Previous Article in Journal
Morphological Revision of Thirteen Wild Fighting Fish Species Found in Thailand with an Identification Key
Previous Article in Special Issue
Microhabitat Primarily Structures Bacterial Communities, While Management History Shapes Functional Potential in Tomato-Associated Soils
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Diversity
Volume 18
Issue 6
10.3390/d18060335
diversity-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Biocontrol Potential of Arthrobotrys thaumasius Isolated from Banana Roots (Musa spp. L.) Against Root-Knot Nematodes of the Genus Meloidogyne

by
Giovanna Carpio
1,
Alejandra de la Cruz
1,*,
María F. Ratti
2,
Rafael F. Castañeda-Ruiz
3 and
Marcos Vera-Morales
2,*
1
Grupo de Investigación en Aplicaciones Biotecnológicas—GIAB, Universidad Politécnica Salesiana—UPS, Carrera de Biotecnología, Campus María Auxiliadora, Km 19.5 Vía a La Costa, Guayaquil 090901, Ecuador
2
Centro de Investigaciones Biotecnológicas del Ecuador, Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral—ESPOL, Campus Gustavo Galindo, Km 30.5 Vía Perimetral, Guayaquil 090902, Ecuador
3
Departamento de Micologia, Centro de Biociências (CB), Universidade Federal de Pernambuco (UFPE), Av. da Engenharia, s/n Cidade Universitaria, Recife 50740-600, PE, Brazil
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Diversity 2026, 18(6), 335; https://doi.org/10.3390/d18060335
Submission received: 23 February 2026 / Revised: 25 May 2026 / Accepted: 30 May 2026 / Published: 3 June 2026
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rhizosphere Microbial Community Diversity)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Root-knot nematodes of the genus Meloidogyne are among the most destructive endoparasitic nematodes due to their ability to infect a wide range of agriculturally important crops. In this context, nematode-trapping fungi have been widely recognized for their potential as biological control agents against plant-parasitic nematodes. In the present study, the nematode-trapping fungus Arthrobotrys thaumasius was isolated from roots soils of banana plants (Musa spp.) in the canton of Guayaquil, Guayas Province, Ecuador. Four strains were obtained and identified based on sequence analyses of molecular markers. In addition, the in vitro growth and sporulation of the isolates were evaluated, with cornmeal agar and oat agar proving to be the most suitable culture media. Three A. thaumasius isolates exhibited attraction and capture rates exceeding 65% against second-stage juveniles (J2) of Meloidogyne. This study represents the first report of the isolation and characterization of A. thaumasius in Ecuador and demonstrates that isolates HN-20, HN-21, and HN-24 have high potential as biological control agents, positioning them as promising candidates for the sustainable management of root-knot diseases caused by Meloidogyne spp.

1. Introduction

Plant-parasitic nematodes, with approximately 4100 described species [1], represent one of the most significant threats to agricultural production and global food security. Their impact is reflected in annual crop losses exceeding USD 100 billion worldwide [2,3]. Furthermore, their management remains particularly challenging due to the broad range of host crops they are capable of infecting.
Plant-parasitic nematodes belonging to the genera Meloidogyne, Heterodera, Globodera, and Pratylenchus affect more than 2500 plant species, including staple crops such as rice, maize, and wheat, as well as vegetables, fruits, and ornamental plants [4]. These pathogens primarily penetrate plants through the root system, causing symptoms such as chlorosis, wilting, and, in severe cases, plant death during intermediate or advanced stages of infection [5].
Among plant-parasitic nematodes, Meloidogyne spp. (root-knot nematodes) are of particular scientific and economic importance [6]. The genus Meloidogyne comprises obligate parasitic nematodes with a worldwide distribution and represents one of the most destructive nematode groups [7]. To date, 105 species have been described within the genus [8], parasitizing virtually all vascular plants [9]. In Ecuadorian agricultural systems, five species of major relevance have been reported up to 2021: M. incognita, M. arenaria, M. graminicola, M. hapla, and M. javanica [10].
The management of plant-parasitic nematodes is a complex process due to their wide host range, their ability to persist in soil, and the difficulty of detecting infections at early stages [11]. Traditionally, control strategies have relied heavily on the use of chemical nematicides [12]. Nearly half of the global nematicide market, valued at approximately USD 1 billion, is used to control Meloidogyne species [13]; however, these compounds are currently under increasing regulatory scrutiny worldwide due to concerns related to environmental toxicity, human health, and food safety [14]. As a result, several conventional molecules, including fumigants such as methyl bromide and organophosphates such as fenamiphos, have been restricted or banned in many countries [15].
Biological control of plant-parasitic nematodes is being actively explored as a sustainable alternative to chemical nematicides [16]. Numerous species of soil-dwelling nematode-trapping fungi act as natural enemies by capturing and digesting phytopathogenic nematodes. These fungi are classified according to their mode of action into trapping fungi, endoparasites, egg parasites, toxin-producing fungi, and species that form specialized infection devices [17].
Nematode-trapping fungi produce capture structures through hyphal modifications [18]. Fungal cells adhere strongly to the nematode cuticle, leading to immobilization [19]. The trapping process occurs through several stages, including attraction, recognition, trap formation, adhesion, penetration, and digestion of nematodes [20]. This phenomenon involves the action of various proteins and enzymes, such as serine proteases, collagenases, phosphatases, chitinases, among others [21].
Approximately 700 taxonomically diverse fungal species are capable of attacking living nematodes (juveniles, adults, and eggs) and utilizing them as a nutrient source [22]. Among these, the genus Arthrobotrys stands out as the largest group of nematode-trapping fungi within the family Orbiliaceae, with 118 records currently listed in Species Fungorum [23]. The genus Arthrobotrys is widely recognized for its ability to capture nematodes through the formation of specialized trapping structures. Among these species, Arthrobotrys thaumasius (Drechsler) S. Schenck, W.B. Kendr. & Pramer (synonym Monacrosporium thaumasium) has been reported in several countries, including Australia, China, Indonesia, Germany, the Netherlands, Taiwan, Thailand, the United Kingdom (England), Ukraine, the United States, India, Oman, Brazil, and Turkey.
Biopesticides exert beneficial effects on ecosystems by promoting plant growth, inducing systemic resistance against pathogens, and enhancing plant tolerance to biotic and abiotic stresses [24]. A. thaumasius has been the subject of various agricultural studies [25]. However, despite these advances, its application in agricultural systems remains limited. Most studies have focused on a small number of isolates, restricting our understanding of intraspecific variability, adaptation to different edaphoclimatic conditions, and the effectiveness of native strains in specific production systems. Therefore, the exploration and characterization of new fungal strains are essential to identify variants with enhanced biocontrol efficiency and improved agronomic performance, facilitating their application in agricultural systems.
Therefore, the objective of the present study was to isolate and identify A. thaumasius from roots soils of banana plants in the coastal region of Ecuador and to evaluate its potential for the biological control of Meloidogyne spp. This research represents the first report of this species in the country and provides scientific evidence supporting its effectiveness as a nematode-trapping fungus for use in tropical agriculture.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Site, Isolation, and Preservation

