Next Article in Journal
A Review of Ampelometry: Morphometric Characterization of the Grape (Vitis spp.) Leaf
Previous Article in Journal
Identification of a Major Locus for Lodging Resistance to Typhoons Using QTL Analysis in Rice
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Microbes vs. Nematodes: Insights into Biocontrol through Antagonistic Organisms to Control Root-Knot Nematodes

1
Section of Environmental Botany and Plant Pathology, Faculty of Life Sciences, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh 202002, India
2
Mycology and Nematology Genetic Diversity and Biology Laboratory, USDA, ARS, Northeast Area, 10300 Baltimore Avenue, Beltsville, MD 20705, USA
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Plants 2023, 12(3), 451; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12030451
Submission received: 7 December 2022 / Revised: 9 January 2023 / Accepted: 16 January 2023 / Published: 18 January 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Plant Protection and Biotic Interactions)

Abstract

:
Root-knot nematodes (Meloidogyne spp.) are sedentary endoparasites that cause severe economic losses to agricultural crops globally. Due to the regulations of the European Union on the application of nematicides, it is crucial now to discover eco-friendly control strategies for nematode management. Biocontrol is one such safe and reliable method for managing these polyphagous nematodes. Biocontrol agents not only control these parasitic nematodes but also improve plant growth and induce systemic resistance in plants against a variety of biotic stresses. A wide range of organisms such as bacteria, fungi, viruses, and protozoans live in their natural mode as nematode antagonists. Various review articles have discussed the role of biocontrol in nematode management in general, but a specific review on biocontrol of root-knot nematodes is not available in detail. This review, therefore, focuses on the biocontrol of root-knot nematodes by discussing their important known antagonists, modes of action, and interactions.

1. Introduction

Plant-parasitic nematodes (PPNs) significantly reduce crop yields in both quantity and quality, which is a growing economic concern for the global agricultural industry [1]. The three most economically important groups of PPNs include root-knot nematodes, cyst nematodes, and lesion nematodes, which infect and proliferate on a wide range of plant species [2]. Among these PPNs, root-knot nematodes (Meloidogyne spp.) are the main damaging plant-parasitic nematodes. Meloidogyne spp. are sedentary endoparasites with a broad host range and exhibit a negative or detrimental effect on many crops, resulting in a significant reduction in the amount and quality of food production [3]. Not only do they reduce yield, but the infected crops also become more prone to bacterial and fungal diseases [4]. They also interact with viral diseases in several ways [5]. In Solanum khasium, the root-knot index was higher on plants inoculated with tobacco mosaic tobamovirus than on healthy plants [6]. Inhibitory effects on root-knot nematode Meloidogyne javanica were observed in zucchini (Cucurbita pepo) infected with watermelon mosaic polyvirus. Virus infection retarded the establishment of these nematodes in the roots as compared with healthy plants [7]. All of these effects, favorable or detrimental, occurred or were more pronounced when nematode inoculation was preceded for 2 to 3 weeks by virus infection. This points to biochemical processes in plant tissues as a decisive mechanism involved in these interactions. This is underlined by results obtained by Alam et al. [8]. They observed antagonistic effects between tomato mosaic tobamovirus and M. incognita. When virus infection preceded nematode inoculations, nematodes were suppressed, and when nematodes were the first agent, the virus was inhibited. The changes caused by one pathogen were detrimental to the other. The influence of the host on this type of interaction was demonstrated by Moura and Powell [9]. In two out of three tomato varieties, the egg production of M. incognita was significantly increased by the presence of tobacco mosaic tobamovirus, but in the third, it was not. The concomitant presence of nematode and virus in most cases results in a synergistic effect that aggravates the plant damage considerably. Little is known about the physiological or biochemical basis of enhancing or inhibiting nematode development by a virus infection of the host. It has been suggested that changes in protein metabolism caused by nematodes may interact with corresponding changes caused by the virus, resulting in beneficial effects in one case and detrimental effects in another [10]. This view was recently supported by Shower et al. [11]. They showed that the changes in free amino acid levels in sugarcane (Saccharum L.) caused by sugarcane mosaic virus were responsible for population changes in various nematodes on sugarcane. The life cycle of root-knot nematode is very complicated, and based on environmental factors such as temperature, moisture and availability of a suitable host, it can take 3 weeks to a few months to complete its life cycle. In order to thrive inside plant roots, Meloidogyne spp. may overpower host defense mechanisms. There are various species of root-knot nematodes that parasitize and infest crops in agroecosystems. However, four species, M. incognita (Kofoid and White, 1919) Chitwood, 1949, M. javanica (Treub, 1885) Chitwood, 1949, M. hapla Chitwood, 1949, and M. arenaria (Neal 1889) Chitwood, 1949, are economically most important [12]. In agriculture, nematodes result in a loss of about USD 100 billion annually [13]. It has been estimated that root-knot nematode infestations result in a loss of about 15% in annual crops all over the world [14].
Considering the economic losses caused by root-knot nematodes, there is an immediate need to control these plant parasites by suitable methods. So far, various approaches have been used for their control, including chemicals, host plant resistance, crop rotation, soil solarization, antagonistic organisms, etc. Crop rotation is very commonly used for nematode control, but it requires adequate land to produce alternate crops that are non-hosts to the nematodes. Additionally, these alternate crops must bring good profits to the grower. Chemical treatmentshave been found to be very effective in nematode management, but due to their nonavailability, high cost, and short-term effects, resistance developed in nematodes [15]; further, such treatments can kill useful microorganisms, and persistent chemicals may cause serious threats to the ecological balance [16]. Nematicides may be toxic reproductively and carcinogenic in animals [17]. So, due to limitations on the use of nematicides [18,19], it has become essential to develop cost-effective and ecologically friendly agents. In this regard, biocontrol can be a promising alternate to nematicides and traditional methods with an eco-friendly mechanism to combat and suppress the pathogenic root-knot nematodes in crop ecosystems.

2. Biocontrol Agents against Root-Knot Nematodes

Microorganisms play a vital role in soil health, plant growth and development, and are crucial for plant disease management [20]. These microorganisms can be exploited as biocontrol agents by using their natural mode of action against several soil-borne pathogens. Biocontrol means the use of advantageous organisms and their products to increase beneficial responses and reduce negative ones and contribute to gross increases in productivity. Bio-agents lead to disease prevention with no or little environmental threat [21]. These agents may last in the soil for long durations. Through biological control, we can check diseasesthrough various mechanisms, such as:
  • Competition: Competition (intraspecific and interspecific), mainly for space, nutrients, water, etc. reduces the growth, activity, and reproduction of the organisms involved [22] or affects nematode fitness.
  • Antibiosis: This can happen when plant compounds are released from the roots into the soil. Bacteria produce and release certain antibiotics or toxins, which may have an undesirable effect on the infective stage of nematodes [23]. Allelochemicals are known to harm plant-parasitic nematodes as well [24].
  • Parasitism: Nematodes are prey for most nematophagous bacteria, which use nematodes as a potential source of nutrients. They can also pierce the cuticle (due to enzymatic action), and kill the nematode host [25].
  • Plant growth promotion: Bio-agents aid in the control of plant diseases by increasing plant development through improved nutrient solubilization, higher nutrient uptake, and nutrient sequestration. Plants with higher nutritional status can tolerate more plant-parasitic nematodes in their roots [26].
  • Induced systemic resistance: Numerous bacterial products create systemic signaling in plants, which can protect the entire plant from diseases induced by various pathogens or help plants become resistant to various pathogenic organisms [27].
A schematic representation of different mechanisms of biocontrol is shown in Figure 1. Even though a large number of biocontrol agents have been revealed as potential pesticides, only a few have been commercialized [28]. Under laboratory conditions, biocontrol agents appear to perform well compared to field conditions, but in field conditions their effect may drop due to interactions with other biotic and abiotic components of the surrounding atmosphere. Through the application of various biocontrol agents, Meloidogyne species have been conveniently controlled [29,30]. A broad range of organisms such as bacteria, viruses, fungi, protozoans, insects, mites, and predatory nematodes have been reported as nematode antagonists [31]. Among these, bacterial and fungal antagonists are the important ones and have been investigated over a period of time for their use as biocontrol agents against plant-parasitic nematodes [32]. Apart from natural antagonists, plant extracts can also be used for nematode control, as discussed in Section 2.3.

2.1. Bacteria as Biocontrol Agents against Root-Knot Nematodes

Microbial biocontrol agents exploit antagonism through hyper-parasitism and antibiosis to interfere with and inhibit the growth of another pathogen [33]. Glick [34] found that soil bacteria that promote plant growth are found in alliance with the roots/leaves/flowers or any plant tissues and are generally called plant growth-promoting bacteria (PGPB). Both the plant and microbial community can be influenced by bacteria and their products [35]. Various bacterial species have been evaluated for their nematicidal activities. Based on their mechanisms of operation, bacterial antagonists of nematodes can be grouped into rhizobacteria, obligate parasitic bacteria, endophytic bacteria, opportunistic parasitic bacteria, symbiotic bacteria, and parasporal crystal (cry) protein-forming bacteria [25]. Many bacteria such as Pseudomonas spp., Bacillus spp., Burkholderia spp., and others minimize damage in plants, as they build metabolites that then alter nematode behavior, feeding and reproduction [36]. Bacillus and Pseudomonas occur widely in the natural environment and have shown the highest efficacy for biological control [37]. In the rhizosphere, Bacillus spp. and Pseudomonas spp. are the prominent opponents of plant pathogens [38]. Pseudomonas spp. are largely present in soil and plant root systems. They can take advantage of plant exudates for nutritional purposes, produce certain metabolites and antimicrobial compounds, and can be easily produced in the laboratory [39]. Some of the important bacterial species are summarized in Table 1.
Sharma et al. [40] studied the control of root-knot disease with pseudomonad rhizobacteria filtrate under in-vitro and greenhouse conditions. Pseudomonas jessenii strain R62 and Pseudomonas synxantha strain R81 were used to control root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne incognita) on tomato plants. In laboratory conditions, it was found that out of all of the treatments (25%, 50%, 75%, 100%) with R62 and R81, 75%, 100% and all dilutions of R62 + R81 caused 100% mortality of second-stage juveniles (J2). At 25%, no effect was found on J2, and at 50% some mortality was observed. Under greenhouse conditions, by using R62 and R81 collectively, significant variations in plant growth parameters were observed. When the same treatment (R62 + R81) was given to plants under nematode stress, a great increase in plant growth parameters was found in contrast to only nematode-inoculated plants (Table 1). So, these observations indicated that Pseudomonas culture filtrate can operate as a potential biocontrol agent for controlling root-knot nematodes. Similarly, the biocontrol efficiency of Pseudomonas fluorescens and Pseudomonas protegens Sneb 1997 is summed up in Table 1.
Chinheya et al. [41], under in-vitro conditions, tested 70 Bacillus isolates against M. javanica J2 on soybean. With serial dilutions, primary spore suspension was settled to 108 per ml, and it was found that five isolates, BC 27, BC 29, BC 31, BC 56, and BC 64, caused mortality greater than 50%. From these five isolates, only three (BC 27, BC 29, and BC 31) from the rhizosphere of grass in goat pastures were chosen for second screening, as they caused greater larval mortality (80%) after 24 h. In a second in vitroscreening, it was found that BC 27 was remarkably better than BC 29 and BC 31, as it caused mortality of 100% after only 3 h, and BC 29 caused greater mortality than BC 31. After 24 h, both BC 27 and BC 29 were found to be more operative than BC 31 (Table 1). Under glasshouse experiments, in comparison to control, bacterial isolates BC 27 and BC 29 greatly reduced gall formation and the number of egg masses. The biocontrol potential of Bacillus subtilis, Bacillus pumilis, Bacillus thuringiensis, and Bacillus altitudinis is briefly summarized in Table 1.
Bacillus spp. have also been largely used for the effective management of plant-parasitic nematodes [46]. Bacillus spp. reduce the threat of chemical application by forming nematicidal metabolites [47,48]. Bacillus subtilis, a potential biocontrol agent, possesses spore-forming ability and several other characteristics that increases its chances of survival in the rhizosphere [49]. The genus Pasteuria, which includes the endospore-forming parasites, has also been found to decrease the populations of root-knot nematodes on various crops such as tomato, grapevines (Vitis vinifera L.), tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) and peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) [50]. It is a host-specific parasite of root-knot nematodes resistant to various nematicides and has a high level of virulence. Cetintas and Dickson [51] reported that in the presence of Pasteuria penetrans, the numbers of root galls by Meloidogyne arenaria race 1 were reduced on peanut. Similarly, Cho et al. [52] found that Meloidogyne arenaria was controlled by Pasteuria penetrans on tomato. Another bacterium, Serratia plymuthica, is found almost everywhere and can be used to control M. incognita (Table 1). It produces a large palette of antimicrobial products [35].

2.2. Fungi as Biocontrol Agents against Root-Knot Nematodes

Because fungi have a very high reproductive rate (both sexually and asexually), a short generation time, and are target-specific, the potential for the application of fungal biological control agents against plant pathogens has greatly expanded. Furthermore, in the absence of the host, they can survive in the environment by switching from parasitism to saprotrophism, allowing them to remain sustainable [53]. These fungi play an important role in controlling root-knot disease of plants caused by Meloidogyne spp. [54]. Different fungi have been found with nematophagous/nematicidal activities (Table 2). These fungi use different mechanisms to kill or control root-knot nematodes (Figure 2). More than 700 nematophagous fungi belonging to the phyla ascomycota, zygomycota, chytridiomycota, basidiomycota and oomycota have been described [55]. Nematophagous fungi were of four types: endoparasitic fungi, nematode-trapping fungi (predatory or scavengers), opportunistic ovicidal or parasites of eggs and females, and toxin-producing fungi [56,57].

2.2.1. Entomopathogenic Fungi as Biocontrol Agents of Root-Knot Nematodes

Entomopathogenic fungi include those fungal species that parasitize other pathogens and kill them. Beauveria bassiana is an important entomopathogenic fungusthat is well-known to parasitize nematodes. Liu et al. [81] assessed the nematicidal activity of a culture filtrate of B. bassiana against M. hapla in in-vitro and greenhouse conditions on tomatoes. The percentage relative suppression rate of egg hatching ranged from 64.25 (50× dilution) to 99.89% (1× dilution), and mortality of J2 was directly proportional to the concentration of culture filtrate in vitro. In greenhouse conditions, soil drenching with 10×, 5×, 1× dilution strongly reduced the number of egg masses, root gall, and population density in tomato roots and soil. A 1× and 5× culture filtrate dilution resulted in 98.61% and 76.39% inhibition rate of nematodes, respectively. Youssef et al. [83] conducted in-vitro studies of the effect of culture filtrates at dilutions S, S/2, S/4 and conidial spore concentrations of 1 × 106, 1 × 107 and 1 × 108 of the fungi Beauveria bassiana, Metarhizium anisopliae (Metchnikoff) Sorokin 1883 and Purpureocillium lilacinus on M. incognita egg hatching and juvenile mortality. B. Bassiana and M. anisopliae culture filtrate with dilution S resulted in maximum egg hatching inhibition by 90%, and P. lilacinus spore conc. 1 × 108 resulted in the highest egg inhibition by 42.5%. The highest mortality of juveniles, of 100.00%, resulted from the culture filtrate of M. anisopliae at dilution S followed by 76% mortality by the fungus P. lilacinus at S dilution. In greenhouse conditions, P. lilacinus at S dilution resulted in the highest reduction in the number of egg masses (84.2%) and nematode populations in soil and root, by 86.4% and 82.9%, respectively. Additionally, the spore concentration (1 × 108) achievedthe highest nematode reduction, by 85.3%. B. bassiana and M. anisopliae have been used as bioagents against root-knot nematodes, as they possess nematicidal activity. A secondary metabolite produced by B. bassiana, beauvericin, has toxic effects on M. incognita [84]. Ghayedi and Abdollahi [85] reported that the conidial spores of M. anisopliae attached to the cuticle of the nematode germinate, parasitize and produce infective hyphae inside the body of the nematode. Kershaw et al. [86] also reported the pathogenicity of the fungus due to the production of cyclopeptides and destruxins.

2.2.2. Toxin-Producing Fungi as Biocontrol Agents against Root-Knot Nematodes

This group includes those fungal species that secrete some toxic compounds known as mycotoxins. A common example in this category is the oyster mushroom (Pleurotus ostreatus), which produces mycotoxin that causes paralysis of nematodes [87]. The toxin, trans-2-decenoic acid derived from linoleic acid, affects nematodes as well as insects and other fungi [88]. Five species of Pleurotus, including P. ostreatus, P. sajor-caju (Fr.) Fr. 1838, P. cornucopiae (Paulet) Rolland 1910, P. florida Cetto 1987 and P.eryngii (DC.) Quel. 1872, showed nematotoxic action against J2 of M.javanica. Toxin-producing processes or droplets were found on the hyphae. Contact of the nematode with toxin droplets resulted in immediate recoiling, and repeated contact resulted in inactivation. With increasing exposure (24–48 h), hyphae penetrated the nematode body, especially through the mouth, and within 2–3 days, their body contents were digested. Pleurotus ostreatus toxins were more effective, suddenly inactivating the nematodes after short exposure. Culture filtrates of Pleurotus ostreatus and Pleurotus sajor-caju showed similar toxicity [89]. Organic amendments with fresh mashed fruit residue of Pleurotus ostreatus at 15 g resulted in the reduction of 86.4% of nematodes and 92.4% of galls on cowpea and also increased plant growth and yield [77].

2.2.3. Nematode-Trapping Fungi as Biocontrol Agents against Root-Knot Nematodes

A distinct and fascinating class of carnivorous microorganisms known as nematode-trapping fungi can capture and consume worms using specialized trapping structures. They are able to create a variety of trapping mechanisms, including constricting rings, non-constricting rings, adhesive knobs, adhesive networks, and adhesive hyphae [90]. Arthrobotrys oligospora Fresen. 1850 form different traps and adhesive devices for trapping and suppressing M. incognita second-stage juveniles (J2). The trapping organ consists of either a single ring or a fully developed 3-D network of hyphae. Mobile juveniles are trapped by the loop formed by hyphae, or hyphae directly adhere to immobilized juveniles without any developed loops or traps. Traps formed as a response against nematode presence and resulted in the attraction, adhesion, capturing, penetration and immobilization of juveniles and finally digestion and assimilation of the nematodes [67]. Studies revealed that trapping of juveniles by the fungus increases with time. The highest numbers of juveniles trapped were recorded after 72 h from nematode inoculation in-vitro [91]. Soliman et al. [66] carried out in-vitro and in-vivo experiments to study the effect of a culture filtrate of A. oligospora on M. incognita. The 50% and 100% concentrations of fungus culture filtrate resulted in 80.7% and 84.0% suppression of juveniles, respectively. In greenhouse experiments on tomato plants, soil applications of the fungus resulted in suppression of the numbers of females, galls and egg masses. In addition, treatment with the fungus prior to inoculation of nematodes showed a more significant effect in reducing the numbers of nematodes in soil and also resulted in increases in plant shoot weight, root weight and dry weight. Soil drenching with fungus alone resulted in an increase in plant growth, hence demonstrating the fungus to be a biocontrol against root-knot nematodes and an enhancer of plant vigor. Nourani et al. [92] studied the effect of two species of fungus, A. oligospora and Arthrobotrys conoides (Drechsler 1937), on egg hatching and mortality of M. javanica and M. incognita. Results showed that culture filtrates of A. conoides were more fatal to J2 and egg hatching as compared to A. oligospora. This was due to the production of the protein Ac1 by A. conoides, which could destroy a broad spectrum of substrate as compared to the serine protease produced by A. oligospora [93]. M. incognita juveniles were more sensitive to culture filtrate of both fungi as compared to M. javanica.
The nematode-trapping fungus Aspergillus awamori isolate BS05 parasitizes nematodes. The hyphae produced open constricting loops 18 h after incubation with nematodes, resulted in trapping by hyphal ring followed by penetration and digestion of the nematodes. In a pot experiment, treatment with fungal isolate resulted in reduction of root galling and eggs per root system and also improved tomato growth and yield [69]. Dactylaria brochopaga, a nematode-trapping fungus, formed traps for capturing larvae, paralyzed them, dissolvedthe outer cuticle, and digested the inner content, thus proving to be an effective antagonistic fungus for nematode management [94]. Noweer and Aboul-Eid [76] studied the effect of D. brochopaga for the management of M. incognita in Cucumis sativus L. cvs. Alfa. They observed that the fungus alone or in combination with yeast, molasses and vermiculite reduced nematode population density and the number of root galls and also significantly increased the weight of cucumber fruit per plant. D. brochopaga is also used a potent bioagent against M. incognita infesting superior grapevine [95]. Noweer et al. [75] suggested that combined application of D. brochopaga and Verticillium chlamydosporium (egg parasite of Meloidogyne spp.) with yeast molasses and vermiculate resulted in a 93.1% reduction of root galls per plant and also increased the weight of fruit per plant.
Monacrosporium dermatum, a nematode-trapping fungus, showed predatory efficacy against J2s of M. incognita. Trapping by the fungus increased with increases in the J2 population and incubation time; 64.50, 77.75, 91.50, 95.69, and 96.90% of juveniles were trapped in 100, 200, 300, 400 and 500 nematode population levels, respectively, at 96 h of exposure. Treatments of the fungus with organic manure on brinjal resulted in decrease in the nematode populations in root and soil and egg masses per plant, and also increased plant height and root length [96].

2.2.4. Endoparasitic Fungi as Biocontrol Agents against Root-Knot Nematodes

A class of fungi known as endoparasitic fungi infects nematodes via their conidia. This class of fungi produces essentially no mycelium in soil and has no or a very limited saprophytic phase [97]. Drechmeria coniospora (Drechsler) W. Gams and H.B. Jansson, 1985is an endoparasitic nematophagous fungus used as a bioagent against nematodes. An extract from SDAY (10.0 g bacterial peptone, 10.0 g yeast extract, 40.0 g glucose, 18.0 g agar, 1 L water) medium offungal isolate of D. coniospora YMF1.01759 showed nematicidal activity against M. incognita, resulting in 99.1% mortality at 5 mg m/L at 72 h. EtOAc extract obtained from crude extract of SDAY attained 98.0% mortality of juveniles at 1 mg mL−1 at 72 h. From EtOAc extract, 13 metabolites were isolated and identified, and among them, 5-hydroxymethylfuran-2-carboxylic acid (1) at a concentration of 400 µg mL−1 exhibiteda toxic effect on M. incognita, resulting in 100% mortality of J2s after 72 h. The compound also inhibited egg hatching, as the number of hatched J2s from one egg mass was 11.17 at 200 µg mL−1 after 3 days [98].

