Evaluation the Reaction of some Soybean Cultivars to Root-Knot Nematode, Meloidogyne javanica

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

• tayebh solimani ¹
• majid olia
• fariba heydari ¹
• M. Tadayon ²

¹ Shahrekord University

² Shahrekord

10.22067/jpp.v32i2.60969

Abstract

Introduction: Using nematode-resistant cultivars is the most economical and environmentally friendly management strategy for the management of the pathogens like nematodes known for causing great yield losses. Root knot nematode (Meloidogyne javanica) is distributed in all soybeans - producing regions of the world and can result in yield losses in almost all soybean-growing areas. The most important species in Iran is M. javanica, which has the widest host ranges of any of the root-knot nematodes. Control of M. javanica is accomplished through the use of pesticides, crop rotation and resistant cultivars. Resistance to nematodes is usually defined as a plant’s ability to inhibit nematode reproduction. Soybean, Glycine max (L.) Merrill, which had economic and nutritional significance, is currently the most important oil - seed crop cultivated in the world. The relationship between crop yield response and initial nematode densities is an important property of a crop resistance. The purpose of the current study was to determine damage functions of M. javanica for some soybean cultivars.
Materials and Methods: The experiments were conducted under greenhouse conditions and temperature maintained at 25±3°C. Pots (2500 grams) were fumigated with methyl bromide to eliminate existing biotic factors prior to planting and then were filled with a sterile soil composed of sand 60%, clay 14%, silt 26%, at pH 7. For evaluating the reaction of some soybean cultivars to the target nematode, infected roots collected from Isfahan province, identified using morphological methods, perineal pattern of adult females as well as molecular markers, amplification of 670 bp band of extracted DNA from egg and larvae using single egg mass culture. Then the nematode mass was cultured around the roots of 2-4 leaf stage tomato cultivar Ps using completely randomized design with five replications. Soybean plants inoculated with 8000 eggs of M. javanica per 2.5 kg of soil. After 80 days, the growth and physiologic factors of host plant such as root length, root fresh and dried weight, shoot length, shoot fresh and dried weight, pod number in plant, seed per pod, 100- seed weight, chlorophyll concentration, leaf area index (LAI) and leaf area ratio (LAR) as well as gall index, egg mass and reproductive factors of nematode was measured.
Results and Discussion: The purpose of this study was to determine damage function of M. javanica for some resistant and susceptible soybean cultivars. Similar to M. javanica, the other nematode species was identified using morphological as well as molecular markers as. In greenhouse condition, results showed that the root weight of the infected soybean cultivars increased in comparison to that of healthy roots and the reason is the hormonal imbalance and the gall formation in the roots by the target nematode. The shoot length and shoot fresh weight in infected plants decreased due to the absorption of nutrients and internodes distance reduction. Seed per pod is dependent characteristics on the genotype, and largely is independent of environmental factors and specific environmental stresses may affect grain formation period. The number of seeds per pod was completely genetic trait, indicating significant differences among cultivars, but the cultivars were not affected by nematode infection. The JK cultivar has the most final population of nematodes and Sahar cultivar has the least one. The JK cultivar was sensitive to 2.65 gall index and Williams and Elit cultivars were tolerant and showed less gall index and Sahar, L- 17, 033 along with DPX were recognized as resistant soybean cultivar, among which Sahar cultivar with 0 reproductive factor and 0.6 gall index was most resistant one. The use of resistant soybean cultivars is the most efficient and control methods for root- knot nematode.
Conclusions: The different soybean cultivars have varying degrees of sensitivity, tolerance and resistance to root-knot nematode infection. The present research indicates that using breeding methods as well as biotechnological techniques, tolerant and resistant cultivars can be produced and the farmers can choose the resistant ones to reduce application of hazardous chemicals. On the other hand it is necessary that by a thorough examination of nematode resistant genes in soybean plants and their incorporation in the sensitive plant, the nematode damage would get reduced. The use of resistant soybean cultivars is the most efficient and adequate control measure.