Banana roots (cv. Williams) were collected from a field with a documented history of root-knot nematode incidence at the Agricultural Experimental Farm (GEA) of the Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral, located in Guayaquil, Guayas Province, Ecuador (2°08′23.5″ S, 79°57′43.3″ W) (Figure 1). Sampled plants exhibited symptoms commonly associated with Meloidogyne infection, including root galling and reduced plant vigor. Root samples were collected at a depth of 10 cm below the soil surface in January 2024, placed in sterile plastic bags, and transported in a cooler to the Microbiology/Phytopathology Laboratory of the Centro de Investigaciones Biotecnológicas del Ecuador (CIBE).
In the laboratory, banana roots were surface-disinfected with 1% sodium hypochlorite for 1 min and subsequently rinsed five times with sterile distilled water to remove residual oxidizing agents. Root fragments (1 cm2) were then placed onto water agar medium (1 L distilled water + 18 g agar). After 10 days of incubation at 28 °C in darkness, Petri dishes were examined, and fungal strains emerging from dead nematodes were isolated using a sterile needle. Conidia were subsequently transferred to corn meal agar (CMA), a low-nutrient medium that promotes conidiation [26]. Monoconidial cultures were prepared for each isolate and identified using taxonomic identification keys [27,28,29,30]. The strains were preserved in the pure microorganism culture collection of the CIBE-ESPOL Culture Collection.

2.2. Genomic DNA Extraction and PCR Amplification

Fungal genomic DNA was extracted using the Cenis, 1992 protocol [31]. The quantity and quality of the extracted DNA were assessed using standard procedures. The obtained DNA was used to amplify the ITS1 region, which is widely employed for fungal taxonomy and phylogenetic analyses.
PCR reactions were performed in a final volume of 25 μL, containing 10.5 μL of sterile water, 12.5 μL of DreamTaq PCR Master Mix (2×) (Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., Waltham, MA, USA), 1 μL of each primer (10 μM), and 1 μL of template DNA. Amplification of the ITS region was performed using the universal primers ITS1 (5′-TCCGTAGGTGAACCTGCGG-3′) and ITS4 (5′-TCCTCCGCTTATTGATATGC-3′) [32]. PCR cycling conditions consisted of an initial denaturation at 95 °C for 5 min, followed by 35 cycles of denaturation at 94 °C for 30 s, annealing at 52 °C for 30 s, and extension at 72 °C for 1 min, with a final extension step at 72 °C for 8 min. Reactions were subsequently held at 4 °C until further analysis.
The presence and concentration of PCR products were evaluated by electrophoresis on a 1.5% agarose gel stained with SYBR Safe (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA, USA). The resulting amplicons were sent for sequencing using the Sanger method [33] through Psomagen, Inc. (Rockville, MD, USA).
The phylogenetic analysis of the genus Arthrobotrys was conducted using reference ITS sequences obtained from GenBank together with the isolates obtained in this study. Sequence alignment was performed using MUSCLE implemented in Geneious (v10.2.6). The alignment was subsequently exported to MEGA X to determine the best-fitting nucleotide substitution model according to the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC). Phylogenetic inference was then performed using the Maximum Likelihood method with the PhyML plugin (Guindon et al., 2010) [34] in Geneious v10.2.6, applying the General Time Reversible (GTR) substitution model with 1000 bootstrap replicates. The isolates included in this study were identified as A. thaumasius strains HN20 (GenBank accession number: PZ399369), HN21 (PZ392464), HN24 (PZ399370), and HN25 (PZ399371).

2.3. Growth Dynamics on Different Culture Media in Petri Dishes

Solid culture media supplemented with chloramphenicol (10 mg L−1) were prepared to inhibit bacterial growth and prevent contamination. The evaluated media included cornmeal agar (CMA), V8 juice agar, oat agar (OA), SNA agar (Spezieller Nährstoffarmer Agar), and SNA agar supplemented with leaves and plant debris. Additionally, a control medium consisting solely of water agar (20 g agar, 1000 mL H2O) was used. All culture media were adjusted to a pH range of 6.2–6.3. Four replicates were prepared, five each medium.
Inoculation was performed by placing a 5-mm-diameter agar plug obtained from the actively growing margin of a fungal colony at the center of each Petri dish. Plates were incubated at 28 ± 1 °C in darkness and under controlled conditions of 60% relative humidity. Mycelial growth was recorded daily for five days after inoculation by marking the colony margin on the underside of the plates. After seven days of growth, conidia were quantified by adding 5 mL of sterile water to each plate and gently detaching the mycelium. The resulting suspension was transferred to sterile tubes, and the number of conidia per milliliter was determined using a Neubauer counting chamber [35].

