Skip to main content

Table 3 Changes in tomato plant growth parameters after treatment with abamectin, emmectin benzoate, colocynth, marigold, moringa, rhizobacteria, and Purpureocillium lilacinum in comparison with plants infected with Meloiodogyne incognita under greenhouse conditions

From: Integrated management of Meloidogyne incognita on tomato using combinations of abamectin, Purpureocillium lilacinum, rhizobacteria, and botanicals compared with nematicide

Treatments

Fresh root weight (g) (% increase)

Fresh shoot weight (g) (% increase)

Fresh weight of leaves (g) (% increase)

Stem diameter (mm) (% increase)

Plant height (cm) (% increase)

Healthy plants

17.16a

21.87a

15.00a

11.71a

29.80a

Positive control infected with RNK M. incognita

14.85e

16.62f

7.80f

8.10e

20.90f

M. incognita + abamectin

16.68b

20.98b

13.80b

11.60a

27.70b

(12.32)

(26.23)

76.92

(43.20)

(32.53)

M. incognita + emmectin benzoate

15.70c

18.81c

11.80c

10.60bc

27.70b

(5.72)

(13.17)

51.28

(30.86)

(32.53)

M. incognita + colocynth, Citrullus colocynthis

15.22de

17.15ef

9.00e

8.80d

22.10e

(2.49)

(3.18)

15.38

(8.64)

(5.74)

M. incognita + marigold, Tagetes erecta

15.18de

17.87d

9.40e

8.80d

23.60e

(2.22)

(7.52)

20.51

(8.64)

(12.91)

M. incognita + moringa, Moringa oleifera

14.92de

16.80ef

8.60ef

8.50d

21.10f

(0.47)

(1.08)

10.25

(4.93)

(0.95)

M. incognita + Serratia and Pseudomonas

15.28d

18.34cd

10.60d

10.10c

24.80d

(2.89)

(10.34)

35.89

(24.69)

(18.66)

M. incognita + Purpureocillium lilacinum

16.84ab

17.65e

13.20b

11.20b

26.40c

(13.40)

(6.19)

69.23

(38.27)

(26.31)

  1. Each value is the mean of five replicates
  2. Means in each column followed by the same letter(s) are not significantly different at 5% level of probability according to Duncan’s multiple range test
  3. \( \mathsf{Increase}\kern0.5em \%=\frac{\mathsf{Treated}\kern0.5em -\mathsf{Control}}{\mathsf{Control}}\times \mathsf{100} \)