusion: Based on the results of this study, ALYSTE F-1 was identified as a moderately resistant cultivar to the root- knot nematode, M. javanica. and the others were highly sensitive to the nematode.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Meloidogyne javanica
  • Nematode reproductive traits
  • Plant growth traits
  • Resistance
  • Tomato cultivars
  1. Abdollahi M. 2015. Response of ten greenhouse cucumber cultivars to root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne javanica. Seed and Plant Improvement Journal 30-1(1): 55-75. (In Persian)
  2. Alvani S., Mahdikhani Moghadam E., Giblin-Davis R.M., and Pedram M. 2016. Description of Ektaphelenchus berbericussp. (Rhabditida: Ektaphelenchinea) from eastern Iran. Nematology 18: 1063-1077.
  3. Bailey D.M. 1941. The seedling method for root- knot nematode resistance. Proceeding of American Society of Horticultural Science 38: 573-575.
  4. Bakker E., Dees R., Bakker J., and Govers A. 2006. Mechanisms involved in plant resistance to nematodes. In: Tuzun S., and Bent E (ed.). Multigenic and Induced Systemic Resistance in Plants. Springer science+Busines Media Inc.
  5. Canto-Saenz M. 1983. The nature of resistance to Meloidogyne incognita (Kofoid & White) Chitwood. P. 160-165. In: C.C Carter (Ed.). Proceedings of the Third Research & Planning Conference on Root-Knot Nematodes, Meloidogyne International Meloidogyne Project. Lima, Peru.
  6. Castagnone-Sereno P., Wajnberg E., Bongiovanni M., Leroy F., and Dalmasso A. 1994. Genetic variation in Meloidogyne incognita virulence agianst the tomato Mi resistance gene: evidence from isofemale line selection studies. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 88: 749-753.
  7. Caveness F.E., and Jepsen H.J. 1955. Modification of the centrifugal flotation technique for the isolation and concentration of nematodes and their eggs from soil and plant tissue. Proceedings of the Helminthological Society of Washington 22: 87-89.
  8. Devran Z., and Elekcioglu I.H. 2004. The screening of F2 plants for the root knot nematode resistance gene Mi by PCR in tomato. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 28: 253-257.
  9. Dong W., Holbrook C.C., Timper P., Brenneman T.B., and Mullinix G. 2007. Comparison of methods for assessing resistance to Meloidogyne arenaria in peanut. Journal of Nematology 39: 169-175.
  10. Dropkin V.H. 1969. The necrotic reaction of tomatoes and other hosts resistance to Meloidogyne: reversal by temperature. Phytopathology 59:1632-1637.
  11. Ghayedi S., and Abdollahi M. 2013. Evaluation of eight bean cultivars for resistance to root knot nematode, Meloidogyne javanica. Seed and Plant Improvement Journal 30-1(1): 17-36. (In Persian)
  12. Hadisoeganda W.W,. and Sasser J.N. 1982. Resistance of tomato, bean, southern pea and garden pea cultivars to root-knot nematodes based on host suitability. Plant Disease 66: 145-150.
  13. Hussey R.S., and Barker K.R.1973. Acomparison of methods of collecting inocula of Meloidogyne spp. including a new technique. Plant Disease Reports 57: 1025-1028.
  14. Hussey R.S. and Jansen G.S. 2002. Root-knot nematodes: Meloidogyne P. 69-76. In: J. L. Starr et al. Plant Resistance to Parasitic Nematodes. CAB International.
  15. Jaiteh F., Kwoseh C., and Akromah R. 2012. Evaluation of tomato genotypes for resistance to root-knot nematodes. African Crop Science 20: 41-49.
  16. Jepson S.B. 1987. Identification of root-knot nematodes Meloidogyne CABI Publishing.
  17. Kaloshian I., Williamson V.M., Miyao G., Lawn D.A., and Westerdahl B.B. 1996. Resistance- breaking nematodes in California tomatoes California Agriculture 50: 18-19.
  18. Kamalwanshi R.S., Khan A., and Srivastava A.S. 2004. Reaction of tomato germplasm against root knot nematode, Meloidogyne incognita. Indian Journal of Nematology 34: 94-95.
  19. Karssen G., and Moens M. 2006. Root- knot nematodes. p. 59-90. In R.N Perry and M Moens. (ed). Plant Nematology Wallingford. CABI Publishing.
