Next Article in Journal
Enhancing Sugarcane Yield and Sugar Quality through Optimal Application of Polymer-Coated Single Super Phosphate and Irrigation Management
Previous Article in Journal
Comparative Physiological and Transcriptome Analyses Reveal Mechanisms of Salicylic-Acid-Reduced Postharvest Ripening in ‘Hosui’ Pears (Pyrus pyrifolia Nakai)
Previous Article in Special Issue
Primary Screening of Microorganisms against Meloidogyne hapla (Chitwood, 1949) under the Conditions of Laboratory and Vegetative Tests on Tomato
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Plants
Volume 12
Issue 19
10.3390/plants12193431
plants-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 thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Metarhizium carneum Formulations: A Promising New Biological Control to Be Incorporated in the Integrated Management of Meloidogyne enterolobii on Tomato Plants

by
Daniel López-Lima
1,*,
David Alarcón-Utrera
1,
José Ángel Ordáz-Meléndez
1,
Luc Villain
2,3 and
Gloria Carrión
4,*
1
Facultad de Ciencias Agrícolas, Universidad Veracruzana, Xalapa 91000, Mexico
2
Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement (CIRAD), UMR DIADE, 34398 Montpellier, France
3
Diversité, Adaptation et Développement des plantes (DIADE), Université de Montpellier, Pole Agriculture Environnement Biodiversité, IRD, CIRAD, 34394 Montpellier, France
4
Instituto de Ecología, A.C. Red de Biodiversidad y Sistemática, Xalapa 91073, Mexico
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Plants 2023, 12(19), 3431; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12193431
Submission received: 18 August 2023 / Revised: 22 September 2023 / Accepted: 22 September 2023 / Published: 29 September 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Management of the Root-Knot Nematodes)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The increase in the populations of root-knot nematode Meloidogyne enterolobii in various vegetables such as tomatoes grown under greenhouse conditions as well as increasing restrictions on the use of certain chemical nematicides have led to the search for new, effective management strategies, preferably ones that are sustainable biological alternatives. In this work, two formulations of the nematophagous fungus Metarhizium carneum, one concentrated suspension and one wettable powder, were evaluated under greenhouse conditions to reduce the M. enterolobii infestation in tomato plants. In addition, the effectiveness of the liquid formulation of M. carneum was compared with two biological and three chemical commercial nematicides. The results show that the two M. carneum formulations reduced the M. enterolobii population density by 78 and 66% in relation to the control treatment. In comparison, the liquid formulation of M. carneum and Purpureocillium lilacinum treatments reduced nematode population density by 72 and 43%, respectively, while for metam sodium preplanting applications followed by M. carneum applications during the tomato growth stage, the reduction was 96%. The alternate use of some chemical compounds plus the application of M. carneum as a biocontrol is a good starting strategy for managing M. enterolobii populations. These results confirm that M. carneum is a serious candidate for the short-term commercialization of an environmentally friendly biological nematicide.

1. Introduction

Root-knot nematodes are the most widespread soilborne pathogens worldwide, causing USD millions in losses annually on various crops [1]. Meloidogyne species are sedentary endoparasites that induce feeding sites within the roots of their host, which allows the nematodes to grow and develop in interaction with the plant. The Meloidogyne life cycle begins with the second-stage juveniles (J2) hatching in the soil, which, upon finding a host plant, enter through the elongation zone of the roots and migrate towards the vascular cylinder [2], where they induce the differentiation of some cells into multinucleated cells by hyperplasia. These giant cells are metabolically very active and serve as a constant source of food for the nematode. Giant cells at feeding sites cause root gall symptoms [3]. Meloidogyne enterolobii is considered an emerging nematode species of major concern due to its worldwide distribution and its ability to reproduce on various crops, causing severe damage [4]. This nematode was recorded for the first time in Mexico parasitizing watermelon plants in the state of Veracruz [5], and later it was registered in tomato cultivated fields in Sinaloa, the main vegetable-producing state, causing severe damage to tomato plants, even those carrying the Mi gene which provides resistance to M. incognita, M. javanica and M. arenaria [6,7]. This is of particular concern because Mexico is the tenth largest tomato producer at four million tons per year, and it is also the main exporter worldwide [8,9]. Currently, M. enterolobii is reported in Mexico on cucumber [10], pepper [11], eggplant [12], carrot and beet crops [13]. The ability of M. enterolobii to infect various plant species and overcome host resistance mechanisms is one of the main problems for field management [14,15]. The control of the M. enterolobii population is carried out using chemical nematicides, mainly organophosphates and carbamates. However, these nematicides have drawbacks since they must be applied in high doses and repeatedly to keep the nematode population below the economic threshold [16]. In addition, the constant use of these chemical nematicides leads to their ineffectiveness after prolonged use and causes harmful effects on beneficial organisms along with contamination of groundwater; therefore, restrictions were implemented for their use in the control of plant-parasitic nematodes [16,17].
The harmful effects of chemical nematicides can be overcome by using biological control, which is a safer, more effective and environmentally friendly alternative. Some nematophagous fungi have been used as biological control agents since they can modify their saprophytic behavior to feed on nematodes, developing various strategies to infect them [18]. The nematophagous fungus Metarhizium carneum (=Paecilomyces carneus) (Duché & R. Heim) Kepler, S.A. Rehner & Humber) was recorded as a parasite of Meloidogyne spp. [19,20], Heterodera avenae [21,22] and Globodera rostochiensis [20]. The biological effectiveness of M. carneum against nematodes was evaluated with the application of concentrated conidia in suspension [20]; however, its performance when manufactured as a commercial product is unknown. Likewise, it is important to compare its effectiveness with respect to other nematicides, both biological and chemical, available on the market. In considering the potential of using M. carneum as a nematicide, the aims of this work are as follows: (1) to evaluate the effects of two formulations of M. carneum in liquid and powder forms in tomato plants infected with M. enterolobii, and (2) to compare their effectiveness with other commercial nematicides.

2. Results

2.1. Evaluation of the Liquid vs. Powdered Formulation of Metarhizium carneum against Meloidogyne enterolobii in Greenhouse Tomato Plants

The tomato plants treated separately with one of the two formulations of M. carneum presented similar numbers of M. enterolobii galls: an average of 145 and 156 galls for the liquid and powder formulations, respectively. These values were not significantly different from the 189 average galls observed in the untreated plants. Although the galling index was similar in the three treatments, the galls registered in the plants treated with the liquid formulation of M. carneum presented a smaller size. Moreover, the two formulations, liquid and powder, reduced significantly (p ≤ 0.01) the population of M. enterolobii (eggs and J2) in the roots of tomato plants by 78 and 66%, respectively, with respect to the control (Table 1).
Population density of J2 in the rhizospheric soil was very low. The total populations of nematodes found in M. carneum treatments were significantly lower than the population found in the control (Table 1). Based on the final population of nematodes in the roots and in the rhizospheric soil, the reproduction factor in the liquid and powder treatments was 4.8 and 4.2, respectively, in contrast to the reproduction factor of 14.6 in the untreated plants. About the plants’ development, similar values were found in the three treatments. However, the tomato plants treated with the liquid formulation of M. carneum showed a greater foliage fresh weight (Table 2).