Keywords

• Glycine max
• Meloidogyne javanica
• Resistant cultivar

20.1001.1.20084749.1397.32.2.2.8

---

References

1- Ago C.M. 2002. Effect of Urea Fertilizer on Root-Gall Disease of Meloidogyne javanica in Soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merril). Sustainable Agriculture, 20:95-100.

2- Ago C.M. 2008. Effects of intercropping on Root-Gall Nematode Disease on Soybean (Glycine max (L) Merril). Vol. I. New York Science Journal.

3- Alan Walter S., Wehner T.C., and Barker K.R. 1999. Green house and field resistance in cucumber to root-knot nematode. Nematology, 1:279-284.

4- Amani F. 2006. Effects of sulfur on the gland packing, biological nitrogen fixation and absorption of some nutrients in two soybean cultivars. Thesis of Soil Sciences. Faculty of Agriculture. Shahrekord. (In Persian).

5- Amarjit S., and Basra R. 1958. Mechanisms of environmental stress resistance in plants. Thenetherlands by Harwood Academic Publishers.

6- Arthur Geoffrey N. 1950. Soybean Physiology agronomy and utilization. New York: Academic Press.

7- Asgarian H., Sharifnabi B., Olia M., Mehdikhani-moghadam A., and Akhavan A. 2009. Identified Meloidogyne javanica by using f morphological and morphmeterical and speces specific primers in Kerman. Journal of Science and Technology of Agriculture and Natural Resources, 47: 279-289. (In Persian).

8- Berg R.H., and Tylor C.G. 2008. Cell biology of plant nematode Parasitism. Heidelberg. Germany.

9- Canto-Saenz M. 1985. The nature of resistance to M. incognita. In: J.N. Sasser and C.C. Carter (Eds.), an advanced treaties on Meloidogyne. Vol. I. North Carolina State University Graphics, Raleigh, USA, pp: 225-231.

10- Carneiro R.G., Mazzafera P., Ferraz L.C.C.B., Muraoka T., and Trevelin P.C.O. 2002. Uptake and translocation of nitrogen, phosphorus and calcium in soybean infected with Meloidogyne incognita and M. javanica. Fitopatologia Brasileira, 27:141-150.

11- Chen P., and Robert P.A. 2003. Virulence in Meloidogyne hapla differtiat by resistance in root-knot nematode. International Nematology Network Newsletter, 7:13-14.

12- Coronel N.B., Devani M.R., Ledesma F., and Sanchez J.R. 1998. Evaluation for resistance in soybean breeding lines and cultivars to Meloidogyne javanica in Northwest Argentine.

13- Egli D.B. 1975. Rate of accumulation of dry weight in seed of soybeans and its relationship to yield. Can. J. Plant, 55: 215-219.

14- Heydari R., Pourjam A., tanha-maafi Z., and Safai N. 2008. Evaluation of some common soybean cultivars to the major type of the soybean cyst nematode of Iran, Heterodera glycines HG Type 0. Iranian Journal of Plant Pathology, 44: 319-329. (In Persian).

15- Hirshmann H. 1985. The genus Meloidogyne and morphological characters differentiating its species. In: Sasser J.N. and Carter C.C. (eds), An University Graphics, pp: 79-93.

16- Hussey R.S., and Jenssen G.J.W. 2002. Root-knot nematodes: Meloidogyne species. In: Starr J.L. Cook R. and Brige j. (eds), Plant resistance to parasitic nematodes, CAB International, pp. 69-76.

17- Jenkins W.R. 1964. A rapid centrifugal-floatation technique for separating nematode from soil. Planta disease, 48:692-700.

18- Jepson S.B. 1987. Identification of root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne species). C.A.B. International, Wallingford, Oxon, United Kingdom, pp: 265.

19- Kaplan D. 1982. Plant resistance to nematode symposium introduction. Nematology 14:1-2.

20- Khalequzzaman K.M. 2003. Effect of Inocula Levels of Meloidogyne javanica and Sclerotium rolfsii on the Growth, Yield and Galling Incidence of Soybean. Plant Pathology Journal, 2:56-64.

21- Kinloch R.A., Hiebsch C.K., and Peacock H.A. 1987. Evaluation of soybean cultivars for production in Meloidogyne incognita-infested soil. Annals of applied Nematology, 1: 32-34.