2.2.5. Ovicidal Fungi as Biocontrol Agents against Root-Knot Nematodes

The ovicidal group hunts and consumes eggs, cysts, and nematode females using traps and enzymes [99]. A good example in this category includes Purpureocillium lilacinum (Thom) Samson isolate HYBDPL-04, which has been reported to be effective against M. incognita among seven other isolates, NDPL-01, ANDPL-02, SHGPL-03, AHDPL-05, PTNPL-06, SNGPL-07 and VNSPL-08, resulting in inhibition of egg hatching by 90%, juvenile mortality of 80%, and 75% egg infection in-vitro. In a field experiment, application of HYBDPL-04 along with farmyard manure resulted in a reduction of galls by 60% and enhanced yield by 43% on tomato plants [100]. Field treatment with P. lilacinus 25%WP at 1.5 kg in 500 kg FYM first at transplantation and then after 30 days significantly reduced the nematode population by 24.50% in soil and induced a 60% yield enhancement [101]. Application of a P. lilacinus spore suspension (10 × 105 conc.) to soil before transplantation of tomato plants reduced Meloidogyne spp. egg masses by 85% [59].
Bio-nematon, a biological nematicide of P. lilacinus formulation found to be very effective in reducing nematode populations of M. incognita, increases cucumber yield and is environmentally safe with no phytotoxic symptoms. Soil drenching first at the time of sowing and a second time 30–60 days after sowing with Bio-nematon P. lilacinus 1.15% WP bio-nematicide at 6.0 kg/ha was effective in managing M. incognita and increased plant yield [102]. Bio-nematon 1.15% at 69 g a.i/ha can also be effectively adopted for the management of root-knot nematodes (M. incognita) in tomato crops [103].
Bioformulations of the P. lilacinus (PI-181) strain in Attapulgite-based clay dust with peat colony count(CFU count 92.3%), demonstrated effective self-life(maximum spore viability of 94.9, 86.5, 81.2, 56.8 and 38.8% at 2, 4, 6 and 8 months, respectively), longevity and plant growth parameters and nematode reduction(76.72% egg infection) [104]. P. lilacinus 6029 filtrate obtained from Karanja cake-based broth was effective for the mortality of the J2 stage of M. incognita, as this cake medium elevated the production and nematicidal activity of the filtrate. Additionally, an increase in the incubation period of the culture filtrate of up to 15 days enhancedits nematicidal activity and resulted in 100% mortality of J2 within 12 h of exposure (in-vitro tests at the intervals of 3, 6, 12, and 24 h carried out in 24 well plates; each well contained 1 ml of culture filtrate and 0.5 ml suspension containing 150–200 juveniles) [105].
Bawa et al. [80] studied the integrated management of M. incognita in capsicum using P. lilacinus and organic amendments. They found that in a pot experiment, a bioformulations of P. lilacinus liquid 1.50% (1 × 109 CFU/mL) at 6 L + FYM at 1.2 kg/500 kg soil was potent against the root-knot nematode and resulted in a 48.72% reduction in the average root gall index and 60.15% and 61.10% reduction in the average number of egg masses per root system and average soil nematode population, respectively. Hence, they carried out the experiment in a net house and in an open field with the same concentration (1.50%) of P. lilacinus along with organic amendments (neem cake and farmyard manure). It was observed that P. lilacinus liquid (1.50%) with enriched neem cake at 1 t/ha and FYM at 2.5 t/ha as a split application at the time of transplanting and 30 days after transplanting was very beneficial, as the treatment increased average shoot length (41.65 cm in net house and 35.13 cm in open field), shoot weight (57.86 g in net house and 43.02 g in open field), root length (13.17 cm in net house and 11.48 cm in open field) and root weight (13.47 g in net house and 10.35 g in open field). Application of P. lilacinus and neem also resulted in the reduction of the average root gall index by 44.52% and 50.60% and reduction of egg masses per root system by 56.92% and 61.08% in the net house and open field, respectively, compared to control.
Singh and Mathur [61] carried out an in-vitro study to assess the efficacy of the antagonistic fungi Acremonium strictum, Aspergillus terreus, A. nidulans G. Winter 1884, A. niger, Cladosporium oxysporum (Berk. and M.A. Curtis 1868), Fusarium chlamydosporium Link 1809, F. dimarum, F. oxysporum (Schlecht. Emend. Snyderand Hansen), F. solani (W.C. Snyderand andH.N. Hansen, 1941), P. lilacinus, Pochonia chlamydosporia (Goddard) Zare and W. Gams 2001, Trichoderma viride Pers 1794 and T. harzianum against Meloidogyne incognita. All fungi were tested for root-knot nematode egg parasitism, egg hatching reduction, and juvenile mortality. The highest percentage of egg parasitism was shown by P. chlamydosporia (87.2%), followed by P. lilacinus (82.3%), and A. strictum (53.3%) after 72 h of exposure of eggs to each of fungal culture, while no egg parasitism was shown by A. terreus, A. nidulans, A. niger, F. dimarum, and F. solani. Egg hatching was reduced by 11 to 14% by the culture filtrate of A. strictum (14.3%), F. dimarum (10.8%), and F. oxysporium (14.5%) after 10 days of exposure. The highest inactivation of juveniles was recorded by three fungi: F. dimarum (84.3%), followed by A. terreus (80.3%) and A. strictum (75.3%) after 72 h of exposure. The highest mortality of juveniles was caused by A. strictum (68.7%) and A. terreus (67.8%). F. dimarum, however, did not cause increased mortality of juveniles, and F. solani had no effect on nematode mobility or mortality of juveniles. The authors reported A. strictum and A. terreus as good bioagents against M. incognita in-vitro. A. strictum was found to be very effective in reducing egg hatching (14.3%), egg parasitism (53.3%) and inactivation (75.3%), and mortality (68.7%) of juveniles. It showed advantages over P. chlamydosporium and P. lilacinus, as it showed the dual activity of egg parasitism as well as toxin production. In-vivo applications of the fungi Aspergillus terreus and Acremonium strictum resulted in 76% and 73% reductions in eggs/egg mass and number of hatching eggs/egg mass by A. terreus and 71% and 68% by A. strictum, respectively. Combined application resulted in reductions in the egg hatching rate and number of eggs/egg mass by 77% and 81%, respectively.

2.2.6. Secondary Metabolites and Nematicidal Compounds Obtained from Nematophagous Fungi as Biocontrol Agents against Root-Knot Nematodes

Various secondary metabolites from nematode-trapping fungi that exhibit nematicidal and nematode-attracting actions or influence the establishment of reproductive or trapping organs have been documented [106]. Some important metabolites with nematicidal activities include, Omphalotus olearius, linoleic acid, chaetoglobosin A, acetic acid, and oxalic acid [73]. Aspergillus niger strain F22 showed nematicidal activity in a dose-dependent manner against M. incognita and resulted in juvenile mortality and reduced egg hatching. A 5–20% culture filtrate resulted in complete suppression of egg hatching after 7 days of incubation and above 90% juvenile mortality with a 2.5–20% culture filtrate after 1 day of incubation. Analysis of culture filtrate revealed the presence of a major organic acid, oxalic acid, which showed nematicidal activity. A 2 mmol/L oxalic acid solution resulted in 100% mortality of M. incognita J2 after 1 day of treatment, and 10 and 50 mmol/L oxalic acid resulted in 100% egg hatching inhibition after 7 days of treatment. M. hapla was highly sensitive to oxalic acid in comparison to M. incognita. Oxalic acid resulted in the production of multiple vacuoles in the nematode body, which was straightened and stiffened, destroying all internal organs. The combined application of a 1:1 mixture of two wettable powder-type formulations of oxalic acid (90% purity) and Aspergillus niger F22 (spore count, 4.1 × 108 CFU/g) at 1000- and 500-fold dilutions to a watermelon field reduced gall formation by 58.8% and 70.7%, respectively. Combined treatment showed greater inhibitory activity than a single treatment alone [107]. αβ-dehydrocurvularin (αβ-DC), a major nematicidal compound isolated from Aspergillus welwitschiae with a median lethal concentration (LC50) of 122.2 μg ml−1, showed nematicidal activity against M. graminicola. αβ-DC-treated rice root prevented attraction of nematodes, thus retarding invasion and infection. The volume of giant cells in treated roots was smaller than in the control; thus, the treatment had a negative impact on giant cell development, and this resulted in a decreased supply of nutrients to nematodes. Drenching with αβ-DC significantly reduced penetration by nematodes and thus reduced infection in rice root and suppressed the development of females. αβ-DC significantly reduced the root gall index under field conditions [108].
Volatile organic compounds(VOCs) obtained from various microorganisms have been used as bioagents for the control of nematodes [109]. Many VOCs produced by the fungus Fusarium oxysporum, including 2-methylbutyl acetate, 3-methylbutyl acetate, ethyl acetate, and 2-methylpropyl acetate, showed nematicidal activity against plant-parasitic nematodes [110]. VOCs obtained from the fungus Daldinia cf. concentrica (Bolton 1792) Cesati and de Notaris possess nematicidal activity against M. javanica, and 4-heptanone was its major active compound [111]. Mei et al. [112] studied the nematicidal potential of VOCs of the nematode-trapping fungus Duddingtonia flagrans (Dudd.) R.C. Cooke 1969. The fungal hyphae form a three-dimensional network trap for capturing and killing juveniles. Adhesive substances and mycelia also play a role in pathogenicity. GC-MS analysis of VOCs of the fungus revealed the presence of 52 metabolites, out of which cyclohexanamine, cyclohexanone, and cyclohexanol showed nematicidal activity. M. incognita mortality of 100% was achieved with 10 µL of cyclohexanamine and cyclohexanone at 12 h. Cyclohexanamine at 26.14 µM exhibited the highest inhibitory activity against egg hatching, resulting in 8.44 hatched juveniles per egg mass after 3 days.
Chitinases and proteases are essential extracellular enzymes involved in the degradation of chitinous eggshells [113]. Chitinase-producing fungi such as Trichoderma harzianum, Lecanicillium lecanii (R. Zare and W. Gams, 2001), and Beauveria bassiana have been used as biocontrol agents against plant-parasitic nematodes [114]. P. lilacinus, a nematophagous fungi that produces chitinase and protease, caused considerable damage to M. javanica egg shells [115]. CHI43, the first chitinase obtained from nematophagous fungi Verticillium chlamydosporium (Syn. Pochonia chlamydosporia) and Verticillium suchlasporium (Syn. Pochonia rubescens (Zare, W. Gams and Lopez-Llorca 2001), was effective against nematode eggshells [116].
Serine protease and PRA1 trypsin-like protease were isolated from Trichoderma species and showed nematicidal activity against juveniles of M. javanica [117]. Moreover, Aurovertins, pochonins and phomalactones obtained from Pochonia chlamydosporia showed egg parasitism and infected juveniles of nematode [118]. Grammicin, a metabolite isolated from Xylaria grammica (Mont. 1840) KCTC 13121BP showed nematicidal activity against M. incognita, egg hatching inhibition, and juvenile mortality at a 15.9 μg/mL concentration [119].
Lecanicillium psalliotae (Syn. Verticillium psalliotae) (Treschew 1941) Zare and W. Gams 2001,a filamentous nematophagous fungus used as a bioagent against root-knot nematodes, possesses a cuticle-degrading protease (Ver112) and chitinase (LPCHI1), which are effective against M. incognita eggs and thus influence its development [120,121]. Incubation of eggs of nematode with pure LPCHI1 and Ver112 resulted in the failure of 38.2% and 49.5% of the nematode eggs to hatch, respectively. The hatching rate was reduced by 56.55% using a combined treatment of both the chitinase and protease. Chitinase treatment resulted in deformed eggs, partially degraded eggshells and large vacuole formations in eggs [121]. Lecanicillium antillanum B-3 (Syn. Verticillium antillanum B-3) (R.F. Castaneda and G.R.W. Arnold) Zare and W. Gams 2001, a chitinolytic nematophagous fungus, showed parasitism on Meloidogyne incognita eggs. Treatment with B-3 isolate led to parasitization of 90% of the eggs by hyphae penetration, with growth inside the eggs on the third day. B-3 crude chitinase at a concentration of 14.6µg m/L resulted in damage to 78% of the eggs on day 4 of treatment [116]. Lecanicillium muscarium, a nematophagous fungus, parasitizes the eggs of M. incognita [121,122]. Hussain et al. [79] observed that the increased initial fungal conidia level decreased the nematode reproduction rate on tomato plants. Additionally, plant growth and yield increased with increasing fungus inoculum. A Monacrosporium thaumasium (Drechsler) de Hoog and Oorschot 1985 enzymatic pool containing protease proved effective in reducing the hatching rate of M.javanica eggs by 30% [123].
A fermentation filtrate of Aspergillus japonicus ZW1 showed nematicidal activity against M. incognita. Two-week fermentation filtrate(2-WF)showed strong nematicidal activity against the cumulative egg hatching rate as well as causing mortality of juveniles. With 50% 2-WF, the cumulative hatching rate of eggs was 6.4% after 15 days of incubation, and J2 mortality reached 100% after 6 h of incubation. Treatment with 2-WF resulted in wrinkles on the body surfaces of of juveniles, internal bubble formation and cytoplasmic vacuolization. In a greenhouse experiment, application of a 50% fermentation broth of 2-WF resulted in a 78.6–79.9% reduction in the number of root galls and a 69.4–72.0% reduction in the number of eggs per plant, compared to control. The nematicidal compound present in the fermentation filtrate was identified as 1,5-Dimethyl Citrate hydrochloride ester, which showed strong toxic activity against J2s. A 1.25 mg m/L concentration of this compound resulted in 91.7% mortality of J2s after 48 h of exposure. A. japonicus filtrate also showed no negative effect on seed germination of cucumber, tomatoes, wheat, rice, and cowpeas and thus proved to be a potent biocontrol agent [65].
Aspergillus welwitschiae AW2017 has ovicidal and larvicidal potential. A conidial suspension at a concentration of 5 × AW2017 resulted in 86.2% mortality of nematodes after 48 h of exposure, and egg hatching was reduced by 47.3% after 8 days of incubation. In addition, the conidial suspension of A. welwitschiae reduced the attractiveness of rice root to M. graminicola (Golden and Birchfield), resulting in a 64.9 ± 5.4% reduction in the number of penetrated juveniles and 39.6 ± 3.4% reduction the number of juveniles migrating to 3.0–4.5 cm. Drenching with the conidial suspension 5 × AW2017 resulted in reduction of galls and nematode penetration by 40.5% and 24.5%, respectively, and also delayed the development of nematodes in rice root [66].
Chaetomium globosum, a fungus living as saprophyte or as an endophyte, has been used as a bioagent against plant pathogenic microbes and nematodes [124]. Chaetoglobosin A (ChA) isa secondary metabolite of an isolate of C. globosum NK102 with anticancer activity and is an inhibitor of movement and mammalian cell proliferation. Natori [125] isolated it from its culture filtrate and also showed that it has nematicidal activity against M. incognita. C. globosum NK102 fungal colony, its culture filtrate and ChA all showed negative effects on juvenile mortality. C. globosum inhibited egg hatching but both filtrate and ChA showed no effect on eggs. The culture filtrate showed strong nematicidal activity toward juvenile mortality and penetration of J2s on cucumber root even at a very low 12.5% dilution. A 300 μg/mL concentration of ChA resulted in 99.8% mortality of J2s and also reduced penetration. Treatment of soil with 30 mg/kg of ChA significantly reduced the number of eggs per plant by 63% as compared to control [73]. In another isolate of C. globosum YSC5 culture broth, five secondary metabolites were isolated and showed adverse effects toward juvenile mortality. Among these metabolites, 200 μg/mL chaetoglobosin A(ChA), chaetoglobosin B(ChB) and flavipin resulted in 91.6, 83.8 and 87.4% mortality of J2s of M. javanica, respectively, after 72 h of exposure. ChA- and ChB-treated roots of tomato reduced nematode reproduction and also enhanced plant growth and yield. ChB at 200 μg/mL resulted in the reduction of galls by 61.5% and number of egg masses by 72.4%, and ChA caused 59.0% and 71.1% reductions, respectively, in the number of galls and egg masses [74].