2.2. Effectiveness of M. carneum Liquid Formulation Compared to Commercial Nematicide Products

The evaluations carried out at 60 and 120 days after tomato seedling transplanting allowed us to observe how the population of nematodes was reduced or increased according to the treatment. At 60 days after transplanting, the plants treated with metam sodium + M. carneum, fluensulfone and metam sodium + abamectin did not show galling symptoms, while the plants treated separately with M. carneum, Purpureocillium lilacinum and the inactivated ferment of Myrothecium verrucaria presented slight galling with no necrosis signs. Control group plants showed symptoms of medium galling with the beginning of necrotic areas. The population density of M. enterolobii in the roots of the plants treated with metam sodium + M. carneum, fluensulfone and metam sodium + abamectin were significantly (p ≤ 0.01) lower than the rest of the treatments, with a reduction of 99, 98 and 99%, respectively, compared to the control treatment; therefore, the reproduction factor was also significantly lower (Table 3). Likewise, in the treatments with M. carneum, P. lilacinum and the inactivated M. verrucaria ferment, the nematode population density was significantly (p ≤ 0.01) lower than population density in the control treatment, with a reduction of 28, 39 and 61%, respectively. The nematode reproduction factor in the last three treatments was of 6.2, 6.6 and 4.6, respectively, significantly lower than the reproduction factor in the control treatment, which was 9.8 (Table 3). In addition, the plants treated with the inactivated M. verrucaria ferment had greater (p ≤ 0.01) foliage fresh weight, flower number and chlorophyll content than untreated plants (Table S1).
At 120 days after transplanting, the roots of the plants treated with M. carneum showed a medium to high galling index, with continuous thickening and the beginnings of necrosis; however, in this treatment, the root system was very abundant despite heavy infestation. Regarding the plants treated with P. lilacinum and the inactive ferment of M. verrucaria, the galling index was strong to severe, with continuous thickening, cracking in the root cortex necrosis and a reduced root system. The roots of the plants treated with fluensulfone presented slight necrosis of the older roots, and the root system was slightly reduced in weight, while the plants treated with metam sodium + M. carneum and metam sodium + abamectin presented a galling index of zero to light (Figure 1).
Plants treated with M. carneum had the lowest (p ≤ 0.01) root population density (72%) compared with biological treatments and control plants, followed by plants treated with P. lilacinum with a reduction of 43%. On the other hand, plants treated with the metabolites of M. verrucaria fermentation presented a high final population density, only 2% less than the untreated plants. The lowest population density of M. enterolobii was recorded in the roots of the plants treated with metam sodium + M. carneum, fluensulfone and metam sodium + abamectin with a reduction compared with the control group of 96, 99 and 97%, respectively. The reproduction factor of M. enterolobii in treatments with M. carneum, P. lilacium and the inactive ferment of M. verrucaria reached values of 17, 19.5 and 21.3, respectively, which are not significantly different (p ≤ 0.01) from the value of 27.2 reached for the control group (Table 4). Likewise, the reproduction factor and final population was significantly lower in the metam sodium + M. carneum, fluensulfone and metam sodium + abamectin treatments (Table 4, Figure 2). Likewise, the plants treated with these three treatments developed better in terms of higher biomass, chlorophyll content (Figure 3), number of flowers and root length (Table S2).