2.4. Evaluation of A. thaumasius Against Meloidogyne sp.

Second-stage juveniles (J2) of Meloidogyne were used in all experiments. The nematodes were obtained from a tomato crop (Solanum lycopersicum) maintained at the Experimental Agricultural Farm (GEA) of the Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral. To standardize the population, new tomato seedlings were inoculated with a single nematode egg mass, from which a monospecific population was established and subsequently used in the experiments. Currently, this population is maintained on tomato plants under greenhouse conditions at CIBE-ESPOL.
For nematode DNA extraction, the protocol described by Castagnone-Sereno et al. (1995) [36] was used. Ribosomal DNA (rDNA) was amplified using the primers 1A (5′-GGCGATCGAAAAGATTAAGCC-3′) and 3B (5′-GGCGATCGATTGGCAAATGCTTTCGC-3′). The PCR product was sequenced and submitted to the GenBank database of the National Center for Biotechnology Information, where it was assigned the accession number PZ392194.
Between 10 and 12 weeks after inoculation, infected roots were collected and transported for the manual extraction of egg masses. Root tissues were washed five times with sterile distilled water supplemented with streptomycin sulfate (50 ppm). Subsequently, the egg masses were placed in Petri dishes containing water agar supplemented with antibiotics and incubated at 28 ± 1 °C to promote hatching. After 48 h, second-stage juveniles (J2) were collected [35].
The strains used in the experiment were cultured on 9-cm-diameter Petri dishes containing cornmeal agar in order to preserve their predatory capacity, following the methodology described by Duddington (1955) [26]. For attraction assays, cornmeal agar diluted in water at a 1:10 ratio was used. The bottom of each Petri dish was divided into four equal sections, and a 6-mm-diameter agar plug was placed in each section, positioned 1 cm from the edge of the plate, following the protocol proposed by Hussain et al. (2018) [35]. Agar plugs containing the fungal isolate were placed in quadrants I and III, while agar plugs of diluted cornmeal agar (1:10) without the fungus were placed in quadrants II and IV and served as controls. Plates were incubated for 24 h at 28 ± 1 °C to allow fungal growth.
Subsequently, 20 μL of water containing 50 nematode juveniles was added to each plate and allowed to dry for 1 h. Plates were then incubated for an additional 72 h prior to microscopic observations.
The attraction index was calculated using the formula described by Hsueh et al. (2017) [37]:
Attraction   index =   I + I I I − I I + I V I + I I I + I I + I V   × 100
where I, II, III, and IV correspond to the number of nematodes present in each quadrant after 72 h. In addition, the number of captured nematodes was recorded for each isolate. All experiments were conducted with five replicates.

2.5. Statistical Analysis

A completely randomized design (CRD) with five replicates per treatment was used. Radial colony growth was expressed as mean ± standard deviation and analyzed by incubation day. Data normality and homogeneity of variances were verified prior to analysis. For fungal sporulation, values were log-transformed [Log(x + 1)] and attraction percentages were arcsine square-root transformed to meet the assumptions of ANOVA. When significant differences were detected, means were separated using Tukey’s HSD test (p < 0.05). All statistical analyses were performed using R software (v. 3.6.3).

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Phylogenetic Analysis

Isolates HN20, HN21, HN24, and HN25 clustered within the clade corresponding to Arthrobotrys thaumasius, showing a close phylogenetic relationship with previously reported reference sequences of this species. This clustering was supported by moderate to high support values, confirming their correct taxonomic assignment. Additionally, the phylogenetic tree clearly distinguished A. thaumasius from closely related species such as A. elegans and A. sinensis, further reinforcing the molecular identity of the analyzed isolates. These results confirm that the HN isolates correspond to A. thaumasius and highlight the usefulness of phylogenetic analysis for the accurate identification of nematode-trapping fungi (Figure 2).
This study provides new evidence supporting the occurrence of A. thaumasius in Ecuador, contributing to the current understanding of the diversity of nematode-trapping fungi in the country. Although the presence of nematode-predatory fungi in Ecuador has been previously documented, available records were limited and did not include A. thaumasius. Although the presence of nematode-predatory fungi in Ecuador has been previously documented, available records were limited and did not include A. thaumasius. In this regard, Rubner (1994, 1996) [30,38] conducted the first systematic studies on predatory fungi in Ecuador, reporting the presence of several species in Ecuadorian soils and highlighting their ecological potential; however, A. thaumasius was not recorded, reinforcing the novelty of the present finding.
Subsequent studies in Ecuador have focused primarily on A. oligosporus, demonstrating its predatory capacity against Meloidogyne spp. and its potential as a biological control agent in agricultural systems [39]. The phylogenetic analysis conducted in this study allowed a robust taxonomic assignment, with the isolates consistently clustering with reference sequences of A. thaumasius, thereby confirming their molecular identity and clearly distinguishing them from closely related species. The identification of A. thaumasius in Ecuador not only expands the national mycological inventory but also opens new perspectives for functional evaluations of this species, considering that fungi of the genus Arthrobotrys possess highly specialized and efficient nematode-capture mechanisms.

3.2. Growth Dynamics

The evaluation of fungal growth on different culture media revealed significant differences among treatments. Among the tested media, cornmeal agar exhibited the greatest average radial growth across the four isolates after five days (82.6 mm), whereas V8 juice agar showed the slowest average growth (60.9 mm). Individual isolate assessments indicated that strain HN-20 exhibited optimal growth on SNA medium (83.3 mm), while strains HN-21 (82.0 mm), HN-24 (83.3 mm), and HN-25 (83.3 mm) showed their highest growth on cornmeal agar (Table 1, Table 2, Table 3 and Table 4).
The asexual fungal strains evaluated in this study exhibited variations in their growth rates. Agar-based media containing cornmeal and oat flour have been reported to promote vigorous mycelial development in fungi of the genus Arthrobotrys [40,41]. In contrast, water agar, due to its low nutritional content, promotes slower growth [42,43]. Water agar is a nutrient-poor medium commonly used for isolation and predatory activity assays; in Arthrobotrys, mycelial growth is generally slower than in CMA or PDA [39].
The evaluation of sporulation in the asexual fungal isolates revealed significant differences among treatments. According to the results, oat agar was the most suitable medium for sporulation, followed by V8 juice agar and cornmeal agar. On oat agar, isolate HN-20 produced 2.4 × 104 conidia mL−1, HN-21 produced 2.4 × 104 conidia mL−1, HN-24 produced 1.8 × 104 conidia mL−1, and HN-25 produced 4.7 × 104 conidia mL−1. In contrast, the water agar control showed the lowest conidial production across all isolates, with HN-20 producing 6.25 × 102 conidia mL−1 and HN-24 producing 3.13 × 102 conidia mL−1, while isolates HN-21 and HN-25 did not sporulate under these conditions (Figure 3).
Cornmeal agar (CMA) and oatmeal/oat agar (OA) are commonly used media in mycology to promote sporulation and the expression of conidial characters in conidial fungi. Several protocols and comparative studies indicate that, although the response is species-specific, both media generally enhance conidium production and the development of diagnostic structures in taxa that sporulate poorly on more nutrient-rich media [44]. In nematode-trapping fungi such as Arthrobotrys, CMA is frequently used for isolation as well as for growth and conidiogenesis assays; however, optimal sporulation induction may require adjustments in formulation (e.g., Tween-80), light conditions, or nutritional stress. In the present study, oat agar and cornmeal agar yielded the highest levels of sporulation.
Previous studies have reported that the polyphyletic group of imperfect fungi (informally referred to as Deuteromycetes) produces higher numbers of conidia on CMA, followed by PDA and OA [45]. Studies on the isolation and characterization of Arthrobotrys species commonly use CMA as an optimal medium for growth and conidiogenesis; moreover, CMA is applied in physiological assays (e.g., temperature and pH) that assess conidial production and germination [46]. Nevertheless, although CMA and OA favor sporulation in many cases, the intensity of the response varies: some species sporulate better on CMA (with or without Tween-80), others on OA, and in certain cases neither CMA nor OA induces sporulation unless culture conditions are modified (e.g., UV light, water stress, or additives) [47].