2.3. Plant Extracts as Biocontrol Agents against Root-Knot Nematodes

The richest source of organic matter on Earth is found in plants, which are repositories of nature. These days, plants and their by-products are given more consideration as biocontrol agents against a variety of plant parasites, nematodes, fungi, and other pests [126]. According to current patterns in the application of botanical nematicides, a majority of the allelopathic substances demonstrate egg hatching inhibition, interrupt sexual selection, and decrease gut motility. Nematicidal plant extracts are mostly from the families Meliaceae, Fabaceae, Lamiaceae, Brassicaceae, Verbenance, Euphorbiaceae, etc. [127]. Various secondary metabolites released from plants such as alkaloids, flavonoids, glucosinolates, isothiocyanates, tannins, fatty acids, and sesquiterpenes show nematicidal potential against egg hatching, juvenile mortality, and penetration of nematodes [128,129]. Orisajo and Dongo [130] studied the nematicidal potential of various plant extracts of Ocimum gratisimum L., Carica papaya L., Vernonia amygdalina Delile, Bixa orellana L., and Azadirachta indica A. Jusson against the reproduction and pathogenicity of Meloidogyne incognita. Fabiyi [131] used plant materials of Eucalyptus officinalis, Ocimum gratismum, Hyptis suaveolens (L.) Kuntze and Crotolaria juncea L. as soil amendments to control M. incognita on okra. Cucurbitaceae cold peeling extracts (CCOPEs) obtained from the peels of Cucumis melo L. var. cantalupensis protected Oryza sativa L. and Solanum lycopersicum L. against root-knot nematodes by direct nematicidal effects and through resistance induced by the generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and ethylene accumulation and cell wall modification [132]. Arshad et al. [133] found that seed priming with botanical extracts, Neem (Azadirachta indica), Datura (Datura stramonium L.), Kortuma (Citrullus colocynthis (L.) Schrad) and Moringa oleifera Lam. leaf extracts showed significant results in suppressing nematodes. In-vitro neem leaf extract resulted in egg hatching reduction by 30% and juvenile mortality of 70%, and in pot trials, significantly reduced the numbers of galls, egg masses, and females and increased juvenile mortality. An aqueous extract of Phyllanthus amarus Schumach. and Thonn. (5000 ppm) resulted in 91% mortality of juveniles after 72 h of exposure and 86.5% reduction in egg hatching after 7 days of exposure [134]. Different plant parts, including by-products such as oil cakes, chopped leaves as soil or organic amendments, and plant extracts for soil drenching, seed dressing and priming have been assessed for their nematicidal properties: specifically, rhizome of Curcuma longa L., aerial parts of Lantana camara L., Azadirachta indica, Datura, and roots of Fumaria parviflora Lam., bark of Terminalia nigrovenulosa Pierre, 1886, and bulbs of Allium sativum L. Table 3 summarizes a few of the plant species, their secondary metabolites, and nematodes targeted.

3. Conclusions

Plant-parasitic nematodes, which cause huge economic losses globally, and sustainable and eco-friendly methods for their management are needed as harmful nematicides are being phased out from the agroecosystems. The necessity of such an alternate approach signifies the importance of biocontrol, which exploits the natural processes of various microorganisms, bacteria and fungi to control these parasitic nematodes. These biocontrol agents activate several processes that stimulate the self-regulation of the ecological community. They improve the nutrient content in soil, enhance its biological activities by augmenting it with beneficial microflora, promote plant growth, and exert lethal effects on root-knot nematodes through different modes including the production of metabolic compounds and other toxins that alter nematode egg hatching and kill nematode juveniles. However, efficient biocontrol requires detailed knowledge about the dynamics of pathogens and their natural enemies. In addition, the focus should be on combining more than one environmentally friendly discipline or approach for root-knot nematode management thatcan be effortlessly produced and easy to apply. Synergistic interaction, sustainability and other parameters as mentioned above must be improved for the ecofriendly management of nematodes.

Author Contributions

A.A.B., A.S. and S.W. generated the idea and wrote the article. A.A.K. designed and supervised the manuscript. Z.A.H. reviewed and edited the manuscript andprovided resources. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The first three and last authors are thankful to the University Grants Commission for providing non-net fellowship. Mention of trade names or commercial products in this publication is solely for the purpose of providing specific information and does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that no conflict of interest exists.