3. Discussion

Currently, M. enterolobii is considered an important risk for agricultural production due to its worldwide distribution and wide host range. Moreover, this species is recognized as one of the most virulent root-knot nematodes because of its ability to reproduce in plants with resistance to the main root-knot nematode tropical species [4,23]. Several methods, such as chemical nematicides, biological control, resistant cultivars and cultural control methods, have recently been evaluated in the control of M. enterolobii [24]. The results of this work contribute to the design of integrated pest management strategies that include the application of various control methods to increase efficiency in damage reduction and reduce the pathogen population below the economic threshold [25].
In Mexico, this nematode causes significant yield losses in tomato and other vegetables crops due to its high pathogenicity, which leads to important plant mortality before completing the crop cycle. Even tomato cultivars with the Mi-1 resistance gene, which confers resistance to M. javanica, M. arenaria and M. incognita, are susceptible to M. enterolobii [6,7]. Therefore, in this work, the research focused on the development of integrated management strategies for this emerging species using biological and chemical controls.
The effectiveness of the application of bioproducts of nematophagous fungi was previously demonstrated in other Meloidogyne species and in other crops [26,27,28], with Purpureocillium lilacinum being the most widely used nematophagous fungus worldwide, and there are currently many products available on the market developed with its conidia [29,30,31,32,33]. However, in recent years, there have been cases of severe infections in humans, so it is necessary to evaluate the nematicidal properties of other species of fungi to provide other, safer biological control alternatives for farmers’ health [34,35].
Fungi of the Metarhizium genus, commonly used for their entomopathogenic activity, were shown to be effective in parasitizing the root-knot nematode M. incognita [36]. In particular, M. carneum showed its effectiveness in reducing populations of the potato cyst nematode G. rostochiensis by 33 to 89% under field conditions [20]. The results of this work confirm the effectiveness of M. carneum formulations obtained by reproducing it in a bioreactor (active fermentation) or on a solid substrate for the reduction of M. enterolobii populations. The way the microorganisms used as biological control agents are reproduced is an important factor in their performance in crop fields. Various studies indicate that liquid formulations may have advantages over powder ones because the spores remain viable for more time. There is also less risk of contamination compared to powder presentations, and therefore the liquid presents greater efficiency in reducing populations of plant-parasitic nematodes [37,38,39]. Moreover, it was indicated that microorganisms reproduced in liquid media have greater efficiency potential since the microorganisms remain in a latent stage and become active only when applied to the soil [40]. The results of this work reveal that the two ways of reproducing M. carneum have a similar potential in the suppression of M. enterolobii. However, the liquid formulation provides a higher concentration of spores in less time, and therefore, this means that smaller quantities of product can be applied per hectare.
The early application of M. carneum in the field, before transplanting or planting, is an important factor to consider in the integrated management of pathogenic nematodes, as has been carried out in fields heavily infested with G. rostochiensis [20]. This way, the fungus has more opportunity to parasitize eggs and J2. Conversely, when the nematicide was applied seven days after nematode inoculation, many J2 were allowed to penetrate roots and establish their feeding site. The process of root infestation and feeding-site establishment by the nematode takes approximately 10 days [3]. For this reason, the number of galls and the galling index in the plants with the application of the two M. carneum formulations (powder and liquid) were like those of the inoculated control, although nematode root population density was very different. This also indicates that the evaluation of the number of galls or the galling index are not adequate references when evaluating the nematicidal properties of any product. Based on our data, we think that to efficiently control the population density of M. enterolobii in tomato roots in soils highly infested by nematodes, it is important to reduce the population before transplanting, when nematodes are still at egg and J2 stages. Metarhizium carneum was recorded as a parasite of nematode immobile stages such as eggs and females of Globodera, Heterodera and Meloidogyne [19,21,22], because of its ability to cross the nematode’s cuticle and develop its mycelium inside [20]. In this work, both formulations (liquid and powder) significantly reduced the population in the soil. In the genus Metarhizium, other species were recorded to produce spores with a thin mucilaginous layer that allowed them to adhere to the surface of their host to form an appressorium, from which a narrow hypha was produced that penetrated the cuticle using a combination of enzymes and mechanical strength [41]. It is possible that M. carneum has a similar adhesion mechanism, which would explain its suppressive effect on J2 in the soil; however, further research is needed.
In the second trial comparing the effectiveness between the M. carneum liquid formulation and commercial biological and chemical nematicides, both treatments with the application of M. carneum and P. lilacinum allowed a reduction in the nematode population. Novel biorational strategies have been evaluated for the M. enterolobii control. For example, P. lilacinum and Pochonia chlamydosporia conidia reduced by 80% the hatching of this nematode under in vitro conditions [14]; Aspergillus tubingensis fermentation inhibited M. enterolobii hatching and caused 100% mortality of its J2 in in vitro conditions and significantly reduced the infestation of greenhouse tomato plants [42]; and indole 3-butyric acid prevented M. enterolobii infestation in guava plants [43]. Although the applications of M. carneum reduce the population of M. enterolobii in heavily infested soils, it may be interesting to use this biological control with other novel control strategies such as those described above and also including crop rotation and the use of resistant cultivars to reduce the nematode population in less time [20]. Furthermore, it is important to consider that in addition to the nematicidal properties of biological control agents, their effectiveness also depends on other factors such as the formulation viability, crop management and environmental conditions at the application time [44].
The application of the inactivated metabolites of M. verrucaria fermentation showed better performance at 60 days after transplanting. In other studies, it was found to inhibit eggs from hatching by a nematostatic effect on the J2 of M. javanica, preventing early root invasion [45,46]. Application of this nematicide also reduced galling in beet plants infested by M. incognita by up to 86% [47]. However, in the 120 days after transplanting evaluation of our study, it performed poorly and matched the untreated control population. The low effect of the M. verrucaria product 120 days after transplanting may be due to the severe thickening of the roots, which causes the juveniles to not leave the root tissue towards the ground but instead to reinfest the plant root in the same area, as was observed in severe infestations of Meloidogyne paranaensis in coffee roots [48]. So, the J2 juveniles are not exposed to the product that has a nematostatic effect, which therefore does not carry out the control; however, more studies are needed to confirm this hypothesis. Based on the results of this work, the metabolites from the fermentation of M. verrrucaria could be used in alternating applications with a nematophagous fungus to affect all stages of the nematode, but it is necessary to carry out the corresponding evaluations.
One of the practices for controlling nematodes in conventional agriculture is soil disinfection with chemicals to reduce the nematodes’ number as much as possible before transplanting. In this work, this strategy was used, applying two chemical compounds in the pretransplanting phase (fluensulfone and metam sodium). Various studies indicate that the most efficient nematicides in reducing the populations of various Meloidogyne species are soil fumigants, such a 1,3 dichloropropene, chloropicrin and metam sodium, since they can have an effectiveness between 50 and 80% in decreasing the initial nematode populations in the soil [49,50,51]. This coincides with what was recorded in this work, where the application of metam sodium, a chemical from the ditiocarbamate group, resulted in very low infestations in the tomato roots. However, it is known that the application of this chemical nematicide to the soil also reduces the abundance and diversity of communities of beneficial bacteria, fungi and non-plant-parasitic nematodes, among others, so the continuous use of this chemical nematicide over crop cycles significantly affects the microbial balance of the rhizosphere [52,53]. In addition to this, the most common practice in conventional agriculture is to continue nematode control with post-transplant applications of chemical nematicides after initial preplanting soil fumigation, which increases the damage to edaphic biota. In this work, it was shown that fumigation with metam sodium before transplanting and then the use of M. carneum during the growth stage of the crop has the same effectiveness as using a post-transplant chemical nematicide, so this procedure is a good alternative that can reduce the application of chemical nematicides in highly infested soils.
The nonfumigant nematicide applied to pretransplant fluensulfone is one of the active ingredients with the greatest potential to reduce nematode populations. Its effectiveness has been verified against M. enterolobii, where it significantly reduces damage to sweet potato and tobacco [54,55]. Although it is classified as slightly toxic to humans and various studies indicate low toxicity towards nontarget organisms [16], the impact of constant applications should be studied. Fluensulfone has also been found to have phytotoxic effects on many cultivated plants [56]. In particular, the sensitivity of tomato plants to this nematicide has been pointed out; however, in this work, no significant delay in the development of plants treated with fluensulfone was observed. Chemical nematicides used in conventional agriculture are important since they can significantly reduce the nematode populations, allowing crops to maintain their productivity; however, due to the registered consequences of continuous use, it is necessary to have environmentally friendly alternatives such as bionematicides.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Fungal Strain and Growth Conditions

The fungal used in this study was M. carneum strain IE-431 stored at the Instituto de Ecología A.C. (INECOL) strain collection, registered with the World Federation for Culture Collection (No. IEWDCM 782) and the Chilean Collection of Microbial Genetic Resources (CChRGM). The IE-431 strain was grown on potato dextrose agar (PDA) medium plates and incubated at 22 °C for 10 days. Subsequently, a collection of spores was made using 50 mL of sterile distilled water with Tween 80 at 0.01%, adjusting the spore concentration by using a Newbauer chamber for use in preparing formulations.

4.2. Preparation of Metarhizium carneum Formulations

To prepare the M. carneum formulation, a preinoculum of the fungus was put into a flask of 1 L with 500 mL of potato dextrose broth (PDB) at a concentration 1 × 106 conidia mL−1. The flask was incubated at 22 °C and at 100 rpm for 72 h. For the liquid formulation, the fungus was reproduced in a BioFlo 415 bioreactor (New Brunswick Scientific, Edison, NJ, USA) with a capacity of 10.5 L (Eppendorf™, Hamburg, Germany) with an oat broth as the growth medium [20]; 50 mL of the preinoculum was added to the bioreactor and was incubated for 120 h. Finally, a stabilizer was added to the ferment, which was kept in a hermetically sealed 1 L flask at room temperature. For the powdered formulation, 200 g of sterilized semistarchy rice was impregnated with 25 mL of preinoculum of M. carneum inside a high-density polyethylene bag and was then incubated for 30 days at room temperature (22 ± 2 °C and 60% relative humidity). Afterwards, the rice with the fungus developed was shredded with a food processor (Ninja Intelli-Sense CT680CO2SS, Ninja Kitchen, Newton, MA, USA) at top speed for 20 s. The obtained powder was mixed with 20% of diatom (Dia-Fix™ Zeolitech, Cuernavaca, Mexico). The mixture was then stored in vacuum-sealed bags and kept at room temperature (22 ± 2 °C). At the time of the sealing process, the fermentation suspension had 1.8 × 108 CFU mL−1 and the powder had 1.8 × 107 CFU g−1.