3.3. Nematode Capture

The percentage of nematode attraction and capture varied significantly among the evaluated fungal isolates (HN-20, HN-21, HN-24, and HN-25) compared with their respective controls (Figure 4). Isolates HN-20, HN-21, and HN-24 exhibited the highest attraction and capture values, with percentages exceeding 65%, showing a significantly greater response than that observed in the corresponding controls (p < 0.05). In contrast, isolate HN-25 showed a lower attraction and capture percentage relative to the other fungal isolates, although it remained higher than the control.
The predatory activity observed in the evaluated isolates may be explained by several well-documented biochemical and structural mechanisms associated with nematode-trapping fungi [48]. Species of Arthrobotrys are known to produce specialized trapping structures, such as adhesive networks, which facilitate the physical capture of nematodes [49]. In addition, these fungi secrete extracellular enzymes, including proteases and chitinases, that degrade the nematode cuticle, allowing penetration and subsequent digestion of internal tissues [50]. The production of secondary metabolites with nematicidal activity has also been reported, contributing to nematode immobilization and mortality [51]. These combined mechanisms likely underlie the high capture rates observed in isolates HN-20, HN-21, and HN-24.
Furthermore, the variability in attraction and capture percentages among isolates may reflect differences in species–host specificity and ecological adaptation. Previous studies have shown that the effectiveness of nematode-trapping fungi can vary depending on the target nematode species, environmental conditions, and the intrinsic characteristics of each fungal strain [52,53,54,55]. For instance, while A. thaumasius has demonstrated high efficacy against Meloidogyne incognita, its performance may differ when interacting with other plant-parasitic nematodes [56]. This suggests that the observed differences among Ecuadorian isolates could be associated with strain-specific traits influencing host recognition, trap formation, and enzymatic activity.
The results of this study are consistent with the growing body of evidence supporting the biocontrol potential of A. thaumasius against plant-parasitic nematodes and provide additional support for its occurrence in Ecuador. Previous studies have identified and characterized A. thaumasius as an effective antagonist of Meloidogyne spp. In Turkey, A. thaumasius was isolated from tomato soils and, under in vitro conditions, reduced second-stage juveniles of Meloidogyne incognita by more than 70%, demonstrating significant antagonistic activity [57]. Similarly, studies conducted in India confirmed the identity of A. thaumasius using molecular markers and demonstrated its parasitic capacity, achieving approximately 82% parasitism against M. incognita in in vitro assays, along with a substantial reduction in nematode populations in tomato under greenhouse conditions [56].
When compared with these published studies, the attraction and capture percentages exceeding 65% observed in the Ecuadorian isolates HN-20, HN-21, and HN-24 confirm that A. thaumasius isolates from Ecuador exhibit predatory behavior consistent with values reported internationally. These similarities suggest that, despite geographical and ecological differences among populations, A. thaumasius retains functional traits that position it as a robust candidate for the development of nematode biocontrol strategies in agricultural systems.

4. Conclusions

This study is the first report on the isolation and characterization of A. thaumasius in Ecuador, which was identified in the roots of banana crops through molecular analysis. In vitro, assays demonstrated that cornmeal agar and oat agar are optimal culture media for the growth and sporulation of this fungus, providing a fundamental methodological basis for its laboratory handling. Furthermore, this research highlights the high biocontrol potential of isolates HN-20, HN-21, and HN-24, which achieved capture rates exceeding 65% against second-stage juveniles (J2) of Meloidogyne sp.
These findings highlight A. thaumasius as a promising candidate for the development of sustainable management strategies against root-knot nematodes. From an applied perspective, its incorporation into integrated pest management programs could contribute to reducing reliance on chemical nematicides. However, further studies under greenhouse and field conditions are required to evaluate its effectiveness in planta, as well as its potential influence on plant growth and overall crop performance.