References

  1. Shakeel, A.; Khan, A.A.; Bhat, A.H.; Sayed, S. Nitrogen fertilizer alleviates root-knot nematode stress in beet root by suppressing the pathogen while modulating the antioxidant defence system and cell viability of the host. Physiol. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2022, 120, 101838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Sikora, R.A.; Coyne, D.; Hallmann, J.; Timper, P. Plant Parasitic Nematodes in Subtropical and Tropical Agriculture; CABI: Wallingford, UK, 2018; pp. 1–19. [Google Scholar]
  3. Kiewnick, S.; Sikora, R.A. Biological control of the root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne incognita) by Paecilomyces lilacinus strain 251. Biol. Control 2006, 38, 179–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Ashraf, M.S.; Khan, T.A. Integrated approach for the management of Meloidogyne javanica on egg plant using oil cakes and biocontrol agents. Arch. Phytopathol. Plant Prot. 2010, 43, 609–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Weischer, B. Nematode-virus interactions. In Nematode Interactions; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1993; pp. 217–231. [Google Scholar]
  6. Ismail, W.; Johri, J.K.; Zaidi, A.A.; Singh, B.P. Influence of root-knot nematode, tobaccomosaic virus & complex on the growth & carbohydrates of Solanum khasianum Clarke. Indian J. Exp. Biol. 1979, 17, 1266–1267. [Google Scholar]
  7. Huang, S.P.; Chu, E.Y. Inhibitory Effect of Watermelon Mosaic Virus on Meloidogyne javanica (Treub) Chitwood infecting Cucurbitapepo L. J. Nematol. 1984, 16, 109. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  8. Alam, M.M.; Samad, A.; Anver, S. Interaction between tomato mosaic virus and Meloidogyne incognita in tomato. Nematol. Mediterr. 1990, 18, 131–133. [Google Scholar]
  9. Moura, R.M.; Powell, N.T. Estudos sobre o complexo TMV M. incognita em tomate. Soc. Bras. De Nematol. Publicacao 1977, 2, 175–181. [Google Scholar]
  10. Weischer, B. Further studies on the population development of Ditylenchus dipsaci and Aphelenchoides ritzemabosi in virus-infected and virus-free tobacco. Nematologica 1975, 21, 213–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Showler, A.T.; Reagan, T.E.; Shao, K.P. Nematode interactions with weeds and sugarcane mosaic virus in Louisiana sugarcane. J. Nematol. 1990, 22, 31. [Google Scholar]
  12. Moens, M.; Perry, R.N.; Starr, J.L. Meloidogyne species–a diverse group of novel and important plant parasites. Root-Knot Nematodes 2009, 1, 483. [Google Scholar]
  13. Coyne, D.L.; Cortada, L.; Dalzell, J.J.; Claudius-Cole, A.O.; Haukeland, S.; Luambano, N.; Talwana, H. Plant-parasitic nematodes and food security in Sub-Saharan Africa. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 2018, 56, 381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  14. 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]
  15. Chen, J.; Li, Q.X.; Song, B. Chemical nematicides: Recent research progress and outlook. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2020, 68, 12175–12188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Dong, J.Y.; Li, X.P.; Li, L.; Li, G.H.; Liu, Y.J.; Zhang, K.Q. Preliminary results on nematicidal activity from culture filtrate s of Basidiomycetes against the pinewood nematode, Bursaphelenchus xylophilus (Aphelenchoididae). Ann. Microbiol. 2006, 56, 163–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Sharma, P.; Rakesh, P. Biologicalcontrol of root-knot nematode; Meloidogyne incognita in the medicinal plant; Withania somnifera and the effect of biocontrol agents on plant growth. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 2009, 4, 564–567. [Google Scholar]
  18. MBTOC. Report of the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee. In Non-Chemical Alternatives Adopted as Replacements to Methyl Bromide on a Large Scale; United Nation Environmental Programme, UNON Publishing Section Services: Nairobi, Kenya, 2006; pp. 39–73. [Google Scholar]
  19. EC. Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and repealing Council. In Directives 79/117/EEC and 91/414/EEC. Official Journal of the European Union, 24.11. 2009, L 309/1-50; EC: Brussels, Belgium; Luxembourg, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  20. Zarb, J.; Ghorbani, R.; Koocheki, A.; Leifert, C. The importance of microorganisms in organic agriculture. Outlooks Pest Manag. 2005, 16, 52–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Stirling, G.R. Biological control of plant-parasitic nematodes. In Diseases of Nematodes; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2018; pp. 103–150. [Google Scholar]
  22. Pal, K.K.; Gardener, B.M. Biological control of plant pathogens. Plant Health Instr. 2006, 2, 1117–1142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Lugtenberg, B.; Kamilova, F. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 2009, 63, 541–556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  24. Kaya, H.K.; Koppenhöfer, A.M. Effects of microbial and other antagonistic organism and competitionon entomopathogenic nematodes. Biocontrol. Sci. Technol. 1996, 6, 357–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Tian, B.; Yang, J.; Zhang, K.Q. Bacteria used in the biological control of plant-parasitic nematodes: Populations, mechanisms of action, and future prospects. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 2007, 61, 197–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Schouteden, N.; DeWaele, D.; Panis, B.; Vos, C.M. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi for the biocontrol of plant-parasitic nematodes: A review of the mechanisms involved. Front. Microbiol. 2015, 6, 1280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Junaid, J.M.; Dar, N.A.; Bhat, T.A.; Bhat, A.H.; Bhat, M.A. Commercial biocontrol agents and their mechanism of action in the management of plant pathogens. Int. J. Mod. Plant Anim. Sci. 2013, 1, 39–57. [Google Scholar]
  28. Roberts, D.P.; Lohrke, S.M.; Meyer, S.L.; Buyer, J.S.; Bowers, J.H.; Baker, C.J.; Chung, S. Biocontrol agents applied individually and in combination for suppression of soilborne diseases of cucumber. Crop Prot. 2005, 24, 141–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Murslain, M.; Javed, N.; Khan, S.A.; Khan, H.U.; Abbas, H.; Kamran, M. Combined efficacy of Moringa oleifera leaves and a fungus, Trichoderma harzianum against Meloidogyne javanica on eggplant. Pak. J. Zool. 2014, 46, 827–832. [Google Scholar]
  30. Haque, Z.; Khan, M.R.; Ahamad, F. Relative antagonistic potential of some rhizosphere biocontrol agents for the management of rice root-knot nematode(Meloidogyne graminicola). Biol. Control 2018, 126, 109–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Askary, T.H.; Martinelli, P.R.P. Biocontrol Agents Phytonematodes; CABI: Wallingford, UK, 2015; pp. 81–125. [Google Scholar]
  32. 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]
  33. Miliute, I.; Buzaite, O.; Baniulis, D.; Stanys, V. Bacterial endophytes in agricultural crops and their role in stress tolerance: A review. Zemdirbyste 2015, 102, 465–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Glick, B.R. Beneficial Plant-Bacterial Interactions; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015; pp. 139–180. [Google Scholar]
  35. Zhao, J.; Wang, S.; Zhu, X.; Wang, Y.; Liu, X.; Duan, Y.; Chen, L. Isolation, and characterization of nodules endophytic bacteria Pseudomonas protegens Sneb 1997and Serratia plymuthica Sneb 2001 for the biological control of root-knot nematode. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2021, 164, 103924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Tariq, M.; Khan, A.; Asif, M.; Khan, F.; Ansari, T.; Shariq, M.; Siddiqui, M.A. Biological control: A sustainable and practical approach for plant disease management. Acta Agric. Scand. Sect. B—Soil Plant Sci. 2020, 70, 507–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Migunova, V.D.; Sasanelli, N. Bacteria as biocontrol tool against phytoparasitic nematodes. Plants 2021, 10, 389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Mhatre, P.H.; Karthik, C.; Kadirvelu, K.; Divya, K.L.; Venkatasalam, E.P.; Srinivasan, S.; Shanmuganathan, R. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria(PGPR): A potential alternative tool for nematodes biocontrol. Biocatal. Agric. Biotechnol. 2019, 17, 119–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Panpatte, D.G.; Jhala, Y.K.; Shelat, H.N.; Vyas, R.V. Pseudomonas fluorescens: A promising biocontrol agent and PGPR for sustainable agriculture. In Microbial Inoculants in Sustainable Agricultural Productivity; Springer: New Delhi, India, 2016; pp. 257–270. [Google Scholar]
  40. Sharma, I.P.; Sharma, A.K. Effective control of root-knot nematode disease with Pseudomonad rhizobacteria filtrate. Rhizosphere 2017, 3, 123–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Chinheya, C.C.; Yobo, K.S.; Laing, M.D. Biological control of the root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne javanica (Chitwood) using Bacillus isolates, on soybean. Biol. Control 2017, 109, 37–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Mehtab, A.; Javed, N.; Khan, S.A.; Gondal, A.S. Combined effect of Pasteuria penetrans and neem extract on the development of root-knot nematode in medicinal plants. Pak. J. Nematol. 2013, 31, 55–59. [Google Scholar]
  43. Abd-El-Khair, H.; El-Nagdi, W.; Youssef, M.; Abd-Elgawad, M.M.; Dawood, M.G. Protective effect of Bacillus subtilis, B. pumilus, and Pseudomonas fluorescens isolates against root-knot nematode Meloidogyne incognita on cowpea. Bull. Natl. Res. Cent. 2019, 43, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Khalil, M.S.; Kenawy, A.; Gohrab, M.A.; Mohammed, E.E. Impact of microbial agents on Meloidogyne incognita management and morphogenesis of tomato. J. Biopestic. 2012, 5, 28–35. [Google Scholar]
  45. Wang, J.Y.; Guo, C.; Zhao, P.; Yu, F.Y.; Su, Y.; Qu, J.P.; Zhou, B. Biocontrol potential of Bacillus altitudinis AMCC1040 against root-knot nematode disease of ginger and its impact on rhizosphere microbial community. Biol. Control 2021, 158, 104598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Lee, Y.S.; Kim, K.Y. Antagonistic potential of Bacillus pumilus L1 against root-knot nematode(Meloidogyne arenaria). J. Phytopathol. 2016, 164, 29–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Abbasi, M.W.; Ahmed, N.; Zaki, M.J.; Shuakat, S.S.; Khan, D. Potential of Bacillus species against Meloidogyne javanica parasitizing eggplant (Solanum melongena L.) and induced biochemical changes. Plant Soil 2014, 375, 159–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Sivasakthi, S.; Usharani, G.; Saranraj, P. Biocontrol potentiality of plant growth promoting bacteria (PGPR)-Pseudomonas fluorescens and Bacillus subtilis: A review. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 2014, 9, 1265–1277. [Google Scholar]
  49. Rao, M.S.; Kamalnath, M.; Umamaheswari, R.; Rajinikanth, R.; Prabu, P.; Priti, K.; Gopalakrishnan, C. Bacillus subtilis IIHRBS-2 enriched vermicompost controls root-knot nematode and soft rot disease complex in carrot. Sci. Hortic. 2017, 218, 56–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Bhuiyan, S.A.; Garlick, K.; Anderson, J.M.; Wickramasinghe, P.; Stirling, G.R. Biological control of root-knot nematode on sugarcane in soil naturally or artificially infested with Pasteuria penetrans. Australas. Plant Pathol. 2018, 47, 45–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Cetintas, R.; Dickson, D.W. Persistence and Suppressiveness of Pasteuria penetrans to Meloidogyne arenaria Race. J. Nematol. 2004, 36, 540. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  52. Cho, M.R.; Na, S.Y.; Yiem, M.S. Biological control of Meloidogyne arenaria by Pasteuria penetrans. J. Asia-Pac. Entomol. 2000, 3, 71–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Thambugala, K.M.; Daranagama, D.A.; Phillips, A.J.; Kannangara, S.D.; Promputtha, I. Fungi vs. fungi in biocontrol: An overview of fungal antagonists applied against fungal plant pathogens. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 2020, 10, 604923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Stirling, G.R.; West, L.M. Fungal parasites of root-knot nematode eggs from tropical and subtropical regions of Australia. Australas. Plant Pathol. 1991, 20, 149–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Li, J.; Zou, C.; Xu, J.; Ji, X.; Niu, X.; Yang, J.; Zhang, K.Q. Molecular mechanisms of nematode-nematophagous microbe interactions: Basis for biological control of plant-parasitic nematodes. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 2015, 53, 67–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Li, Y.; Zhang, C.; Yin, Y.; Cui, F.; Cai, J.; Chen, Z.; Hu, R. Neurological effects of pesticide use among farmers in China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2014, 11, 3995–4006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Zhang, Y.; Yang, G.; Fang, M.; Deng, C.; Zhang, K.Q.; Yu, Z.; Xu, J. Comparative analyses of mitochondrial genomes provide evolutionary insights into nematode-trapping fungi. Front. Microbiol. 2020, 11, 617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. Abd Elgawad, M.M.; Askary, T.H. Fungal and bacterial nematicides in integrated nematode management strategies. Egypt. J. Biol. Pest Control 2018, 28, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  59. Ahmed, S.; Monjil, M.S. Effect of Paecilomyceslilacinus ontomatoplantsandthemanagement of root-knot nematodes: Paecilomyces lilacinus on tomato root-knot disease. J. Bangladesh Agric. Univ. 2019, 17, 9–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Khalil, M.S.E.D.H.; Allam, A.F.G.; Barakat, A.S.T. Nematicidal activity of some biopesticide agents and microorganisms against root-knot nematode on tomato plants under green houseconditions. J. Plant Prot. Res. 2012, 52, 47–52. [Google Scholar]
  61. Singh, S.; Mathur, N. Biological control of root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne incognita) infesting tomato. Biocontrol Sci. Technol. 2010, 20, 865–874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Tian, X.; Yao, Y.; Chen, G.; Mao, Z.; Wang, X.; Xie, B. Suppression of Meloidogyne incognita by the endophytic fungus Acremonium implicatum from tomato root galls. Int. J. Pest Manag. 2014, 60, 239–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Yao, Y.R.; Tian, X.L.; S hen, B.M.; Mao, Z.C.; Chen, G.H.; Xie, B.Y. Transformation of the endophytic fungus Acremonium implicatum with GFP and evaluation of its biocontrol effect against Meloidogyne incognita. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2015, 31, 549–556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Goswami, J.; Pandey, R.K.; Tewari, J.P.; Goswami, B.K. Management of root-knot nematode on tomato through application of fungal antagonists, Acremonium strictum and Trichoderma harzianum. J. Environ. Sci. Health Part B 2008, 43, 237–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Noweer, E.M.A. A field trial to use the nematode-trapping fungus (Arthrobotrys dactyloides) to control the root-knot nematode(Meloidogyne incognita) infesting bean plants. Comm. Appl. Biol. Sci. Ghent. Univ. 2017, 82, 275–280. [Google Scholar]
  66. Soliman, M.S.; El-Deriny, M.M.; Ibrahim, D.S.S.; Zakaria, H.; Ahmed, Y. Suppression of root-knot nematode Meloidogyne incognita on tomato plants using the nematode trapping fungus Arthrobotrys oligospora Fresenius. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2021, 131, 2402–2415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Bakr, R.A.; Mahdy, M.E.; Mousa, E.S.M. Biological control of root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne incognita) by Arthrobotrys oligospora. Egypt. J. Crop Prot. 2014, 9, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Mostafanezhad, H.; Sahebani, N.; Nourinejhad Zarghani, S. Control of root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne javanica) with combination of Arthrobotrys oligospora and salicylic acid and study of some plant defence responses. Biocontrol. Sci. Technol. 2014, 24, 203–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Cui, R.; Fan, C.; Sun, X. Isolation, and characterisation of Aspergillus awamori BS05, a root-knot nematode trapping fungus. Biocontrol. Sci. Technol. 2015, 25, 1233–1240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. He, Q.; Wang, D.; Li, B.; Maqsood, A.; Wu, H. Nematicidal evaluation and active compounds isolation of Aspergillus japonicus ZW1 against root-knot nematodes (Meloidogyne incognita). Agronomy 2020, 10, 1222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Ying, L.I.U.; Zhong, D.; Peng, D.L.; Liu, S.M.; Kong, L.A.; Huan, P.; Huang, W.K. Evaluation of the biocontrol potential of Aspergillus welwitschiae against the root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne graminicola)in rice(Oryza sativa L.). J. Integr. Agric. 2019, 18, 2561–2570. [Google Scholar]
  72. Le, H.T.; Padgham, J.L.; Sikora, R.A. Biological control of the rice root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne graminicola) on rice, using endophytic and rhizosphere fungi. Int. J. Pest Manag. 2009, 55, 31–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Hu, Y.; Zhang, W.; Zhang, P.; Ruan, W.; Zhu, X. Nematicidal activity of chaetoglobosin A produced by Chaetomium globosum NK102 against Meloidogyne incognita. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2013, 61, 41–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Khan, B.; Yan, W.; Wei, S.; Wang, Z.; Zhao, S.; Cao, L.; Ye, Y. Nematicidal metabolites from endophytic fungus (Chaetomium globosum YSC5). FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2019, 366, fnz169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Noweer, E.M.A.; Elkelany, U.S. Biological control of root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne incognita) infesting eggplant by the nematode-trapping fungus (Dactylaria brochopaga) and the nematode egg parasitic fungus (Verticilium chlamydosporium) under field conditions. J. Innov. Pharm. Biol. Sci. 2019, 6, 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  76. Noweer, E.M.A.; Aboul-Eid, H.Z. Biological control of root-knot nematode Meloidogyne incognita infesting cucumber Cucumis sativus L. cvs. Alfa by the nematode-trapping fungus (Dactylaria brochopaga) under field conditions. Agric. Biol. J. North Am. 2013, 4, 435–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Youssef, M.M.; El-Nagdi, W.M. New approach for biocontrolling root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne incognita) on cowpea by commercial fresh oyster mushroom (Pleurotus ostreatus). Jordan J. Biol. Sci. 2021, 14, 173–177. [Google Scholar]
  78. Amin, N. The use of fungal endophytes Gliocladium spp. In different concentration to control of root-knot nematode(Meloidogyne spp.). Acad. Res. Int. 2014, 5, 91. [Google Scholar]
  79. Hussain, M.; Zouhar, M.; Rysanek, P. Population dynamics of a nematophagous fungus Lecanicillium muscarium, and root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne incognita) to assess the disease pressure and its management. Pak. J. Zool. 2017, 49, 197–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Bawa, N.; Kaur, S.; Dhillon, N.K. Integrated management of root-knot nematode (M. incognita) in capsicum, using Paecilomyces lilacinus and organic amendments. J. Entomol. Zool. Stud. 2020, 8, 1693–1701. [Google Scholar]
  81. Liu, T.; Wang, L.; Duan, Y.X.; Wang, X. Nematicidal activity of culture filtrate of Beauveria bassiana against Meloidogyne hapla. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2008, 24, 113–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Kumar, D.; Singh, K.P. Assessment of predacity and efficacy of Arthrobotrys dactyloides for biological control of root-knot disease of tomato. J. Phytopathol. 2006, 154, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Youssef, M.; El-Nagdi, W.; Lotfy, D.E. Evaluation of the fungal activity of Beauveria bassiana, Metarhizium anisopliae and Paecilomyces lilacinus as biocontrol agents against root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne incognita) on cowpea. Bull. Natl. Res. Cent. 2020, 44, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Anke, H.; Stadler, M.; Mayer, A.; Sterner, O. Secondary metabolites with nematicidal and antimicrobial activity from nematophagous fungi and Ascomycetes. Can. J. Bot. 1995, 73 (Suppl. S1), 932–939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Ghayedi, S.; Abdollahi, M. Biocontrol potential of Metarhizium anisopliae (Hypocreales: Clavicipitaceae), isolated from suppressive soils of the Boyer-Ahmad region, Iran, against J2s of Heterodera avenae. J. Plant Prot. Res. 2013, 53, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Kershaw, M.J.; Moorhouse, E.R.; Bateman, R.; Reynolds, S.E.; Charnley, A.K. The role of destruxins in the pathogenicity of Metarhizium anisopliae for three species of insect. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 1999, 74, 213–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Satou, T.; Kaneko, K.; Li, W.; Koike, K. The toxin produced by Pleurotus ostreatus reduces the head size of nematodes. Biol. Pharm. Bull. 2008, 31, 574–576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  88. Kwock, O.C.H.; Plattner, R.; Weisleder, D.; Wicklow, D.T. A nematicidal toxin from Pleurotus ostreatus NRRL3526. J. Chem. Ecol. 1992, 18, 127–136. [Google Scholar]
  89. Heydari, R.; Pourjam, E.; Goltapeh, E.M. Antagonistic effect of some species of Pleurotus on the root-knot nematode(Meloidogyne javanica) in-vitro. Plant Pathol. J. 2006, 5, 173–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  90. Jiang, X.; Xiang, M.; Liu, X. Nematode-trapping fungi. Microbiol. Spectr. 2017, 5, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  91. Al Kader, A. In-Vitro Studies on Nematode Interactions with Their Antagonistic Fungi in the Rhizosphere of Various Plants. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Freiburg, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  92. Nourani, S.L.; Mohammadi-Goltapeh, E.; Safaie, N.; JalaliJavaran, M.; Pourjam, E.; Shams-Bakhsh, M.; Jahanshahi Afshar, F. The effects of Arthrobotrys oligospora and Arthrobotrys conoides culture filtrates on second stage juvenile mortality and egg hatching of Meloidogyne incognita and Meloidogyne javanica. J. Crop Prot. 2015, 4, 667–674. [Google Scholar]
  93. Yang, J.; Li, J.; Liang, L.; Tian, B.; Zhang, Y.; Cheng, C.; Zhang, K.Q. Cloning and characterization of an extracellular serine protease from the nematode-trapping fungus Arthrobotrys conoides. Arch. Microbiol. 2007, 188, 167–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Aboul-Eid, H.Z.; Abdel-Bari, N.A.; Ameen, H.H.; Noweer, E.M.A. The morphological features of twelve nematode-antagonistic fungi and the bacterium Pasteuria penetrans isolated from El-Mansouria region soils(Giza, Egypt). Egypt. J. Agronematology 1997, 1, 59–76. [Google Scholar]
  95. Aboul-Eid, H.Z.; Noweer, E.M.A.; Ashour, N.E. Impact of the nematode-trapping fungus(Dactylaria brochopagaas) a biocontrol agent against Meloidogyne incognita infesting Superior) grapevine. Egypt. J. Biol. Pest Control 2014, 24, 477. [Google Scholar]
  96. Kumar, P.; Chand, R. Studies on the bio-efficacy of Monacrosporium eudermatum against root-knot nematode(Meloidogyne incognita) on brinjal. J. Pharmacogn. Phytochem. 2017, 6, 2427–2430. [Google Scholar]
  97. Aguilar-Marcelino, L.; Mendoza-de-Gives, P.; Al-Ani, L.K.T.; López-Arellano, M.E.; Gómez-Rodríguez, O.; Villar-Luna, E.; Reyes-Guerrero, D.E. Using molecular techniques applied to beneficial microorganisms as biotechnological tools for controlling agricultural plant pathogens and pest. In Molecular Aspects of Plant Beneficial Microbes in Agriculture; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2020; pp. 333–349. [Google Scholar]
  98. Wan, J.; Dai, Z.; Zhang, K.; Li, G.; Zhao, P. Pathogenicity and metabolites of Endoparasitic nematophagous fungus(Drechmeria coniospora) YMF1.01759 against nematodes. Microorganisms 2021, 9, 1735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. 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]
  100. Singh, S.; Pandey, R.K.; Goswami, B.K. Bio-control activity of Purpureocillium lilacinum strains in managing root-knot disease of tomato caused by Meloidogyne incognita. Biocontrol Sci. Technol. 2013, 23, 1469–1489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Hano, P.; Khan, M.R. Evaluation of fungal (Paecilomyces lilacinus) formulations against root-knot nematode infecting tomato. Bangladesh J. Bot. 2016, 45, 1003–1013. [Google Scholar]
  102. Sivakumar, T.; Renganathan, P.B.P.; Sanjeev kumar, K. Bio efficacy of bio-nematon(Paecilomyces lilacinus 1.15%wp) against root-knot nematode(Meloidogyne incognita) in cucumber crop. Plant Arch. 2020, 20, 3805–3810. [Google Scholar]
  103. 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]
  104. Pandey, R.K.; Singh, S.R.; Gupta, P.K.; Goswami, B.K.; Singh, D.V.; Gharde, Y. Effect of different bioformulations of Paecilomyces lilacinus against root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne incognita) infecting tomato (Solanum esculentum). Indian J. Agric. Sci. 2011, 81, 261–267. [Google Scholar]
  105. Sharma, A.; Sharma, S.; Dalela, M. Nematicidal activity of Paecilomyces lilacinus 6029 cultured on Karanja cake medium. Microb. Pathog. 2014, 75, 16–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Degenkolb, T.; Vilcinskas, A. Metabolites from nematophagous fungi and nematicidal natural products from fungi as an alternative for biological control. PartI: Metabolites from nematophagous ascomycetes. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2016, 100, 3799–3812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  107. Jang, J.Y.; Choi, Y.H.; Shin, T.S.; Kim, T.H.; Shin, K.S.; Park, H.W.; Kim, J.C. Biological control of Meloidogyne incognita by Aspergillus niger F22 producing oxalic acid. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0156230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  108. Xiang, C.; Liu, Y.; Liu, S.M.; Huang, Y.F.; Kong, L.A.; Peng, H.; Huang, W.K. αβ-Dehydrocurvularin isolated from the fungus Aspergillus welwitschiae effectively inhibited the behaviour and development of the root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne graminicola) in rice roots. BMC Microbiol. 2020, 20, 48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  109. Campos, V.P.; Pinho, R.S.C.D.; Freire, E.S. Volatiles produced by interacting microorganisms potentially useful for the control of plant pathogens. Ciência e Agrotecnologia 2010, 34, 525–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  110. Terra, W.C.; Campos, V.P.; Martins, S.J.; Costa, L.S.A.S.; daSilva, J.C.P.; Barros, A.F.; Oliveira, D.F. Volatile organic molecules from Fusarium oxysporum strain 21 with nematicidal activity against Meloidogyne incognita. Crop Prot. 2018, 106, 125–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Liarzi, O.; Bucki, P.; Braun Miyara, S.; Ezra, D. Bioactive volatiles from an endophytic Daldinia cf. concentrica isolate affect the viability of the plant-parasitic nematode (Meloidogyne javanica). PloS one 2016, 11, e0168437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  112. Mei, X.; Wang, X.; Li, G. Pathogenicity and Volatile Nematicidal Metabolites from Duddingtonia flagrans against Meloidogyne incognita. Microorganisms 2021, 9, 2268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Khan, A.; Williams, K.; Molloy, M.P.; Nevalainen, H. Purification and characterization of a serine protease and chitinases from Paecilomyces lilacinus and detection of chitinase activity on 2D gels. Protein Expr. Purif. 2003, 32, 210–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Sugimoto, M.; Koike, M.; Hiyama, N.; Nagao, H. Genetic, morphological, and virulence characterization of the entomopathogenic fungus Verticillium lecanii. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2003, 82, 176–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Khan, A.; Williams, K.L.; Nevalainen, H.K. Effects of Paecilomyces lilacinus protease and chitinase on the eggshell structures and hatching of Meloidogyne javanica juveniles. Biol. Control 2004, 31, 346–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Tikhonov, V.E.; Lopez-Llorca, L.V.; Salinas, J.; Jansson, H.B. Purification and characterization of chitinases from the nematophagous fungi Verticillium chlamydosporium and V. Suchlasporium. Fungal Genet. Biol. 2002, 35, 67–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  117. Chen, L.L.; Liu, L.J.; Shi, M.; Song, X.Y.; Zheng, C.Y.; Chen, X.L.; Zhang, Y.Z. Characterization and gene cloning of a novel serine protease with nematicidal activity from Trichoderma pseudokoningii SMF2. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2009, 299, 135–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  118. Wang, Y.L.; Li, L.F.; Li, D.X.; Wang, B.; Zhang, K.; Niu, X. Yellow pigment aurovertins mediate interactions between the pathogenic fungus Pochonia chlamydosporia and its nematode host. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2015, 63, 6577–6587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Kim, T.Y.; Jang, J.Y.; Yu, N.H.; Chi, W.J.; Bae, C.H.; Yeo, J.H.; Kim, J.C. Nematicidal activity of grammicin produced by Xylaria grammica KCTC13121BP against Meloidogyne incognita. Pest Manag. Sci. 2018, 74, 384–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Yang, J.; Huang, X.; Tian, B.; Wang, M.; Niu, Q.; Zhang, K. Isolation and characterization of a serine protease from the nematophagous fungus (Lecanicillium psalliotae) displaying nematicidal activity. Biotechnol. Lett. 2005, 27, 1123–1128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Gan, Z.; Yang, J.; Tao, N.; Liang, L.; Mi, Q.; Li, J.; Zhang, K.Q. Cloning of the gene Lecanicillium psalliotae chitinase Lpchi1 and identification of its potential role in the biocontrol of root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne incognita). Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2007, 76, 1309–1317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  122. Van Nguyen, N.; Kim, Y.J.; Oh, K.T.; Jung, W.J.; Park, R.D. The role of chitinase from Lecanicillium antillanum B-3 in parasitism to root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne incognita) eggs. Biocontrol. Sci. Technol. 2007, 17, 1047–1058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. De Souza Gouveia, A.; de Freitas Soares, F.E.; Morgan, T.; Sufiate, B.L.; Tavares, G.P.; Braga, F.R.; de Queiroz, J.H. Enhanced production of Monacrosporium thaumasium protease and destruction action on root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne javanica) eggs. Rhizosphere 2017, 3, 13–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Qin, J.C.; Zhang, Y.M.; Gao, J.M.; Bai, M.S.; Yang, S.X.; Laatsch, H.; Zhang, A.L. Bioactive metabolites produced by Chaetomium globosum, an endophytic fungus isolated from Ginkgo biloba. Bioorganic Med. Chem. Lett. 2009, 19, 1572–1574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  125. Natori, S. Chemical surveys on mycotoxins using cytotoxicity testing with special reference to cytochalasans. Yakugakuzasshi: J. Pharm. Soc. Jpn. 1983, 103, 1109–1128. [Google Scholar]
  126. Grainge, M.; Ahmed, S. Handbook of Plants with Pest-Control Properties; John Wiley & Sons Limited: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1988; p. 470. [Google Scholar]
  127. Mwamula, A.O.; Kabir, M.F.; Lee, D. A Review of the Potency of Plant Extracts and Compounds from Key Families as an Alternative to Synthetic Nematicides: History, Efficacy, and Current Developments. Plant Pathol. J. 2022, 38, 53–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Gommers, F.J. Biochemical interactions between nematodes and plants and the irrelevance to control. Helminthol. Abstr. 1981, 50, 9–24. [Google Scholar]
  129. Chitwood, D.J. Phytochemical based strategies for nematode control. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 2002, 40, 221–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  130. Orisajo, S.B.; Dongo, L.N. Nematicidal potential of some indigenous plant extracts against root-knot nematode on cacao. Afr. Sci. 2022, 6, 129–134. [Google Scholar]
  131. Fabiyi, O.A. Evaluation of plant materials as root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne incognita) suppressant in okra(Abelmoschus esculentus). Agric. Conspec. Sci. 2021, 86, 51–56. [Google Scholar]
  132. De Kesel, J.; Degroote, E.; Nkurunziza, R.; Singh, R.R.; Demeestere, K.; DeKock, K.; Kyndt, T. Cucurbitaceae cold Peeling Extracts (CCOPEs) protect plants from root-knot nematode infections through induced resistance and nematicidal effects. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 12, 785699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  133. Arshad, U.; Jabran, M.; Ahmed, S.; Abbas, A.; Jabbar, A.; Zahid, M.S.; Ali, M.A. Seed-Priming: A novel approach for improving growth performance and resistance against root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne incognita) in bread wheat(Triticum aestivum L.). Gesunde Pflanzen. 2022, 74, 1041–1051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Khan, F.; Asif, M.; Khan, A.; Tariq, M.; Ansari, T.; Shariq, M.; Siddiqui, M.A. Evaluation of the nematicidal potential of some botanicals against root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne incognita infected carrot: In in-vitro and greenhouse study. Curr. Plant Biol. 2019, 20, 100115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Lynn, O.M.; Song, W.G.; Shim, J.K.; Kim, J.E.; Lee, K.Y. Effects of azadirachtin and neem-based formulations for the control of sweet potato whitefly and root-knot nematode. J. Korean Soc. Appl. Biol. Chem. 2010, 53, 598–604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Javed, N.; Gowen, S.R.; El-Hassan, S.A.; Inam-ul-Haq, M.; Shahina, F.; Pembroke, B. Efficacy of neem (Azadirachta indica) formulations on biology of root-knot nematodes (Meloidogyne javanica) on tomato. Crop Prot. 2008, 27, 36–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Qamar, F.; Begum, S.; Raza, S.M.; Wahab, A.; Siddiqui, B.S. Nematicidal natural products from the aerial parts of Lantana camara Linn. Nat. Prod. Res. 2005, 19, 609–613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Naz, I.; Khan, M.R. Nematicidal activity of nonacosane-10-ol and 23a-homostigmast-5-en-3β-ol isolated from the roots of Fumaria parviflora (Fumariaceae). J. Agric. Food Chem. 2013, 61, 5689–5695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Adaka, P.; Singh, A.; Dhiman, P.; Chandrika, K.P.; Walia, S.; Sirohi, A.; Parmar, B.S. Hydrogel based formulations of Tagetes patula root extract and MgSO4 to control Meloidogyne incognita in cucumber. Allelopathy J. 2017, 40, 173–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Das, S.; Wadud, A.; Khokon, M.A.R. Evaluation of the effect of different concentrations of organic amendments and botanical extracts on the mortality and hatching of Meloidogyne javanica. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 2021, 28, 3759–3767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Arshad, U.; Butt, H.; Ali, M.A.; Jabran, M.; Zahid, M.S.; Sarfraz, S. Exploring the nematicidal activity of plant extracts for management of Meloidogyne incognita in local cultivars of eggplant (Solanum melongena L.) in Pakistan. Arch. Phytopathol. Plant Prot. 2021, 54, 2333–2344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Khairy, D.; Refaei, A.; Mostafa, F. Management of Meloidogyne incognita infecting eggplant using Moringa extracts, vermicompost, and two commercial bio-products. Egypt. J. Agronematology 2021, 20, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Seo, D.J.; Kim, K.Y.; Park, R.D.; Kim, D.H.; Han, Y.S.; Kim, T.H.; Jung, W.J. Nematicidal activity of 3,4-dihydroxy benzoic acid purified from Terminalia nigrovenulosa bark against Meloidogyne incognita. Microb. Pathog. 2013, 59, 52–59. [Google Scholar]
  144. Bakr, R.A. Nematicidal activity of Jimson weed (Datura spp.) for management of plant-parasitic nematodes with emphasis on root-knot nematode: A review. Pak. J. Phytopathol. 2021, 33, 183–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Maleita, C.; Esteves, I.; Braga, M.E.; Figueiredo, J.; Gaspar, M.C.; Abrantes, I.; de Sousa, H.C. Juglone and 1,4-Naphthoquinone promising nematicides for sustainable control of the root-knot nematode Meloidogyne luci. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13, 867803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  146. Maleita, C.; Esteves, I.; Chim, R.; Fonseca, L.; Braga, M.E.; Abrantes, I.; de Sousa, H.C. Naphthoquinones from walnut husk residues show strong nematicidal activities against the root-knot nematode Meloidogyne hispanica. ACS Sustain. Chem. Engineering 2017, 5, 3390–3398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Jang, J.; Le Dang, Q.; Choi, G.J.; Park, H.W.; Kim, J.C. Control of root-knot nematodes using Waltheria indica producing 4-quinolone alkaloids. Pest Manag. Sci. 2019, 75, 2264–2270. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  148. D’Addabbo, T.; Tava, A.; Argentieri, M.P.; Biazzi, E.; Candido, V.; Avato, P. Nematicidal Potential of Sulla (Hedysarum coronarium, L.) against the root-knot nematode Meloidogyne incognita. Plants 2022, 11, 2550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Khairan, K.; Yusra, N.; Eriana, C.N.; Bahi, M.; Syaukani, S.; Sriwati, R.; Jacob, C. Termiticidal and Nematicidal activities of five extracts from Garlic (Allium sativum). In Journal of Physics: Conference Series; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2021; Volume 1882, No.1; p. 012121. [Google Scholar]