4.3. Obtaining Meloidogyne enterolobii Inoculum

The eggs and juveniles J2 of M. enterolobii came from a population collected in tomato plants in the Sinaloa state, Mexico, which were previously identified molecularly by species-specific SCAR markers and which multiplied in tomato plants under greenhouse conditions [57].

4.4. Evaluation of Metarhizium carneum Formulations for Controlling Meloidogyne enterolobii in Tomato

Tomato plants cv. Rio Grande with a pair of leaves after the cotyledon 20 days after germination (obtained from seed germination in sterile substrate) were transplanted into polypropylene pots (20 cm in diameter) with 5 L of substrate composed of soil, sand, vermiculite and peatmoss (20:15:15:50). The substrate was previously sterilized in a soil pasteurizer with 380 L in capacity (Pro-Grow™ SS-60). Five days after transplanting, each plant was inoculated with 17,500 eggs and J2 of M. enterolobii contained in a suspension of 50 mL of water that was applied directly in three holes at the stem base with a 10 mL automatic micropipette (Eppendorf™ I18057D) to achieve an inoculation of 3.5 nematodes per cm3 of substrate to ensure the nematode establishment. To evaluate the bioformulates, the following treatments were performed: (1) liquid formulation of M. carneum, (2) powder formulation of M. carneum and (3) control group also inoculated with M. enterolobii, without application of M. carneum or any nematicidal treatment. Both presentations of M. carneum were applied in a dose equivalent to 1.8 × 1011 CFU ha−1 seven days after the nematode inoculation, then six times at 15-day intervals. Each treatment was made up of 15 plants, and each plant was considered as a repetition in a completely randomized design. Tomato plants were removed from the pots 120 days after nematode inoculation. The rhizospheric soil was removed with a fine-bristled brush and preserved. The roots were gently washed under running water and placed on absorbent paper to remove excess water and evaluate their length and fresh weight. Plant heights and foliage weights were also evaluated. For each root, gall number was assessed, and the galling index was determined according to the Coyne and Ross scale [58]. For eggs and J2 extraction from plant tissue, the entire root system was cut into 1–2 cm fragments and processed using the crushing, sieving and centrifugation technique [59]. Further, nematodes were also extracted from the 100 g of rhizospheric soil using the sieving–centrifugation technique [60]. Nematodes extracted from plant roots and soil were both quantified in a Sedgwick–Rafter chamber under a 100× light microscope. The population density of nematodes in roots and rhizospheric soil, the total population in roots and soil as well as the reproduction factor (final population/initial population) were calculated.

4.5. Evaluation of Metarhizium carneum Liquid Formulation Compared to Different Commercial Nematicide Products for Controlling Meloidogyne enterolobii in Tomato

The pot substrate was prepared in the same way as in the previous experiment. The pots were inoculated with 25,000 viable M. enterolobii eggs to obtain an infestation level of 5 eggs per cm3 soil−1, consistent with the high infestation levels observed in horticultural soils in Mexico [10,12,61]. Ball tomato plants cv. Horus with a pair of leaves after cotyledons formation, also obtained from seed germination in sterile substrate (20 days after germination), were transplanted to the pots 32 days after the nematode inoculation. The experiment consisted of seven treatments, as follows, with 18 repetitions (one plant per pot) distributed in a completely randomized design: (1) Liquid formulation of M. carneum (1 × 108 CFU mL−1) developed in this work at a dose of 2 L ha−1. (2) Commercial product of nematophagous fungus P. lilacinum (Lila-Plus™ Arysta, 1.2 × 1012 conidia 240 g−1, wettable powder) at a dose of 480 g ha−1; treatments (1) and (2) were applied 30 days before transplanting and at planting time and then had six subsequent applications at 15-day intervals. (3) Inactive fermentation of the fungus Myrothecium verrucaria with nematostatic activity (DiTera DF™, Valent 90% a.i.) at a dose of 2.5 Kg ha−1 starting at the planting and every 10 days on nine occasions. (4) Metam sodium (BL 1480™, Buckman Laboratories 42% a.i.) at a dose of 400 L ha−1 30 days before the transplant and continuing with applications of liquid formulation of M. carneum (1 × 108 CFU mL−1) at a dose of 2 L ha−1 starting at the planting time and om six subsequent applications at intervals of 15 days. (5) Fluensulfone chemical nematicide (5-Chloro-2-((3,4,4-trifluorobut-3-en-1-yl) sulfonyl) thiazole; Nimitz™ 480 EC Adama, 480 g a.i. L−1) at a dose of 2 L ha−1 30 days before transplanting for a single occasion. (6) Metam sodium (BL 1480™, Buckman Laboratories 42% a.i.) at a dose of 400 L ha−1 30 days before transplanting and continuing with abamectin (Oregon™ 60 SC FMC, 60 g a.i. L−1) at a dose of 1.25 L ha−1 on six occasions, starting at the planting, at intervals of 15 days. Metam sodium and abamectin are commonly used by farmers om the management of Meloidogyne populations. Therefore, we consider this treatment as conventional management. (7) Untreated control, without nematicides application. All products were applied in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations. The application of the pretransplant products was carried out 48 h after nematode inoculation. Two evaluations were carried out, one at 60 and another at 120 days after transplanting, using nine repetitions (plants) by treatment at each evaluation time. The galling index was measured according to the Coyne and Ross scale [58], and the number of nematodes per root system was quantified to obtain the nematode root population density, the final root population and the reproduction factor using the same methodology as in the first experiment (Section 4.4). In this experiment, unlike the first experiment, the amount of J2 in the rhizospheric soil was not evaluated because it is a residual population and does not provide valuable information, as can be seen in Table 1. Also, the foliage fresh weight (g), number of flowers and chlorophyll content were measured, the latter using the portable chlorophyll meter CL-01 (Hansatech™ Instruments Ltd., Norfolk, UK), which determines the relative chlorophyll content of the leaves by measuring the absorbance at the wavelengths (660 and 940 nm); the values are expressed in CCI (chlorophyll content index) units.