Author Contributions

G.C.: reviewed the database, structured the sections of the article, wrote the article, and created and elaborated the figures. A.d.l.C.: structured the sections of the article, wrote the article. M.F.R.: wrote a section of the article and revised and corrected the text. R.F.C.-R.: structured the sections of the article, wrote the article. M.V.-M.: wrote a section of the article and corrected the text. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets generated during and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Decraemer, W.; Hunt, D.J. Structure and Classification. In Plant Nematology; Perry, R.N., Moens, M., Eds.; CAB International: Wallingford, UK, 2006; pp. 3–32. [Google Scholar]
  2. Pulavarty, A.; Egan, A.; Karpinska, A.; Horgan, K.; Kakouli-Duarte, T. Plant Parasitic Nematodes: A Review on Their Behaviour, Host Interaction, Management Approaches and Their Occurrence in Two Sites in the Republic of Ireland. Plants 2021, 10, 2352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Westerdahl, B.B. Scenarios for Sustainable Management of Plant Parasitic Nematodes. Indian Phytopathol. 2021, 74, 469–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Páez, A.R. Plant-Parasitic Nematodes and Their Management: A Focus on New Nematicides. In Nematodes—Ecology, Adaptation and Parasitism; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  5. Sikora, R.A.; Coyne, D.; Hallmann, J.; Timper, P. Reflections and Challenges: Nematology in Subtropical and Tropical Agriculture. In Plant Parasitic Nematodes in Subtropical and Tropical Agriculture; CABI Books; CAB International: Wallingford, UK, 2018; pp. 1–19. [Google Scholar]
  6. Jones, J.T.; Haegeman, A.; Danchin, E.G.J.; Gaur, H.S.; Helder, J.; Jones, M.G.K.; Kikuchi, T.; Manzanilla-López, R.; Palomares-Rius, J.E.; Wesemael, W.M.L.; et al. Top 10 Plant-Parasitic Nematodes in Molecular Plant Pathology. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2013, 14, 946–961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Moens, M.; Perry, R.N.; Starr, J.L. Meloidogyne Species—A Diverse Group of Novel and Important Plant Parasites. In Root-Knot Nematodes; Perry, R.N., Starr, J.L., Moens, M., Eds.; CABI International: Wallingford, UK, 2009; pp. 1–17. [Google Scholar]
  8. Devran, Z.; Göknur, A. Molecular Diagnosis and Differentiation of Meloidogyne arenaria, Meloidogyne javanica and Meloidogyne incognita Using SNP-Based KASP Assays. Crop Prot. 2023, 174, 106388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Topalović, O.; Geisen, S. Nematodes as Suppressors and Facilitators of Plant Performance. New Phytol. 2023, 238, 2305–2312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Calderón, J.; Miño-Castro, G.; Llumiquinga, P.; Abbas, M.; Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez, C.; Segovia-Salcedo, M.; Proaño, K. Distribution of Meloidogyne spp. in Agricultural Crops of Ecuador: A Literature Review (1976–2021). CABI Rev. 2022, 17, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Waele, D.D.; Elsen, A. Challenges in Tropical Plant Nematology. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 2007, 45, 457–485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Yadav, H.; Roberts, P.A.; Lopez-Arredondo, D. Combating Root-Knot Nematodes (Meloidogyne spp.): From Molecular Mechanisms to Resistant Crops. Plants 2025, 14, 1321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Wram, C.L.; Zasada, I.A. Short-Term Effects of Sublethal Doses of Nematicides on Meloidogyne incognita. Phytopathology 2019, 109, 1605–1613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Desaeger, J.; Dickson, D.W.; Locascio, S.J. Methyl Bromide Alternatives for Control of Root-Knot Nematode (Meloidogyne spp.) in Tomato Production in Florida. J. Nematol. 2017, 49, 140–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Haydock, P.P.J.; Woods, S.R.; Grove, I.G.; Hare, M.C. Chemical Control of Nematodes. In Plant Nematology; CABI Books; CAB International: Wallingford, UK, 2013; pp. 459–479. [Google Scholar]
  16. Forghani, F.; Hajihassani, A. Recent Advances in the Development of Environmentally Benign Treatments to Control Root-Knot Nematodes. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 1125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Vera-Morales, M.; López Medina, S.E.; Naranjo-Morán, J.; Quevedo, A.; Ratti, M.F. Nematophagous Fungi: A Review of Their Phosphorus Solubilization Potential. Microorganisms 2023, 11, 137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Wang, S.; Liu, X. Tools and Basic Procedures of Gene Manipulation in Nematode-Trapping Fungi. Mycology 2023, 14, 75–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Su, H.; Zhao, Y.; Zhou, J.; Feng, H.; Jiang, D.; Zhang, K.-Q.; Yang, J. Trapping Devices of Nematode-Trapping Fungi: Formation, Evolution, and Genomic Perspectives. Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc. 2017, 92, 357–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Vidal-Diez de Ulzurrun, G.; Hsueh, Y.-P. Predator-Prey Interactions of Nematode-Trapping Fungi and Nematodes: Both Sides of the Coin. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2018, 102, 3939–3949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Vera-Morales, M.; Castañeda-Ruiz, R.F.; Sosa, D.; Arias-Vega, C.; Quevedo, A.; Ratti, M.F. Compuestos bioactivos de bacterias y hongos en el control de nematodos fitopatógenos: Mecanismos de acción, interacciones y aplicaciones. Sci. Agropecu. 2024, 15, 143–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Jiang, X.; Xiang, M.; Liu, X. Nematode-Trapping Fungi. Microbiol. Spectr. 2017, 5, 963–974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Zhang, F.; Boonmee, S.; Bhat, J.D.; Xiao, W.; Yang, X.-Y. New Arthrobotrys Nematode-Trapping Species (Orbiliaceae) from Terrestrial Soils and Freshwater Sediments in China. J. Fungi 2022, 8, 671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Fenibo, E.O.; Ijoma, G.N.; Matambo, T. Biopesticides in Sustainable Agriculture: Current Status and Future Prospects. In New and Future Development in Biopesticide Research: Biotechnological Exploration; Mandal, S.D., Ramkumar, G., Karthi, S., Jin, F., Eds.; Springer Nature: Singapore, 2022; pp. 1–53. [Google Scholar]