  150. Jacob, C. A scent of therapy: Pharmacological implications of natural products containing redox-active sulphur atoms. Nat. Prod. Rep. 2006, 23, 851–863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Ajith, M.; Pankaj; Shakil, N.A.; Kaushik, P.; Rana, V.S. Chemical composition and nematicidal activity of essential oils and their major compounds against Meloidogyne graminicola (rice root-knot nematode). J. Essent. Oil Res. 2020, 32, 526–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Ntalli, N.; Caboni, P. A review of isothiocyanates biofumigation activity on plant-parasitic nematodes. Phytochem. Rev. 2017, 16, 827–834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Hajji-Hedfi, L.; Larayedh, A.; Hammas, N.C.; Regaieg, H.; Horrigue-Raouani, N. Biological activities and chemical composition of Pistacia lentiscus in controlling Fusarium wilt and root-knot nematode disease complex on tomato. Eur. J. Plant Pathol. 2019, 155, 281–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. An overview of different mechanisms of biocontrol.
Figure 1. An overview of different mechanisms of biocontrol.
Plants 12 00451 g001
Figure 2. Mechanisms of bacterial and fungal biocontrol. (A). Bacterial and fungal toxins: Bacteria (e.g., Bacillus thuringiensis) and fungi (e.g., Pleurotus ostreatus) produce certain toxins that suppress plant-parasitic nematodes by preventing their hatching and may even cause death to juveniles [58]. (B). Endoparasitic bacteria and fungi: They produce motile spores that enter nematodes through the mouth or other body openings and cuticle and may be lethal to nematodes. (C). Egg- and female-parasitic fungi: Certain fungi such as Pochonia chlamydosporia parasitize the eggs and adult females of plant-parasitic nematodes [58]. They form branched mycelia around eggs and adult females and suppress plant-parasitic nematodes. (D). Nematode-trapping fungi: These fungi trap nematodes with the help of constricting rings or adhesive knobs and kill them, e.g., Arthrobotrys dactyloides.
Figure 2. Mechanisms of bacterial and fungal biocontrol. (A). Bacterial and fungal toxins: Bacteria (e.g., Bacillus thuringiensis) and fungi (e.g., Pleurotus ostreatus) produce certain toxins that suppress plant-parasitic nematodes by preventing their hatching and may even cause death to juveniles [58]. (B). Endoparasitic bacteria and fungi: They produce motile spores that enter nematodes through the mouth or other body openings and cuticle and may be lethal to nematodes. (C). Egg- and female-parasitic fungi: Certain fungi such as Pochonia chlamydosporia parasitize the eggs and adult females of plant-parasitic nematodes [58]. They form branched mycelia around eggs and adult females and suppress plant-parasitic nematodes. (D). Nematode-trapping fungi: These fungi trap nematodes with the help of constricting rings or adhesive knobs and kill them, e.g., Arthrobotrys dactyloides.
Plants 12 00451 g002
Table 1. Bacterial species as antagonists against root-knot nematodes.
Table 1. Bacterial species as antagonists against root-knot nematodes.
Species NameConcentration UsedReduction in Diseases/ResultCropNematode ManagedReferences
Pseudomonas jessenii Verhille, et al. 1999, and Pseudomonas synxantha (Ehrenberg 1840) Holland 192025%, 50%, 75%, 100%All concentrations greater than 75% resulted in 100% mortality of J2.Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.)Meloidogyne incognita[40]
Bacillus isolates (BC 27, BC 29, and BC 31)108 spores mL−1BC 27 and BC 29 caused 100% mortality after 24 h. BC 31 was less effective compared to BC 27 and BC 29, as it caused only 84% mortality after 24 h.Soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.)Meloidogyne javanica[41]
Pasteuria penetrans (ex Thorne 1940) Sayre and Starr 198650% spore suspensionNumber of J2/100 cm3 was reduced to 9.2 in soil compared to 16.6 in control.Babchi (Psoralea corylifolia L.)Meloidogyne incognita[42]
Pseudomonas fluorescens (pf1)
(Flugge 1886) Migula, 1895
107–109 CFU/mL69.8% reduction of Meloidogyne incognitaCowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.)Meloidogyne incognita[43]
Bacillus subtilis (bs2) (Ehrenberg 1835) Cohn 1872107–109 CFU/mL82% reduction of total nematode populationCowpeaMeloidogyne incognita[43]
Bacillus pumilis (bp2) Meyer and Gottheli 1901107–109 CFU/mL81.8% reduction of nematode populationCowpeaMeloidogyne incognita[43]
Bacillus thuringiensis Berliner 1915108 CFU/mL/280.5% reduction of root-knot nematodeTomatoMeloidogyne incognita[44]
Bacillus altitudinis (AMCC1040) Shivaji et al. 2006108 CFU/mLNumbers of J2s in roots and soil were reduced by 93.68% and 84.48%, respectively.Ginger (Zingiber officinale Rosc.)Meloidogyne incognita[45]
Pseudomonas protegens Ramette et al. 20111 × 109Mortality rate of 87.76% was observed in J2 24 h after treatment (in-vitro), and Gall index was reduced to 30.67% compared to 49.33% in control, and biocontrol efficacy of 37.84 was observedTomatoMeloidogyne incognita[35]
Serratia plymuthica (Lehmann and Neumann 1896) Breed et al. 19481 × 109Mortality rate of 92.67% was observed in J2 24 h after treatment (in-vitro), and Gall index lowered to 38.67% compared to 49.33% in control, and biocontrol efficacy of 21.62% was observedTomatoM. incognita[35]
Table 2. Fungal species for biocontrol of root-knot nematodes.
Table 2. Fungal species for biocontrol of root-knot nematodes.
Species NameConcentration UsedReduction in Diseases/ResultCropNematode ManagedReferences
Purpureocillium lilacinus Luangsa-ard, Houbraken, van Doom Hong Borman, Hywel-Jones, and Samson, 2011Spore suspension, 10 × 105 concentration85% reduction of egg masses of Meloidogyne spp.TomatoMeloidogyne spp.[59]
Purpureocillium lilacinus1 × 109 cfu/mL76.24% reduction of root-knot diseases.TomatoMeloidogyne incognita[60]
Aspergillus terreus Thom 1918, Acremonium strictum W. Gams 19712% (w/w) spore load, 2.3 × 106 to 2.3 × 10876% and 73% reduction in eggs/egg mass and the number of hatching egg/egg mass by A. Terrus, and 71% and 68% by A. Strictum, respectively.TomatoMeloidogyne incognita[61]
Acremonium implicatum (J.C. Gilman and E.V. Abbott) W. Gams, 1975Spore suspension, 1 × 106 CFU/mLReduction in galls with 40.6 galls/treated plant as compared with 121.6 on control plant.TomatoMeloidogyne incognita[62]
Acremonium implicatum1 × 106 CFU/mL conidial suspensionReduction of 60% root gallsTomatoMeloidogyne incognita[63]
Acremonium strictum, Aspergillus niger van Tieghem 1867, Purpureocillium lilacinus and Trichoderma harzianum Rifai 1969Talc-based formulation with spore load 2 × 108 CFUCombined effect of Trichoderma harzianum and Acremonium strictum resulted in greater reduction of disease and high yield.TomatoMeloidogyne incognita[64]
Arthrobotrys dactyloides Drechsler 19372 g (10,000 spore concentration) + 1 g yeast + 3 g vermiculite + 1 mL molassesReduction of 94.1% of root galls per plantSnap bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)Meloidogyne incognita[65]
Arthrobotrys oligospora Fresen 1850Spore suspension with 105 conidia/mLReduced number of galls, females and nematodes and enhanced plant growth.TomatoMeloidogyne incognita[66]
Arthrobotrys oligosporaFungal suspension at 10, 30 and 50 mL/plant (1 × 104 spore/mL)50 mL/plant resulted in reduction of females, eggs/egg-mass and no. of J2 in soil.TomatoMeloidogyne incognita[67]
Arthrobotrys oligospora106 spores/mLApplication of fungus with salicylic acid reduced root galls and nematode population and increased plant growth.TomatoMeloidogyne javanica[68]
Aspergillus awamori Nakaz108 CFU/mLResulted in 44.9% reduction of nematode infection.TomatoM. incognita[69]
Aspergillus japonicus ZW1 Saito 190620% fermentation brothResulted in 51.8 and 47.3% reduction of eggs and galls, respectively.TomatoM. incognita[70]
Aspergillus welwitschiae AW2017 (Bres.) Henn.2 × 108 conidia/mL (5× AW2017)Reduction by 40.5% and 24.5% of root galls and juveniles, respectively.Rice (Oryza sativa L.)M. graminicola[71]
Fusarium and Trichoderma isolates5 × 106 conidial suspension per pot29–42% of root galling was reduced by application of conidia of rhizosphere Fusarium isolates and 38% reduction of root galls by treatment with Trichoderma.RiceM. graminicola[72]
Chaetomium globosum Kunze 181730 mg ChA/kg soil
(Chaetoglobosin A-ChA)
Resulted in reduction of 63% of eggs per plantCucumber (Cucumis sativus L.)M. incognita[73]
Chaetomium globosum YSC5200 μg/Ml of chaetoglobosin B and chaetoglobosin A59.0–61.5% reduction in number of galls and 71.1–72.4% reduction in number of egg massesTomatoM. javanica[74]
Dactylaria brochopaga Drechsler 1937 & Verticilium chlamydosporium Goddard 19132 g (Dactylaria + Verticilium chlamydosporium) + 3 g (vermiculite) + 1 mL (molasses) + 1 g yeast93.1% reduction of root galls per plantEggplant (Solanum melongena L.)M. incognita[75]
Dactylaria brochopaga2 g (fungus) + 1 g (yeast) +
1 mL (molasses) +
3 gm (vermiculite)
Resulted in 94.1% mean reduction in the number of root gallsCucumberM. incognita[76]
Pleurotus ostreatus (Jacq.) P. Kumm. 18715, 10, 15 g fresh mashed mushroom15 g mushroom residue resulted in an 86.4% reduction of nematode reproduction and gall reduction by 92.4%.cowpeaM. incognita[77]
Gliocladium spp.104 mL−1, 105 mL−1, 10−6 mL−1 conidia suspension106 mL−1 conidia suspension significantly decreased intensity of damage by 33%.TomatoMeloidogyne spp.[78]
Lecanicillium muscarium R. Zare and W. Gams 2001103, 104, 105 and 106 conidia levels with different inoculum densities of M. incognita (500, 1000, 1500, 2000)Higher density 1 × 106 decreased nematode population, and plant growth parameters improved with increasing fungus inoculum.TomatoM. incognita[79]
Purpureocillium lilacinusP. lilacinus WP 1.15% (1 × 108 CFU/g), P. lilacinus liquid 1.50% (1 × 109 CFU/mL) and P. lilacinus AS 1.0% (2 × 106 CFU/g)P. lilacinus liquid 1.50% resulted in 48.72% reduction in average root gall index; average number of egg masses per root system and average soil nematode population reduced by 60.15% and 61.10%, respectively.Capsicum (Capsicum annuum L.)M. incognita[80]
Beauveria bassiana (Bals. Criv.) Vuill. 19121×, 5×, 10×, 20×, 50× dilution of culture filtrateResulted in 98.61% and 76.39% rates of inhibition of nematodes at 1× and 5× solutionsTomatoM. hapla[81]
Arthrobotrys dactyloides Drechsler 19374 × 106 CFU/kg of soilResulted in reduction of 37.9–81.8% of juveniles and 44.5–51.3% of egg massesTomatoM. incognita[82]
Table 3. Plant extracts for biocontrol of root-knot nematodes.
Table 3. Plant extracts for biocontrol of root-knot nematodes.
Plant SpeciesFamily Plant Parts UsedActive CompoundsNematodes TargetedReferences
Azadirachta indicaMeliaceaeLeaf, Seed, Fruit, Root, BarkAzadirachtinMeloidogyne incognita, M. javanica[135,136]
Lantana camaraVerbenaceaeAerial partLantanilic acid, camaric acid and oleanolic acidM. incognita[137]
Fumaria parvifloraPapaveraceaeRootNonacosane-10-ol and 23a-homostigmast-5-en-3β-olM. incognita[138]
Tageteserecta L.Asteraceae LeavesAlpha-terthienylM. incognita, M. javanica[139,140,141]
Moringa oleiferaMoringaceaeLeaves Flavonoids, glycosides, saponinM. incognita[142]
Terminalia nigrovenulosaCombretaceaeBark 3,4-dihydroxybenzoic acid (3,4-DHBA)M. incognita[143]
Datura spp.SolanaceaeLeaves, inflorescence,
roots
Atropine, scopolamine, hyoscyamineMeloidogyne spp.[144]
Juglans regia L.Juglandaceae Leaves, huskBeta 1, 4 naphthoquinonesM. hispanica, M. luci[145,146]
Waltheria indica L.MalvaceaeRoots 5-methoxywaltherione A, waltherione A and waltherione CM. incognita, M. hapla, M. arenaria[147]
Hedysarum coronarium L.FabaceaeLeaves, flowerSaponins, flavonoids and tanninsM. incognita[148]
Allium sativum L.AlliaceaeBulb, leavesOrganosulfur compound, AllicinMeloidogyne spp.[149,150]
Cymbopogon martini (Roxb.) Watsand C. flexuosus (Nees ex Steud) W. WatsonPoaceaeLeaves Eugenol and citralM. incognita[151]
Brassica spp.BrassicaceaeShoot, roots, seed IsothiocynatesMeloidogyne spp.[152]
Pistacia lentiscus L.AnacardiaceaeLeavesQuercetin, quinic and gallic acidM. javanica[153]
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

Bhat, A.A.; Shakeel, A.; Waqar, S.; Handoo, Z.A.; Khan, A.A. Microbes vs. Nematodes: Insights into Biocontrol through Antagonistic Organisms to Control Root-Knot Nematodes. Plants 2023, 12, 451. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12030451

AMA Style

Bhat AA, Shakeel A, Waqar S, Handoo ZA, Khan AA. Microbes vs. Nematodes: Insights into Biocontrol through Antagonistic Organisms to Control Root-Knot Nematodes. Plants. 2023; 12(3):451. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12030451

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bhat, Adil Ameen, Adnan Shakeel, Sonia Waqar, Zafar Ahmad Handoo, and Abrar Ahmed Khan. 2023. "Microbes vs. Nematodes: Insights into Biocontrol through Antagonistic Organisms to Control Root-Knot Nematodes" Plants 12, no. 3: 451. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12030451

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