4.6. Greenhouse Conditions

All of the experiments were conducted in the greenhouse in the Planta Piloto de Desarrollo de Agentes de Control Biológico at the Instituto de Ecología A.C. under natural light conditions at a temperature of 25 ± 3 °C. The plants were under a drip irrigation system (up to 1.2 L per day). In addition, 10 g of 18-46-0 granular fertilizer (Fertigolfo™, Banderilla, Mexico) was added to each plant plus 50 mL 0.14% 20-20-20 water-soluble fertilizer (Peters™ Israel Chemicals Ltd., Tel Aviv-Yafo, Israel) applied three times. During plant growth, to prevent fungal diseases, copper hydroxide (Cupravit Hidro™ Bayer, Barmen, Germany) and metalaxyl + chlorothalonil (Fungoxil™ United Phosphorus de Mexico) were applied to the foliage at 30 and 75 days after transplanting. An antibacterial pentahydrated copper sulfate + gentamycin sulfate + oxytetracycline chloride (Genoxi™ Lapisa, La Piedad, Mexico) was also added 5 times, every 15 days starting from day 15. The insecticide flupyradifurone (Sivanto™ Bayer, Barmen, Germany) was applied during the 45th and 75th day after transplant to suppress white flies.

4.7. Statistical Analysis

Nematode count data were transformed (log 10) before analysis [62]. All the data were analyzed using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and a Tukey test for treatment ranking. Significant differences were considered at p ≤ 0.01. All analyses were performed with the Statistica 12.5 package for Windows.

5. Conclusions

Based on the results of this work, we can conclude that liquid and powder formulations made with M. carneum are effective for controlling M. enterolobii populations in tomato plants. Thus, a root-knot nematode control strategy that starts with preplanting soil disinfection using chemical nematicides can be complemented by effective biological control during the development of the tomato crop through applications of M. carneum until shortly before harvest without causing health issues due to residues in the harvested tomatoes. Our results support the purpose of successfully incorporating biological products into nematode management packages to transition to sustainable agriculture.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/plants12193431/s1, Table S1: Development (mean ± standard deviation) at 60 days after transplanting of tomato plants infested with Meloidogyne enterolobii and under different nematicide treatments; Table S2: Development (mean ± standard deviation) at 120 days after transplanting of tomato plants infested with Meloidogyne enterolobii and under different nematicide treatments.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, G.C. and D.L.-L.; methodology, D.L-L., J.Á.O.-M. and D.A.-U.; investigation, data curation, D.L.-L. and G.C.; writing—original draft preparation, D.L.-L.; writing—review and editing, L.V., G.C. and D.L.-L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was funded by Consejo Nacional de Humanidades, Ciencias y Tecnologías (CONAHCYT) and AgroInter S.A. de C.V. through the project “Validation of the technological package for the integrated management of phytoparasitic nematodes and the disinfection of irrigation water for tomato crops under shade netting” (Programa de estimulos a la innovación PEI 2016: 231215).

Data Availability Statement

Data are available upon request to the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Pedro Borboa (AgroInter, S.A. de C.V. CEO) for logistical support and José Francisco Castillo Esparza for his suggestions for the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of this study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Jones, J.T.; Haegeman, A.; Danchin, E.G.; Gaur, H.S.; Helder, J.; Jones, M.G.; Kikuchi, T.; Manzanilla-López, R.; Palomares-Rius, J.E.; Wesemael, W.M.; et al. Top 10 plant-parasitic nematodes in molecular plant pathology. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2013, 14, 946–961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Wyss, U.; Grundler, F.; Munch, A. The parasitic behavior of second-stage juveniles of Meloidogyne incognita in roots of Arabidopsis thaliana. Nematologica 1992, 38, 98–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Bartlem, D.G.; Jones, M.G.; Hammes, U.Z. Vascularization and nutrient delivery at root-knot nematode feeding sites in host roots. J. Exp. Bot. 2014, 65, 1789–1798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Elling, A.A. Major emerging problems with minor Meloidogyne species. Phytopathology 2013, 103, 1092–1102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Ramírez-Suárez, A.; Rosas-Hernández, L.; Alcasio-Rangel, S.; Pérez Valenzuela, G.; Powers, T.O. First report of the root-knot nematode Meloidogyne enterolobii parasitizing watermelon from Veracruz, Mexico. Plant Dis. 2014, 98, 428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Martínez-Gallardo, J.Á.; Díaz-Valdés, T.; Allende-Molar, R.; Ortiz-Meza, J.A.; García-Estrada, R.S.; Carrillo-Fasio, J.A. Nematodos fitoparásitos asociados al cultivo de papaya (Carica papaya L.) en Colima, México. Rev. Mex. De Cienc. Agrícolas 2014, 5, 317–323. [Google Scholar]
  7. Martínez-Gallardo, J.Á.; Díaz-Valdés, T.; Allende-Molar, R.; Retes-Manjarrez, J.E.; Carrillo-Fasio, J.A. Identificación y distribución de Meloidogyne spp. en tomate de Sinaloa México. Rev. Mex. De Cienc. Agrícolas 2019, 10, 453–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. FAOSTAT. Cultivos y Productos de Ganadería. Available online: https://www.fao.org/faostat/es/#data/QCL. (accessed on 11 October 2022).
  9. USDA Tomatoes and Products Anual Report. USDA Foreign Agricultural Sevice. Available online: https://agfstorage.blob.core.windows.net/misc/FP_com/2022/06/17/Ato.pdf (accessed on 9 November 2022).
  10. Gómez-González, G.; Márquez-Zequera, I.; Cruz-Lachica, I.; Osuna-García, L.A.; García-Estrada, R.S. First report of Meloidogyne enterolobii parasitizing cucumber in Sinaloa, Mexico. Plant Dis. 2020, 104, 1260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Carrillo-Fasio, J.A.; Martínez-Gallardo, J.A.; Ayala-Tafoya, F.; López-Orona, C.A.; Allende-Molar, R.; Retes-Manjarrez, J.E. Screening for resistance to Meloidogyne enterolobii in Capsicum annuum landraces from Mexico. Plant Dis. 2020, 104, 817–822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Salazar-Mesta, R.J.; Carrillo-Fasio, J.A.; Tovar-Pedraza, J.M.; Garcia-Estrada, R.S.; Mora-Romero, G.A.; Vega-Hernández, R.; Torres-López, J. First report of the root-knot nematode Meloidogyne enterolobii parasitizing eggplant in Mexico. Plant Dis. 2023, 107, 1638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Salinas-Castro, A.; Navarro de la Fuente, L.; Tapia-Vázquez, I.; López-Lima, D. First report of Meloidogyne enterolobii on chard (Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris) and carrot (Daucus carota) in México. J. Plant Dis. Prot. 2022, 129, 1263–1268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Silva, S.D.; Carneiro, R.M.; Faria, M.; Souza, D.A.; Monnerat, R.G.; Lopes, R.B. Evaluation of Pochonia chlamydosporia and Purpureocillium lilacinum for suppression of Meloidogyne enterolobii on tomato and banana. J. Nematol. 2017, 49, 77–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Philbrick, A.N.; Adhikari, T.B.; Louws, F.J.; Gorny, A.M. Meloidogyne enterolobii, a major threat to tomato production: Current status and future prospects for its management. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 606395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Oka, Y. From old-generation to next-generation nematicides. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Haydock, P.P.; Ambrose, E.L.; Wilcox, A.; Deliopoulos, T. Degradation of the nematicide oxamyl under field and laboratory conditions. Nematology 2012, 14, 339–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. de Freitas Soares, F.E.; Sufiate, B.L.; de Queiroz, J.H. Nematophagous fungi: Far beyond the endoparasite, predator and ovicidal groups. Agric. Nat. Resour. 2018, 52, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Eapen, S.J.; Beena, B.; Ramana, K.V. Tropical soil microflora of spice-based cropping systems as potential antagonists of root-knot nematodes. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2005, 88, 218–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Carrión, G.; Hernandez-Leal, T.I.; López-Lima, D.; Núñez-Sánchez, A.E. Uses, Methods and Biological Compositions of the Genus Paecilomyces for the Control, Prevention and Eradication of Phytoparasites in Solanaceae Cultures. WO2012148251 A2. Available online: https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2012148251&tab=PCTBIBLIO (accessed on 8 October 2022).
  21. Lopez-Llorca, L.V.; Duncan, G.H. A study of fungal endoparasitism of the cereal cyst nematode (Heterodera avenae) by scanning electron microscopy. Can. J. Microbiol. 1988, 34, 613–619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Boag, B.; Lopez Llorca, L.V. Nematodes and nematophagous fungi associated with cereal fields and permanent pasture in eastern Scotland. Crop Res. 1989, 29, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  23. Sikandar, A.; Jia, L.; Wu, H.; Yang, S. Meloidogyne enterolobii risk to agriculture, its present status and future prospective for management. Front. Plant Sci. 2023, 13, 1093657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Abd-Elgawad, M.M.M. Understanding molecular plant–nematode interactions to develop alternative approaches for nematode control. Plants 2022, 11, 2141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. 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] [PubMed]
  26. Udo, I.A.; Osai, E.O.; Ukeh, D.A. Management of root-knot disease on tomato with bioformulated Paecilomyces lilacinus and leaf extract of Lantana camara. Braz. Arch. Biol. Technol. 2014, 57, 486–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Nagachandrabose, S. Liquid bioformulations for the management of root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne hapla that infects carrot. Crop Prot. 2018, 114, 155–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Sánchez, J.Y.; Cardona, N.L. Evaluación del bioformulado y del filtrado crudo de Purpureocillium sp. cepa Udea0106 sobre nemátodos fitopatógenos en crisantemo (Dendranthema grandiflora). Biotecnol. Apl. 2018, 35, 2221–2227. [Google Scholar]
  29. Oclarit, E.; Cumagun, C. Evaluation of efficacy of Paecilomyces lilacinus as biological control agent of Meloidogyne incognita attacking tomato. J. Plant Prot. Res. 2009, 49, 337–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Wilson, M.J.; Jackson, T.A. Progress in the commercialization of bionematicides. BioControl 2013, 58, 715–722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Huang, W.K.; Cui, J.K.; Liu, S.M.; Kong, L.A.; Wu, Q.S.; Peng, H.; He, W.T.; Sun, J.H.; Peng, D.L. Testing various biocontrol agents against the root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne incognita) in cucumber plants identifies a combination of Syncephalastrum racemosum and Paecilomyces lilacinus as being most effective. Biol. Control 2016, 92, 31–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Hore, J.; Roy, K.; Maiti, A.K. Evaluation of bio-nematon (Purpureocillium lilacinum 1.15%WP) against root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne incognita) in tomato. J. Entomol. Zool. Stud. 2018, 6, 1700–1704. [Google Scholar]