22- Kirkpatrick T.L., and May M.L. 1989. Host suitability of soybean cultivars for Meloidogyne incognita and M. arenaria. Supplement to Journal of Nematology, 21: 666-670.

23- Koening S.R., and Barker K.R. 1992. Field evaluation of selected soybean cultivars for resistance to two races of Meloidogyne arenaria. Supplement to journal of Nematology, 24: 735-737.

24- Kutywayo V., Kutywayo D., and Gwata E. 2006. Reaction of cotton and soybean cultivars to populations of Meloidogyne javanica and M. incognita in Zimbabwe. Journal of Food, Agriculture & Environment, 4:223-227.

25- Lafond G.P. 1994. Effects of row spacing, seeding rate and nitrogen on yield of barley and wheat under zero-tillmanagement. Can. Plant Sci., 74:703-711.

26- Maleki Ziarati H., Roostai A., Sahebai N., Etebarian H., and Aminian H. 2010. Study of Biological Control of Root-Knot Nematode, Meloidogyne javanica (Trube) Chitwood, in Tomato by Trichoderma harzianum Rifai in Greenhouse and Quantitative Changes of Phenolic Compounds in Plant. Seed and Plant Production Journal, 2:1-25. (In Persian with English abstract)

27- Melakeberhan H., Webster J.M., Brooke R.C., Dauria J.M., and Cackette M. 1987. Effect of Meloidogyne incognita on plant nutrient concentration and its influence on the physiology of beans. Journal of Nematology, 19:324-330.

28- Mendes M., and Rodriguez P.B.N. 2000. Remove from marked records reaction of soybean cultivars to Meloidogyne javanica and M. incognita races 1, 2, 3 and 4. Nematologia Brasileira, 24: 211-217.

29- Niblack T.L., Hussey R.S., and Boerma H.R. 1986. Effects of Environments, Meloidogyne incognita Inoculum Levels, and Glycine max Genotype on Root-knot Nematode-Soybean Interactions in Field Microplots. J Nematol, 18:338-346.

30- Ogbuji R.O., and Awolola T.A. 2001. Studies on the reactions of soybean cultivars to the root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne javanica infections and their nodulation ability in the soil. Agro-Science, 1: 63-66.

31- Penleit C.G., Egli D.B., Cornelius P.L., and Reikosky D.A. 1980. Variation and association of kernel growth characteristics in maize populations. Crop Sci., 20:766-770.

32- Robert K. M., Hay J., and Porter R. 2006. The Physiology of Crop Yield. New York.

33- Sadegh-moosavi Sh., Karegar A., and Deljo A. 2006. Responses of some common cucumber cultivars in Iran to root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne incognita, under greenhouse conditions. Iranian Journal of Plant Pathology, 42: 241-252. (In Persian).

34- Silva A.T., Penna J.C.V., Goulart L.R., Santos M.A., and Arantes N.E. 2000. Genetic variability among and within races of Heterodera glycines ichinohe assessed by RAPD markers. Genet. Mol. Biol., 23: 323-329.

35- Stirling G.R., Berthelsen J.E., Garside A.L., and James A.T. 2006. The reaction of soybean and other legume crops to root-knot nematodes (Meloidogyne spp.), and implications for growing these crops in rotation with sugarcane. Australasian plant pathology, 30:707-714.

36- Tadayon M.R. 2009. Physiological responses of plants to environmental stresses. Publishers of shahrekord university, Iran.

37- Walters S.A., Wehner T.C., and Barker K.R. 1999. Greenhouse and field resistance in cucumber to root-knot nematode. Nematology, 1: 279-284.

38- Weaver D.B., Akridge R.L., and Thomas C.A. 1991. Growth habit, planting date and row spacing effects on late planted soybean. Crop Sci., 31: 805-810.

39- Zijlstra C., Donkers-Venne T.M., and Fargette M. 2000. Identification of Meloidogyne incognita, M. javanica and M. arenaria using sequence characterized amplified region (SCAR) based PCR assays. Nematology, 2: 847-853.