  25. Hastuti, L.D.; Putri, Q.; Priyani, N.; Kesuma, S. Efficacy of Fungal Bioconsortia Comprising Trichoderma yunnnanense and Arthrobotrys thaumasius in the Management of Meloidogyne hapla Infestations in Tomato Cultivation. Int. J. Agric. Biol. 2024, 32, 461–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Duddington, C.L. Notes on the Technique of Handling Predacious Fungi. Trans. Br. Mycol. Soc. 1955, 38, 97–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Barron, G.L. The Nematode-Destroying Fungi—Topics in Mycobiology, No. 1; Biological Publications Ltd.: Guelph, ON, Canada, 1977. [Google Scholar]
  28. Cooke, R.C.; Godfrey, B.E.S. A Key to the Nematode-Destroying Fungi. Trans. Br. Mycol. Soc. 1964, 47, 61–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Drechsler, C. Some Hyphomycetes That Prey on Free-Living Terricolous Nematodes. Mycologia 1937, 29, 447–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Rubner, A. Revision of predacious Hyphomycetes in the Dactylella-Monacrosporium complex. Stud. Mycol. 1996, 39, 1–134. [Google Scholar]
  31. Cenis, J.L. Rapid Extraction of Fungal DNA for PCR Amplification. Nucleic Acids Res. 1992, 20, 2380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. White, T.J.; Bruns, T.; Lee, S.; Taylor, J. Amplification and Direct Sequencing of Fungal Ribosomal RNA Genes for Phylogenetics. In PCR Protocols; Innis, M.A., Gelfand, D.H., Sninsky, J.J., White, T.J., Eds.; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 1990; pp. 315–322. [Google Scholar]
  33. Sanger, F.; Nicklen, S.; Coulson, A.R. DNA Sequencing with Chain-Terminating Inhibitors. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1977, 74, 5463–5467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Guindon, S.; Dufayard, J.-F.; Lefort, V.; Anisimova, M.; Hordijk, W.; Gascuel, O. New Algorithms and Methods to Estimate Maximum-Likelihood Phylogenies: Assessing the Performance of PhyML 3.0. Syst. Biol. 2010, 59, 307–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Hussain, M.; Zouhar, M.; Ryšánek, P. Attraction of Root Knot Nematodes, Meloidogyne incognita, to Living Mycelium of Nematophagous Fungi. Pak. J. Zool. 2018, 50, 2073–2078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Castagnone-Sereno, P.; Esparrago, G.; Abad, P.; Leroy, F.; Bongiovanni, M. Satellite DNA as a Target for PCR-Specific Detection of the Plant-Parasitic Nematode Meloidogyne hapla. Curr. Genet. 1995, 28, 566–570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Hsueh, Y.-P.; Gronquist, M.R.; Schwarz, E.M.; Nath, R.D.; Lee, C.-H.; Gharib, S.; Schroeder, F.C.; Sternberg, P.W. Nematophagous Fungus Arthrobotrys oligospora Mimics Olfactory Cues of Sex and Food to Lure Its Nematode Prey. eLife 2017, 6, e20023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Rubner, A. Predacious Fungi from Ecuador. Mycotaxon 1994, 51, 143–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Vera-Morales, M.; Quevedo, A.; Peñaherrera, S.; Serrano, L.; Sosa, D.; Ratti, M.F.; Castañeda-Ruiz, R.F.; Magdama, F. Dinámica de Crecimiento, Esporulación y Captura de Hongos Asexuales Sobre Meloidogyne sp., In Vitro. Sci. Agropecu. 2024, 15, 121–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Singh, U.B.; Sahu, A.; Singh, R.K.; Singh, D.P.; Meena, K.K.; Srivastava, J.S.; Renu; Manna, M.C. Evaluation of Biocontrol Potential of Arthrobotrys oligospora against Meloidogyne graminicola and Rhizoctonia solani in Rice (Oryza sativa L.). Biol. Control 2012, 60, 262–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Wang, F.-H.; Xu, Q.; Wang, B.; Wang, K.-Y.; Xue, Y.-J.; Cai, B.; Wang, F.; Liu, Y.; Cai, K.; Cao, X. Isolation, Identification and Characterisation of the Nematophagous Fungus Arthrobotrys thaumasia (Monacrosporium thaumasium) from China. Biocontrol Sci. Technol. 2017, 27, 378–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Orozco A, M.; Jiménez R, A.; Acuña N, O.; Álvarez C, V. Determinación del crecimiento de hongos nematófagosen diversas fuentes de carbono. Agron. Costarric. 2015, 39, 143–152. [Google Scholar]
  43. Quevedo, A.; Vera-Morales, M.; Espinoza-Lozano, F.; Castañeda-Ruiz, R.F.; Sosa Del Castillo, D.; Magdama, F. Assessing the Predatory Activity of Arthrobotrys oligosporus Strain C-2197 as Biocontrol of the Root-Knot Nematode Meloidogyne spp. Rev. Bionatura 2021, 6, 1586–1592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Kumar, D.; Singh, K.P.; Jaiswai, R.K. Screening of Different Media and Substrates for Cultural Variability and Mass Culture of Arthrobotrys dactyloides Drechsler. Mycobiology 2005, 33, 215–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Qi, Y.; Zhao, H.; Zhang, Z.; Ouyang, Y.; Zhang, X. Biological Characteristics and Fungicide Screening of Bipolaris Oryzae Causing Leaf Spot on Banana in China. Microorganisms 2025, 13, 1285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Suresh, S.; Annaiyan, S.; Shobana, C.S.; AlGarawi, A.M.; Hatamleh, A.A.; Arokiyaraj, S. Isolation, Characterization, and Predatory Activity of Nematode-Trapping Fungus, Arthrobotrys oligospora PSGSS01. J. King Saud Univ. Sci. 2024, 36, 103297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Soares, P.L.M.; Nozaki, M.d.H.; Barbosa, B.F.F.; Santos, J.M.d.; Barbosa, J.C. Crescimento e esporulação de duas espécies de Arthrobotrys corda em diferentes meios de cultura e dois ambientes. Biosci. J. 2009, 25, 68–74. [Google Scholar]