  33. Das, M.M.; Rodríguez-Herrera, R.; Haridas, M.; Sabu, A. Purpureocillium lilacinum: A promising bionematicide for sustainable agriculture. In Biocontrol Systems and Plant Physiology in Modern Agriculture: Processes, Strategies, Innovations, 1st ed.; Rojas, R., Martínez Ávila, G.C., Vidales Contreras, J.A., Aguilar, C.N., Eds.; Apple Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 2022; ISBN 9781003277118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. de Sequeira, D.C.; Menezes, R.C.; Oliveira, M.M.; Antas, P.R.; De Luca, P.M.; De Oliveira-Ferreira, J.D.; Borba, C.D. Experimental hyalohyphomycosis by Purpureocillium lilacinum: Outcome of the infection in C57BL/6 murine models. Front. Microbiol. 2017, 8, 617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Chen, Y.T.; Yeh, L.K.; Ma, D.H.; Lin, H.C.; Sun, C.C.; Tan, H.Y.; Chen, H.C.; Chen, S.Y.; Sun, P.L.; Hsiao, C.H. Paecilomyces/Purpureocillium keratitis: A consecutive study with a case series and literature review. Med. Mycol. 2020, 58, 293–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Kassam, R.; Yadav, J.; Jaiswal, N.; Chatterjee, M.; Hada, A.; Chawla, G.; Kamil, D.; Rao, U. Identification and potential utility of Metarhizium anisopliae (ITCC9014) for the management of root-knot nematode. Meloidogyne Incognita. Indian Phytopathol. 2022, 75, 875–881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Cardona, N.L.; Borrego, D.A.; Fernández, E.P.; Sánchez, J.; Cardona, V.; Montoya, G. Microbiological evaluation and pathogenicity of a liquid bioformulation of the fungus Purpureocillium sp. (strain UdeA 0109) on Meloidogyne incognita-javanica stages. Biotecnol. Apl. 2014, 31, 210–215. [Google Scholar]
  38. Mishra, J.; Arora, N.K. Bioformulations for plant growth promotion and combating phytopathogens: A sustainable approach. In Bioformulations: For Sustainable Agriculture; Arora, N., Mehnaz, S., Balestrini, R., Eds.; Springer: New Delhi, India, 2016; ISBN 978-81-322-2779-3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Bawa, N.; Kaur, S.; Dhillon, N.K. Efficacy of Purpureocillium lilacinum, Trichoderma harzianum and T. viride bio-formulations against Meloidogyne incognita. Indian Phytopathol. 2020, 73, 799–804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Song, Z.; Shen, L.; Zhong, Q.; Yin, Y.; Wang, Z. Liquid culture production of microsclerotia of Purpureocillium lilacinum for use as bionematicide. Nematology 2016, 18, 719–726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Butt, T.M.; Greenfield, B.P.; Greig, C.; Maffeis, T.G.; Taylor, J.W.; Piasecka, J.; Dudley, E.; Abdulla, A.; Dubovskiy, I.M.; Garrido-Jurado, I.; et al. Metarhizium anisopliae pathogenesis of mosquito larvae: A verdict of accidental death. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e81686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Sikandar, A.; Gao, F.; Mo, Y.; Chen, Q.; Ullah, R.M.K.; Wu, H. Efficacy of Aspergillus tubingensis GX30 Fermentation against Meloidogyne enterolobii in Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.). Plants 2023, 12, 2724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Natarajan, A.; Selvam, D.; Palaniappan, K.; Subbaiah Balamurali, A.; Perumal, C.; Durai, R.; Sadasivam, S.; Asokan, A.; Sivalingam, R.; Subiramaniyan, A. Standardization of the Optimum Effects of Indole 3-Butyric Acid (IBA) to Control Root Knot Nematode, Meloidogyne enterolobii, in Guava (Psidium guajava L.). Molecules 2023, 28, 1839. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Moosavi, M.R.; Zare, R. Fungi as biological control agents of plant-parasitic nematodes. In Plant Defence: Biological Control. Progress in Biological Control; Mérillon, J.M., Ramawat, K.G., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; Volume 22, ISBN 978-3-030-51034-3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Khalil, A.E.; El-Sherif, A.G.; Bekhiet, M.A.; Kella, A.M. New trend for Meloidogyne javanica management by Myrothecium verrucaria (Ditera) as promising biological agent. J. Plant Prot. Pathol. 2010, 1, 539–558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Nguyen, L.T.; Jang, J.Y.; Kim, T.Y.; Yu, N.H.; Park, A.R.; Lee, S.; Bae, C.H.; Yeo, J.H.; Hur, J.S.; Park, H.W.; et al. Nematicidal activity of verrucarin A and roridin A isolated from Myrothecium verrucaria against Meloidogyne incognita. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 2018, 148, 133–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Hagag, E.S. Evaluation of metabolites of Myrothecium verrucaria as biological nematicide against root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne incognita in vitro and in vivo on sugar beet plants. J. Plant Prot. Pathol. 2021, 12, 47–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. López-Lima, D.; Carrión, G.; Sánchez-Nava, P.; Desgarennes, D.; Villain, L. Fungal diversity and Fusarium oxysporum pathogenicity associated with coffee corky-root disease in Mexico. Rev. De La Fac. De Cienc. Agrar. UNCuyo 2020, 52, 276–292. [Google Scholar]
  49. Phani, V.; Khan, M.R.; Dutta, T.K. Plant-parasitic nematodes as a potential threat to protected agriculture: Current status and management options. Crop Prot. 2021, 144, 105573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Talavera-Rubia, M.; Vela-Delgado, M.D.; Verdejo-Lucas, S. A cost-benefit analysis of soil disinfestation methods against root-knot nematodes in mediterranean intensive horticulture. Plants 2022, 11, 2774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Westerdahl, B.B. Scenarios for sustainable management of plant parasitic nematodes. Indian Phytopathol. 2021, 74, 469–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Li, J.; Huang, B.; Wang, Q.; Li, Y.; Fang, W.; Han, D.; Yan, D.; Guo, M.; Cao, A. Effects of fumigation with metam-sodium on soil microbial biomass, respiration, nitrogen transformation, bacterial community diversity and genes encoding key enzymes involved in nitrogen cycling. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 598, 1027–1036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Sederholm, M.R.; Schmitz, B.W.; Barberán, A.; Pepper, I.L. Effects of metam sodium fumigation on the abundance, activity, and diversity of soil bacterial communities. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2018, 124, 27–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Alam, M.S.; Khanal, C.; Rutter, W.; Roberts, J. Non-fumigant Nematicides are Promising Alternatives to Fumigants for the Management of Meloidogyne enterolobii in Tobacco. J. Nematol. 2022, 54, 3922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Watson, T.T. Sensitivity of Meloidogyne enterolobii and M. incognita to fluorinated nematicides. Pest Manag. Sci. 2022, 78, 1398–1406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Giannakou, I.O.; Panopoulou, S. The use of fluensulfone for the control of root-knot nematodes in greenhouse cultivated crops: Efficacy and phytotoxicity effects. Cogent Food Agric. 2019, 5, 1643819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Tigano, M.; De Siqueira, K.; Castagnone-Sereno, P.; Mulet, K.; Queiroz, P.; Dos Santos, M.; Teixeira, C.; Almeida, M.; Silva, J.; Carneiro, R. Genetic diversity of the root-knot nematode Meloidogyne enterolobii and development of a SCAR marker for this guava damaging species. Plant Pathol. 2010, 59, 1054–1061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Coyne, D.L.; Ross, J.L. Protocol for Nematode Resistance Screening: Root Knot Nematodes, Meloidogyne spp.; International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA): Ibadan, Nigeria, 2014; ISBN 978-978-8444-43-5. [Google Scholar]
  59. Carneiro, R.; Tigano, M.; Randig, O.; Almeida, M.R.; Sarah, J.L. Identification and genetic diversity of Meloidogyne spp. (Tylenchida: Meloidogynidae) on coffee from Brazil, Central America, and Hawaii. Nematology 2004, 6, 287–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. van Bezooijen, J. Methods and Techniques for Nematology. Available online: https://www.wur.nl/upload_mm/f/9/3/10aac0cb-8289-400a-a6e5-c4687461d138_MethodsandTechniquesforNematology.pdf (accessed on 12 August 2023).
  61. Carrillo-Fasio, J.A.; Angúlo-Castro, A.; Martínez-Gallardo, J.Á.; Ayala-Tafoya, F.; Yáñez-Juárez, M.G.; Retes-Manjarrez, J.E. Distribution and incidence of root-knot nematodes (Meloidogyne spp.) on pepper in Sinaloa, Mexico. Trop. Plant Pathol. 2021, 46, 195–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Abd-Elgawad, M.M.M. Optimizing sampling and extraction methods for plant-parasitic and entomopathogenic nematodes. Plants 2021, 10, 629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Plants 12 03431 g001
Figure 1. Tomato roots infested with Meloidogyne enterolobii at 120 days after transplanting under different nematicide treatments: (a) liquid formulation of Metarhizium carneum, (b) Purpureocillium lilacinum, (c) metabolites from the fermentation of Myrothecium verrucaria, (d) metam sodium + Metarhizium carneum, (e) fluensulfone, (f) metam sodium + abamectin and (g) untreated control.
Figure 1. Tomato roots infested with Meloidogyne enterolobii at 120 days after transplanting under different nematicide treatments: (a) liquid formulation of Metarhizium carneum, (b) Purpureocillium lilacinum, (c) metabolites from the fermentation of Myrothecium verrucaria, (d) metam sodium + Metarhizium carneum, (e) fluensulfone, (f) metam sodium + abamectin and (g) untreated control.
Plants 12 03431 g001
Plants 12 03431 g002
Figure 2. Evolution of Meloidogyne enterolobii population on tomato plants under different nematicide treatments. DAT = days after transplant.
Figure 2. Evolution of Meloidogyne enterolobii population on tomato plants under different nematicide treatments. DAT = days after transplant.
Plants 12 03431 g002
Plants 12 03431 g003
Figure 3. Foliage fresh weight and chlorophyll content at 120 days after transplanting of tomato plants infested with Meloidogyne enterolobii and under different nematicide treatments.
Figure 3. Foliage fresh weight and chlorophyll content at 120 days after transplanting of tomato plants infested with Meloidogyne enterolobii and under different nematicide treatments.
Plants 12 03431 g003
Table 1. Population of Meloidogyne enterolobii (mean ± standard deviation) in tomato plants treated with liquid and powder formulations of Metarhizium carneum.
Table 1. Population of Meloidogyne enterolobii (mean ± standard deviation) in tomato plants treated with liquid and powder formulations of Metarhizium carneum.
TreatmentsGalls Number per RootGalling IndexEggs and
J2 g Root−1		J2 g−1 Rhizospheric SoilTotal Nematode Population
Liquid145 ± 1101.86 ± 0.414,481 ± 11,938 a 112 ± 17 a85,005 ± 75,363 a
Powder156 ± 1241.93 ± 0.2622,207 ± 13,505 a11 ± 12 a74,678 ± 57,624 a
Untreated189 ± 1062 ± 064,791 ± 38,944 b26 ± 8 b257,187 ± 170,414 b
pp = 0.66p = 0.72p < 0.01p < 0.01p < 0.01
1 Different letters in each column denote significant differences between treatments indicated by a Tukey test; p ≤ 0.01.
Table 2. Development of tomato plants infested with Meloidogyne enterolobii treated with liquid and powder formulations of Metarhizium carneum (mean ± standard deviation).
Table 2. Development of tomato plants infested with Meloidogyne enterolobii treated with liquid and powder formulations of Metarhizium carneum (mean ± standard deviation).
TreatmentsHeight cmFoliage Fresh Weight gRooth Length cmRoot Fresh Weight g
Liquid97 ± 1046 ± 10 a 119.5 ± 4.15.2 ± 3.6
Powder89 ± 1536 ± 10.9 b16.4 ± 4.33.7 ± 1.9
Control90 ± 1340 ± 10 ab16.8 ± 3.84.6 ± 2.6
p0.210.010.080.09
1 Different letters in each column denote significant differences between treatments indicated by a Tukey test; p ≤ 0.01.
Table 3. Meloidogyne enterolobii symptoms and populations (mean ± standard deviation) at 60 days after transplanting on tomato plants under different nematicide treatments.
Table 3. Meloidogyne enterolobii symptoms and populations (mean ± standard deviation) at 60 days after transplanting on tomato plants under different nematicide treatments.
TreatmentsGalling IndexEggs and J2 g Root−1Final Eggs and J2Reproduction Factor
Metarhizium carneum2.6 ± 0.5 b 16665 ± 2453 cd154,542 ± 37,516 b6.2 ± 1.5 b
Purpureocillium lilacinum2.6 ± 0.5 b5626 ± 1045 bc164,850 ± 28,727 b6.6 ± 1.1 b
Metabolites from M. verrucaria fermentation 2.3 ± 0.5 b3553 ± 2020 b115,238 ± 58,897 b4.6 ± 2.3 b
Metam sodium + Metarhizium carneum1.0 ± 0 a66 ± 19 a563 ± 194 a0.02 ± 0.007 a
Fluensulfone1.0 ± 0 a158 ± 59 a1913 ± 1017 a0.1 ± 0.04 a
Metam sodium + abamectina1.0 ± 0 a15 ± 4 a128 ± 22.5 a0.005 ± 0.0009 a
Control3.3 ± 0.5 c9255 ± 2355 d245,625 ± 26,591 c9.8 ± 1 c
p<0.01<0.01<0.01<0.01
1 Different letters in each column denote significant differences between treatments indicated by a Tukey test; p ≤ 0.01.
Table 4. Meloidogyne enterolobii symptoms and population (mean ± standard deviation) at 120 days after transplanting on tomato plants under different nematicide treatments.
Table 4. Meloidogyne enterolobii symptoms and population (mean ± standard deviation) at 120 days after transplanting on tomato plants under different nematicide treatments.
TreatmentsGalling IndexEggs and J2 g Root−1Final Eggs and J2Reproduction Factor
Metarhizium carneum3.4 ± 0.5 b 12614 ± 1298 ab423,825 ± 168,141 b17.0 ± 6.7 b
Purpureocillium lilacinum4.3 ± 0.5 c5296 ± 2344 b486,300 ± 133,878 b19.5 ± 5.4 b
Metabolites from M. verrucaria fermentation4.7 ± 0.4 c9049 ± 3733 c532,425 ± 127,316 b21.3 ± 5.1 b
Metam sodium + Metarhizium carneum1.3 ± 0.5 a336 ± 12.2 a16,980 ± 5087 a0.7 ± 0.2 a
Fluensulfone1.0 ± 0 a83 ± 33 a2625 ± 1267 a0.1 ± 0.05 a
Metam sodium + abamectina1.3 ± 0.5 a312 ± 212 a29,175 ± 12,862 a1.2 ± 0.5 a
Control5.0 ± 0 c9268 ± 2111 c681,000 ± 531,754 b27.2 ± 21.3 b
p<0.01<0.01<0.01<0.01
1 Different letters in each column denote significant differences between treatments indicated by a Tukey test; p ≤ 0.01.
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

López-Lima, D.; Alarcón-Utrera, D.; Ordáz-Meléndez, J.Á.; Villain, L.; Carrión, G. Metarhizium carneum Formulations: A Promising New Biological Control to Be Incorporated in the Integrated Management of Meloidogyne enterolobii on Tomato Plants. Plants 2023, 12, 3431. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12193431

AMA Style

López-Lima D, Alarcón-Utrera D, Ordáz-Meléndez JÁ, Villain L, Carrión G. Metarhizium carneum Formulations: A Promising New Biological Control to Be Incorporated in the Integrated Management of Meloidogyne enterolobii on Tomato Plants. Plants. 2023; 12(19):3431. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12193431

Chicago/Turabian Style

López-Lima, Daniel, David Alarcón-Utrera, José Ángel Ordáz-Meléndez, Luc Villain, and Gloria Carrión. 2023. "Metarhizium carneum Formulations: A Promising New Biological Control to Be Incorporated in the Integrated Management of Meloidogyne enterolobii on Tomato Plants" Plants 12, no. 19: 3431. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12193431

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