  20. Khan M.R. 1994. Nematology in developing countries. p. 379- 398. In: C.C. Carter and J. N. Sasser. (ed.) An Advanced Treatise on Meloidogyne 1: Biology and control. Co-publication of Department of Plant Pathology, North Carolina State University and the USAID, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA.
  21. Khodaei Arbat A., Taheri A.A.H., Pahlevani M.H., and Niknam CH. R. 2009. Evaluation of tomato cultivars resistance to root-knot nematode (Meloidogynenjavanica Chitwood, 1949). Journal of Plant Production 16: 45-55. (In Persian)
  22. Li X.X., and Zhu D.W. 2005. Descriptors and data standard for cucumber (Cucumis sativus). Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 78-79.
  23. Mani A., and Zidgali T.Al. 1995. Screening of tomato cultivars for resistance against Meloidogyne incognita. Nematologia Mediterranea 23: 269.
  24. Mirehki K., Abdollahi M., and Dehdari A. 2014. Response of eight tomato cultivars to root-knot nematode, javanica, under glasshouse condition. Iranian Journal of Plant Protection Science 44: 291-298. (In Persian)
  25. Mobasseri M., Pedram M., and Pourjam E. 2017. A new species of the rare genus Anguillonema Fuchs, 1938 (Nematoda: Hexatylina, Sphaerulariodea) with its molecular phylogenetic study. Journal of Nematology 49: 286-294.
  26. Nasohi G., and koshki M. 2002. Tomato in Greenhouse. Authors, 122p.
  27. QuesenberryH., Baltensperger D.D., Dunn R.A., Wilcox C.J., and Hardy S.R. 1989. Selection for tolerance to root-knot nematodes in red clover. Crop Science 29: 62-65.
  28. Ramezani B., Mahdikhani Moghadam E., and Rouhani H. 2013. Resistance evaluation of some tomato cultivars to root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne javanica, in greenhouse conditions. Journal of Plant Protection 27(3): 276-285. (In Persian)
  29. Reddy Y.S., Sellaperumal C., Prasanna H.C., Yadav A., Kashyap S.P., Singh S., Rai N., Singh M., and Singh B. 2016. Screening of tomato genotypes against root-knot nematode and validation of Mi 1 gene linked markers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, India Section B: Biological Sciences, 88.DOI: 10.1007/s40011-016-0731-1.
  30. Roberts P.A. 2002. Concepts and consequences of resistance. Pp. 23–41 in L. Starr, R. Cook, and J. Bridge, eds. Plant Resistance to Parasitic Nematodes. Wallingford, UK: CAB International.
  31. Sasser J.N., Carter C.C., and Hartman K.M. 1984. Standardization of host suitability studies and reporting of resistance to root-knot nematode. North Carolina State University, Raleigh and United States Agency for International Developmen, 7pp.
  32. Singh S.J., and Khurma U.R. 2007. Susceptibility of six tomato cultivars to the root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne incognita. The south pacific Journal of Natural Science 13: 73-77.
  33. Smith P.G. 1944. Embryo culture of a tomato species hybrid. In: Proceeding of American Society of Horticultural Science 44: 413-416.
  34. Stirling G., Nicol J., and Reay F. 2002. Advisory services for nematode pests (operational guidelines). Publication No. 99/4. Rural Industries Research Development Corporation 99(4). 114
  35. Sujatha R., Irene Vethamoni P., Manivanna N., and Sivakumar M. 2017. Screening of tomato genotypes for root knot nematode (Meloidogyne incognita Kofoid and White Chitwood). International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied 6: 1525-1533.
  36. Taylor A.L., and Sasser J.N. 1978. Biology, Identification and Control of Root Knot Nematodes (Meloidogyne ). A Cooperative Publication of the Department of Plant Pathology, North Carolina State University and The United States Agency for International Development. North Carolina State Graphics, Raleigh, N.C.
  37. Udo I., Uguru M.I., Ogbuji R.O., and Ukeh D.A. 2008. Sources of tolerance to root-knot nematode Meloidogyne javanica In cultivated and wild tomato species. Plant Pathology 7: 40-44.
  38. Walters S.A., Wehner T.C., and Barker K.R. 1999. Greenhouse and field resistance in cucumber to root-knot nematodes. Nematology 1: 279-284.
  39. Williamson V.M., and Kumar A. 2006. Nematode resistance in plants: the battle underground. Trends in Genetics 22: 396-403.