Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T22:23:47.329Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of cultivar, carbofuran and row spacing on the incidence of stem and leaf nematodes (Ditylenchus dipsaci and Aphelenchoides ritzema-bosi) in lucerne (Medicago sativa) and on lucerne herbage yield

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

A. G. Whitehead
A. G. Whitehead
Affiliation:
AFRC Institute of Arable Crops Research, Entomology and Nematology Department, Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Herts AL 5 2JQ, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

In a clay loam at Rothamsted, inoculated with lucerne stem nematode (Ditylenchus dipsaci) and a leaf nematode (Aphelenchoides ritzema-bosi), lucerne herbage yields were increased on average by 17 and 59% respectively, in the first and second years of a 4-year experiment (1988–91), by carbofuran granules applied around the seeds at sowing in spring 1988. In seven-row plots over the 4 years of the experiment, 1·65 kg a.i./ha increased total yield as much as did 3·3 kg a.i./ha (11 and 12%, respectively). In four-row plots over the same period, 1·9 kg a.i./ha increased total yield by 9%. The cultivars Euver and Vertus, which are partially resistant to D. dipsaci, yielded 44·3 and 48·5 t dry matter/ha, respectively, whereas Europe and Vela, which are susceptible to the nematode, yielded less (36·3 and 28·6 t/ha, respectively). When sown in summer 1990 in four-row plots, cultivars Europe and Euver yielded larger crops in 1991 in plots given 1·2 or 2·3 kg a.i. carbofuran/ha in 1990 (on average 34 and 48%, respectively) than in untreated plots. As little as 0·6 kg carbofuran/ha increased the yield of cv. Europe in infested soil.

The stunting of lucerne plants, associated with D. dipsaci infestation, was greatly decreased by carbofuran, which prevented infestation of the first crop by D. dipsaci and A. ritzema-bosi. Stem nematode infestation of lucerne plots was adequately and quickly assessed by measuring the lengths of rows stunted by D. dipsaci. Other methods of assessment were laborious and no more reliable.

Type
Crops and Soils
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 122 , Issue 2 , April 1994 , pp. 225 - 230
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Belanger, G., Winch, J. E. & Townshend, J. L. (1985). Carbofuran effects on establishment of legumes in relation to plant growth, nitrogen fixation, and soil nematodes. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 65, 423–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boelter, R. H., Gray, F. A. & Delaney, R. H. (1985). Effect of Ditylenchus dipsaci on alfalfa mortality, winterkill, and yield. Journal of Nematology 17, 140–144.Google ScholarPubMed
Brown, E. B. (1957). Lucerne stem eelworm in Great Britain. Nematologica II, 369–375 S.Google Scholar
Caubel, G. & Rivoal, R. (1972). Observations sur les attaques de deux nematodes nuisibles au mai's en 1971. Phytoma, Defense des Cultures No. 239.Google Scholar
Duke, J. A. (1983). Handbook of Legumes of World Economic Importance. New York & London: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Gray, F. A. & Soh, D. H. (1989). A nematicide treatment to control Ditylenchus dipsaci on seedling alfalfa. Journal of Nematology 21, 184–188.Google ScholarPubMed
Whitehead, A. G. & Tite, D. J. (1988). Effects of seed row and foliar applied pesticides on the yield of lucerne in clay soil, in the presence or absence of lucerne stem nematode, Ditylenchus dipsaci. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 110, 279–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitehead, A. G., Fraser, J. E. & Nichols, A. J. F. (1987). Variation in the development of stem nematodes, Ditylenchus dipsaci, in susceptible and resistant crop plants. Annals of Applied Biology 111, 373–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar