Mechanisms of a Sunn Hemp Cover Crop in Suppressing Nematodes

 

Koon-Hui Wang

University of Florida, Department of Entomology and Nematology, P.O. Box 110620, Gainesville, FL 32611-0620, U.S.A.

(last updated on January, 2002)

 

Introduction

Modes of nematode suppression by cover crops can be categorized as providing a nonhost or a poor host environment for nematodes (Rodriguez-Kabana et al., 1988), producing allelochemicals (Halbrendt, 1996), and enhancing nematode antagonistic flora and fauna (Linford, 1937), These modes of action need not be mutually exclusive. An ideal cover crop should exhibit more than one mechanism involved in nematode suppression. Suppression of Rotylenchulus reniformis by Crotalaria juncea (sunn hemp) was used as an example to demonstrate the mechanisms of cover crop in nematode suppression. This article is a summary a published paper (Wang, 2002)

Nonhost or Poor Host Effect

A poor host for nematodes is a plant in which females of nematode does not produce eggs abundantly. The low egg production could be due to slow female development or low fertility.  Crotalaria juncea is a poor host to R. reniformis because egg production and female development rate of R. reniformis in C. juncea were lower than that in cowpea, Vigna unguiculata, a good host of R. reniformis (Table 1, Fig. 1, Fig. 2).

 

Table 1. Rotylenchulus reniformis vermiform stages and eggs number in Vigna unguiculata and Crotalaria juncea 8 weeks after inoculation (Wang et al., 2002).

 

 

Crop

Vermiform stages

/250cm3 soil

Eggs/g root

Vigna unguiculata

          2,276z a

              1,082 a

Crotalaria juncea

              66 b

                  31 b


z
Values are means of 5 replications. Means followed by different letters in a column were different according to Waller-Duncan K-ratio (K=100) t-test.

Allelopathic Effect

Allelopathy is a plant-plant or plant-microorganism biochemical interaction (Rice, 1984). Several cover crops were known for their ability to produce allelopathic compounds against plant-parasitic nematodes. For examples, Tagetes spp. produces a-terthienyl, Crotalaria spp. produces monocrotaline (Gommers and Bakker, 1988; Fassuliotis and Skucas, 1969), Brassica napus produces glucosinolates that are nematicidal when reacted with myrosinase after crop incorporation (Brown et al., 1991). However, allelopathic effect of these cover crops is nematode specific. Rotylenchulus reniformis is more vulnerable to the allelopathic compound released from C. juncea than B. napus and T. erecta (Fig. 3). Percentages of R. reniformis remaining active in C. juncea leachate were lower than that in pineapple leachate (Ananas comosus) as well as water and sand leachate (Fig. 3).


Enhancement of Nematode-Antagonistic Microorganisms

Incorporation of cover crops into soil as organic amendments had long been known to enhance nematode-antagonistic microorganisms (Linford, 1937; Linford et al., 1938). However, not all the nematode-antagonistic fungi respond to organic matter. Nematode-trapping fungi that form constricting rings, and the nematode endoparasitic fungi were often isolated from soil with higher organic matter (Gray, 1985). Cooke (1963) divided the nematode-trapping fungi into saprophytic and parasitic groups. Saprophytic nematode-trapping fungi form three-dimensional-network traps in response to the presence of nematodes and are regarded as inefficient nematode-trappers. Parasitic nematode-trapping fungi have low saprophytic ability, but form traps spontaneously. This group consists of fungi that form constricting rings, adhesive knobs, or adhesive branches, and are more effective nematode-trappers than the saprophytic group (Jansson and Nordbring-Hertz, 1980). High organic matter and moisture increase the parasitic nematode-trapping fungal populations and may stimulate the trap formation of saprophytic nematode-trapping fungi (Gray, 1985).

 

During the C. juncea growing period and after C. juncea incorporation, a niche was created that favored free-living nematodes (Fig. 4). In the presence of nematodes, trap formation is induced in nematode-trapping fungi (NTF). In a soil where parasitic NTF were more abundant, C. juncea amended soil enhanced parasitic NTF more efficient than most of the other organic amendments except B. napus amendment (Fig. 5A). Among the most commonly found NTF detected in C. juncea amended soil were Monocosporium ellipsospora and Arthrobotrys dactyloides. Both of these fungi were found to be effective against M. javanica and were formulated for nematode biocontrol (Jaffee and Muldoon, 1995; Stirling and Smith, 1998). In a repeated test, parasitic NTF population was low, C. juncea amendment enhanced higher population densities of saprophytic NTF than the non-amended soils (Fig. 5B). Parasitized nematode eggs were only detected in C. juncea amended soil when eggs were plated on water agar and incubated for 2 weeks (Fig. 5C). Percent of R. reniformis vermiform stage parasitism was higher in C. juncea and Ananas comosus amended soil than unamended soils (P<0.05, Fig. 5D). Soil treated with 1,3-D or left bare suppressed the activities of NTF as well as fungal parasitism on eggs and vermiform stages of R. reniformis (Fig. 5A, B, C, D). The presence of parasitic nematode-trapping fungi and egg parasites might explain the longer period of R. reniformis suppression in intercycle and intercrop field trials (Wang et al., 2002, in press).

 

References

 

Brown, P. D., M. J. Morra, J. P. McCaffrey, D. L. Auld, and L. WilliamsIII. 1991. Allelochemicals produced during glucosinolate degradation in soil. Journal of Chemical Ecology 17: 2021-2034.

Cooke, R. C. 1963. Ecological characteristics of nematode-trapping fungi Hyphomycetes. Annual Review of Applied Biology 52: 431-437.

Fassuliotis, G., and G. P. Skucas. 1969. The effect of pyrrolizidine alkaloid ester and plants containing pyrrolizidine on Meliodogyne incognita acrita. Journal of Nematology 1: 287-288.

Gommers, F. J., and J. Bakker. 1988. Physiological diseases induced by plant responses or products. in Diseases of nematodes G. O. PoinarJr. and H.-B. Jansson, eds., Vol. I, pp. 3-22. CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton.

Gray, N. F. 1985. Ecology of nematophagous fungi:distribution and habitat. Annual Review of Applied Biology 102: 501-509.

Halbrendt, J. M. 1996. Allelopathy in the management of plant-parasitic nematodes. Journal of Nematology 28: 8-14.

Jaffee, B. A., and A. E. Muldoon. 1995. Susceptibility of root-knot nematode and cyst nematodes to the nematode trapping fungi Monacrosporum ellipsosporum and M. cionopagum. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 27: 1083-1090.

Jansson, H. B., and B. Nordbring-Hertz. 1980. Interaction between nematophagous fungi and plant-parasitic nematodes: attraction, induction of trap formation and capture. Nematologica 26: 383-389.

Linford, M. B. 1937. Stimulated activity of natural enemies of nematodes. Science 85: 123-124.

Linford, M. B., F. Yap, and J. M. Oliveira. 1938. Reduction of soil populations of root-knot nematode during decomposition of organic matter. Soil Science 45: 127-141.

Rice, E. L. 1984. Allelopathy, Academic Press, Inc, Orlando.

Rodriguez-Kabana, R., C. F. Weaver, D. G. Robertson, and H. Ivey. 1988. Bahiagrass for the management of Meloidogyne arenaria in peanut. Annals of Applied Nematology 2: 110-114.

Stirling, G. R., and L. J. Smith. 1998. Field tests of formulated products containing either Verticillum chlamydosporum or Arthrobotrys dactyloides for biological control of root-knot nemtodes. Biological control 11: 231-239.

Wang, K.-H., B. S. Sipes, and D. P. Schmitt. 2002. Suppression of Rotylenchulus reniformis by Crotalaria juncea, Brassica napus, and Target erecta. Nematropica 31: 237-251.

Wang, K.-H., B. S. Sipes, and D. P. Schmitt. 2002. Management of Rotylenchulus Reniformis in pineapple, Ananas comosus, by intercycle cover crops. Journal of Nematology 34: (in press).