  48. Zhu, M.-C.; Li, X.-M.; Zhao, N.; Yang, L.; Zhang, K.-Q.; Yang, J.-K. Regulatory Mechanism of Trap Formation in the Nematode-Trapping Fungi. J. Fungi 2022, 8, 406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Nordbring-Hertz, B.; Jansson, H.-B.; Tunlid, A. Nematophagous Fungi. In Encyclopedia of Life Sciences; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  50. Yang, J.; Wang, L.; Ji, X.; Feng, Y.; Li, X.; Zou, C.; Xu, J.; Ren, Y.; Mi, Q.; Wu, J.; et al. Genomic and Proteomic Analyses of the Fungus Arthrobotrys oligospora Provide Insights into Nematode-Trap Formation. PLoS Pathog. 2011, 7, e1002179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Pereira, C.G.; Varejão, J.O.S.; Barros, A.F.; de Paiva, W.F.; Balbino, H.M.; Rodrigues, D.; de Queiroz, M.E.L.R.; de Freitas, L.G.; Varejão, E.V.V. Identification and Fumigant Effects of Nematicidal Volatile Organic Compounds Produced by Nematophagous Fungi against Root-Knot Nematodes. BioControl 2026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Zhang, J.; Wei, L.; Zhang, H.; Ma, X.; Sun, Y.; Li, R.; Zhang, C.; Cai, X.; Qiao, J.; Meng, Q. Proteomic Insights into Nematode-Trapping Fungi Arthrobotrys Oligospora after Their Response to Chitin. J. Vet. Res. 2025, 69, 71–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Andersson, K.-M.; Kumar, D.; Bentzer, J.; Friman, E.; Ahrén, D.; Tunlid, A. Interspecific and Host-Related Gene Expression Patterns in Nematode-Trapping Fungi. BMC Genom. 2014, 15, 968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Yang, C.-T.; Vidal-Diez de Ulzurrun, G.; Gonçalves, A.P.; Lin, H.-C.; Chang, C.-W.; Huang, T.-Y.; Chen, S.-A.; Lai, C.-K.; Tsai, I.J.; Schroeder, F.C.; et al. Natural Diversity in the Predatory Behavior Facilitates the Establishment of a Robust Model Strain for Nematode-Trapping Fungi. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2020, 117, 6762–6770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Kuo, C.-Y.; Tay, R.J.; Lin, H.-C.; Juan, S.-C.; Vidal-Diez de Ulzurrun, G.; Chang, Y.-C.; Hoki, J.; Schroeder, F.C.; Hsueh, Y.-P. The Nematode-Trapping Fungus Arthrobotrys oligospora Detects Prey Pheromones via G Protein-Coupled Receptors. Nat. Microbiol. 2024, 9, 1738–1751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Kassam, R.; Yadav, J.; Chawla, G.; Kundu, A.; Hada, A.; Jaiswal, N.; Bollinedi, H.; Kamil, D.; Devi, P.; Rao, U. Identification, Characterization, and Evaluation of Nematophagous Fungal Species of Arthrobotrys and Tolypocladium for the Management of Meloidogyne incognita. Front. Microbiol. 2021, 12, 790223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Eken, C.; Uysal, G.; Demir, D.; Caliskan, S.; Sevindik, E.; Caglayan, K. First report of the nematode-trapping fungus Arthrobotrys thaumasia in Türkiye and its biocontrol potential against Meloidogyne incognita. J. Phytopathol. 2024, 172, e13354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Diversity 18 00335 g001
Figure 1. Location of sampling point: Guayaquil, Ecuador.
Figure 1. Location of sampling point: Guayaquil, Ecuador.
Diversity 18 00335 g001
Diversity 18 00335 g002
Figure 2. Maximum Likelihood phylogenetic tree based on ITS sequences of 24 nematode-trapping fungi species within the family Orbiliaceae, showing the evolutionary relationships between reference sequences retrieved from GenBank and the isolates obtained in this study. Bootstrap support values are indicated at the main nodes. The tree confirms the taxonomic assignment of the isolates within the A. thaumasius clade.
Figure 2. Maximum Likelihood phylogenetic tree based on ITS sequences of 24 nematode-trapping fungi species within the family Orbiliaceae, showing the evolutionary relationships between reference sequences retrieved from GenBank and the isolates obtained in this study. Bootstrap support values are indicated at the main nodes. The tree confirms the taxonomic assignment of the isolates within the A. thaumasius clade.
Diversity 18 00335 g002
Diversity 18 00335 g003
Figure 3. Comparison of means ± standard deviation of sporulation of the fungal isolates on cornmeal agar, oat agar, SNA agar, SNA agar supplemented with plant debris, V8 juice agar, and control. Data were log-transformed [Log(x + 1)] prior to statistical analysis. Two independent analyses were performed: (i) comparison among strains within each culture medium, and (ii) comparison among culture media. Different letters above bars indicate statistically significant differences among strains within each medium according to Tukey’s test (p < 0.05). Letters associated with culture media indicate significant differences among media. The symbols on the x-axis represent exponential notation (powers of ten) used to express the scale of the data.
Figure 3. Comparison of means ± standard deviation of sporulation of the fungal isolates on cornmeal agar, oat agar, SNA agar, SNA agar supplemented with plant debris, V8 juice agar, and control. Data were log-transformed [Log(x + 1)] prior to statistical analysis. Two independent analyses were performed: (i) comparison among strains within each culture medium, and (ii) comparison among culture media. Different letters above bars indicate statistically significant differences among strains within each medium according to Tukey’s test (p < 0.05). Letters associated with culture media indicate significant differences among media. The symbols on the x-axis represent exponential notation (powers of ten) used to express the scale of the data.
Diversity 18 00335 g003
Diversity 18 00335 g004
Figure 4. (A) Percentages of nematode attraction toward A. thaumasius fungal isolates, expressed as mean ± standard error. Data were arcsine square-root transformed prior to statistical analysis to meet the assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variances. Different letters above the bars indicate statistically significant differences among fungal isolates and their respective controls according to Tukey’s test. (B) A. thaumasius conidiogenous cell and conidia. (C) A nematode is captured by A. thaumasius hyphal ring structure.
Figure 4. (A) Percentages of nematode attraction toward A. thaumasius fungal isolates, expressed as mean ± standard error. Data were arcsine square-root transformed prior to statistical analysis to meet the assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variances. Different letters above the bars indicate statistically significant differences among fungal isolates and their respective controls according to Tukey’s test. (B) A. thaumasius conidiogenous cell and conidia. (C) A nematode is captured by A. thaumasius hyphal ring structure.
Diversity 18 00335 g004
Table 1. Radial colony growth (mm) of A. thaumasius strain HN20 cultured on different media over five days of incubation.
Table 1. Radial colony growth (mm) of A. thaumasius strain HN20 cultured on different media over five days of incubation.
HN20Colony Diameter per Day (mm)
12345
Jugo v810.3 ± 0.3 a21.4 ± 0.6 a35.6 ± 0.5 a48.5 ± 0.7 a62.0 ± 0.9 a
SNA + Ramas13.3 ± 0.3 bc26.8 ± 0.6 b44.0 ± 0.4 b59.3 ± 0.9 c74.4 ± 0.5 c
OA12.4 ± 0.6 b27.8 ± 1.7 b41.3 ± 1.3 b54.9 ± 2.0 b67.6 ± 2.1 b
CMA14.0 ± 1.2 c30.8 ± 1.8 c47.9 ± 1.8 c60.6 ± 2.6 c82.0 ± 3.9 d
SNA14.6 ± 0.5 c31.0 ± 0.7 c49.9 ± 0.8 c67.9 ± 0.6 d83.3 ± 1.8 d
Control13.9 ± 0.6 c31.4 ± 1.3 c49.1 ± 2.8 c67.3 ± 2.7 d79.9 ± 1.3 d
Values represent the mean ± standard deviation of five replicates. Different letters within the same column indicate significant differences according to Tukey’s test (p < 0.05).
Table 2. Radial colony growth (mm) of A. thaumasius strain HN21 cultured on different media over five days of incubation.
Table 2. Radial colony growth (mm) of A. thaumasius strain HN21 cultured on different media over five days of incubation.
HN21Colony Diameter per Day (mm)
12345
Jugo v88.3 ± 0.9 a20.0 ± 1.1 a32.4 ± 1.0 a46.0 ± 1.8 a59.4 ± 3.4 a
SNA + Ramas12.9 ± 0.8 b28.9 ± 1.8 bc43.4 ± 1.0 bc60.6 ± 1.4 c76.1 ± 2.1 c
OA13.4 ± 0.9 bc27.0 ± 3.1 b40.3 ± 2.2 b54.9 ± 2.9 b67.4 ± 3.0 b
CMA15.8 ± 0.6 c33.4 ± 0.6 d48.0 ± 1.2 d65.1 ± 0.3 c82.0 ± 1.2 cd
SNA14.6 ± 1.1 bc32.8 ± 2.1 cd47.1 ± 2.3 d65.0 ± 2.3 c82.4 ± 2.4 d
Control13.0 ± 1.9 b30.1 ± 2.1 bcd46.0 ± 2.6 cd64.4 ± 2.6 c77.3 ± 3.7 cd
Values represent the mean ± standard deviation of five replicates. Different letters within the same column indicate significant differences according to Tukey’s test (p < 0.05).
Table 3. Radial colony growth (mm) of A. thaumasius strain HN24 cultured on different media over five days of incubation.
Table 3. Radial colony growth (mm) of A. thaumasius strain HN24 cultured on different media over five days of incubation.
HN24Colony Diameter per Day (mm)
12345
Jugo v88.0 ± 0.4 a19.1 ± 1.1 a30.8 ± 0.6 a44.1 ± 1.5 a58.1 ± 0.9 a
SNA + Ramas12.6 ± 0.5 b29.6 ± 0.9 bc 43.9 ± 1.7 c60.5 ± 0.9 c77.0 ± 2.3 c
OA10.1 ± 0.9 a27.4 ± 0.9 b40.1 ± 0.8 b53.5 ± 2.2 b68.5 ± 3.9 b
CMA13.0 ± 2.0 bc31.6 ± 2.3 cd47.0 ± 2.7 cd66.5 ± 1.0 d83.3 ± 3.0 d
SNA14.0 ± 1.0 bc33.4 ± 1.3 d46.4 ± 1.4 c65.3 ± 2.1 d82.0 ± 1.9 cd
Control15.0 ± 0.7 c32.1 ± 0.8 cd50.1 ± 1.4 d68.0 ± 1.5 d80.5 ± 1.4 cd
Values represent the mean ± standard deviation of five replicates. Different letters within the same column indicate significant differences according to Tukey’s test (p < 0.05).
Table 4. Radial colony growth (mm) of A. thaumasius strain HN25 cultured on different media over five days of incubation.
Table 4. Radial colony growth (mm) of A. thaumasius strain HN25 cultured on different media over five days of incubation.
HN25Colony Diameter per Day (mm)
12345
Jugo v811.5 ± 1.2 a27.1 ± 0.8 a35.9 ± 1.5 a49.9 ± 1.4 a64.3 ± 0.9 a
SNA + Ramas14.1 ± 1.0 a30.1 ± 0.6 abc41.0 ± 0.8 bc57.6 ± 0.8 b73.8 ± 1.0 b
OA11.9 ± 1.8 a28.1 ± 1.3 ab39.0 ± 2.7 ab52.1 ± 2.0 a63.3 ± 2.8 a
CMA13.9 ± 1.1 a33.1 ± 1.4 c47.1 ± 1.5 de65.1 ± 1.1 cd83.3 ± 1.0 d
SNA14.0 ± 1.9 a32.0 ± 2.1 c43.6 ± 2.6 cd61.8 ± 2.8 bc77.3 ± 2.7 bc
Control14.1 ± 1.0 a31.1 ± 1.8 bc49.3 ± 1.8 e67.1 ± 2.3 d80.1 ± 1.2 cd
Values represent the mean ± standard deviation of five replicates. Different letters within the same column indicate significant differences according to Tukey’s test (p < 0.05).
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Carpio, G.; de la Cruz, A.; Ratti, M.F.; Castañeda-Ruiz, R.F.; Vera-Morales, M. Biocontrol Potential of Arthrobotrys thaumasius Isolated from Banana Roots (Musa spp. L.) Against Root-Knot Nematodes of the Genus Meloidogyne. Diversity 2026, 18, 335. https://doi.org/10.3390/d18060335

AMA Style

Carpio G, de la Cruz A, Ratti MF, Castañeda-Ruiz RF, Vera-Morales M. Biocontrol Potential of Arthrobotrys thaumasius Isolated from Banana Roots (Musa spp. L.) Against Root-Knot Nematodes of the Genus Meloidogyne. Diversity. 2026; 18(6):335. https://doi.org/10.3390/d18060335

Chicago/Turabian Style

Carpio, Giovanna, Alejandra de la Cruz, María F. Ratti, Rafael F. Castañeda-Ruiz, and Marcos Vera-Morales. 2026. "Biocontrol Potential of Arthrobotrys thaumasius Isolated from Banana Roots (Musa spp. L.) Against Root-Knot Nematodes of the Genus Meloidogyne" Diversity 18, no. 6: 335. https://doi.org/10.3390/d18060335

APA Style

Carpio, G., de la Cruz, A., Ratti, M. F., Castañeda-Ruiz, R. F., & Vera-Morales, M. (2026). Biocontrol Potential of Arthrobotrys thaumasius Isolated from Banana Roots (Musa spp. L.) Against Root-Knot Nematodes of the Genus Meloidogyne. Diversity, 18(6), 335. https://doi.org/10.3390/d18060335

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop