Skip to main content
Log in

Development of growth model for Ber powdery mildew in relation to weather parameters

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Indian Phytopathology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

An experiment was conducted at the orchard of Chaudhary Charan Singh, Haryana, Agricultural University, Hisar (75°46′E and 29°10′N) and 215.2 a.m.s.l. The Ber powdery mildew index was recorded during the peak period (44–49 standard meteorological weeks) at different time intervals for the years 2015, 2016 and 2017 on Ber cultivar Umran. The study was carried out to find out the best fit growth models and significant weather variables in the disease progress curve. Five growth models viz. Exponential, Gompertz, Logistic, Log Logistic and Weibull were analysed for summarizing and comparing different plant disease epidemics. The statistical package R was used to illustrate models and disease progress over time. The best fit growth model was found by Akaike Information Criterion and Bayesian Information Criterion. The R code was developed and the regression analysis was performed to find out the best weather variables in the disease progress curve. It was observed that Exponential model was best fit growth model for the disease progress over time during 2015, whereas the Gompertz model was best fit during 2016 and 2017. The maximum and minimum temperature showed significant correlation with powdery mildew during 2015, whereas during 2017 the powdery mildew has significantly and negatively correlation with minimum temperature (− 0.74) and evening relative humidity (− 0.72). The coefficient of determination (R2) during 2015 and 2017 was found 78 and 68%, respectively.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akaike H (1974) A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Trans Autom Control 19:716–723

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glawe DA (2008) The powdery mildews: a review of the world’s most familiar (yet poorly known) plant pathogens. Annu Rev Phytopathol 46:27–51

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta JH (1988) Perpetuation and epidemiology of powdery mildew of mango. Acta Hortic 231:528–533

    Google Scholar 

  • Jamadar MM, Venkatesh H, Balikai RA, Patil DR (2009) Forecasting of powdery mildew disease incidence on Ber (ziziphus mauritiana lam.) based on weather. Acta Hortic 840:63

    Google Scholar 

  • Jat RG, Goyal SK (2009) Epidemiological studies on powdery mildew of Ber, ziziphus mauritiana Lamarck. In: SHS Acta Hort I international jujube symposium, vol 840, pp 62

  • Jeger MJ (1984) The use of mathematical models in plant disease epidemiology. Sci Hortic 35:11–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar A, Solanki KR, Singh R (2000) Effect of rainfall on incidence of powdery mildew in ber. Ann Arid Zone 39(1):89–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Mckinney HH (1923) Influences of soil temperature and moisture in inhibition of wheat seedling by Helminthosporium sativum. J Agric Res 26(2):171–179

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz G (1978) Estimating the dimension of a model. Ann Stat 6:461–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinha P, Prajneshu R, Varma A (2002) Growth models for powdery mildew development of mango. Ann Plant Prot Sci 10:84–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Szabelska A, Siatkowski M, Goszczurna T, Zyprych J (2010) Comparison of growth models in package R. Nauka Przyroda Technol. 4(4):50

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rajender Singh.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Fitting the growth model in R software

The following code shows how to analyze the data through R code

dataset1 < -read.csv(file.choose(),header = TRUE)

attach(dataset1)

result.m_1 < -drm(response ~ time, data = dataset1, fct = EXD.3())

summary(result.m_1)

plot(result.m_1)

result.m_2 < -drm(response ~ time, data = dataset1, fct = G.4())

summary(result.m_2)

plot(result.m_2)

result.m_3 < -drm(response ~ time, data = dataset1, fct = L.5())

summary(result.m_3)

plot(result.m_3)

result.m_4 < -drm(response ~ time, data = dataset1, fct = LL.5())

summary(result.m_4)

plot(result.m_4)

result.m_5 < -drm(response ~ time, data = dataset1, fct = W1.4())

summary(result.m_5)

plot(result.m_5)

AIC(result.m_1, result.m_2, result.m_3, result.m_4, result.m_5)

AIC(result.m_1, result.m_2, result.m_3, result.m_4, result.m_5,

+ k = Log(nrow(dataset1)))

BIC(result.m_1, result.m_2, result.m_3, result.m_4, result.m_5)

dataset2 < -read.csv(file.choose(),header = TRUE)

attach(dataset2)

result.m_1 < -drm(response ~ time, data = dataset2, fct = EXD.3())

summary(result.m_1)

result.m_2 < -drm(response ~ time, data = dataset2, fct = G.4())

summary(result.m_2)

result.m_3 < -drm(response ~ time, data = dataset2, fct = L.5())

summary(result.m_3)

result.m_4 < -drm(response ~ time, data = dataset2, fct = LL.5())

summary(result.m_4)

result.m_5 < -drm(response ~ time, data = dataset2, fct = W1.4())

summary(result.m_5)

AIC(result.m_1, result.m_2, result.m_3, result.m_4, result.m_5)

BIC(result.m_1, result.m_2, result.m_3, result.m_4, result.m_5)

dataset3 < -read.csv(file.choose(),header = TRUE)

attach(dataset3)

result.m_1 < -drm(response ~ time, data = dataset3, fct = EXD.3())

summary(result.m_1)

result.m_2 < -drm(response ~ time, data = dataset3, fct = G.4())

summary(result.m_2)

result.m_3 < -drm(response ~ time, data = dataset3, fct = L.5())

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Singh, R., Kumar, M., Mamta, D. et al. Development of growth model for Ber powdery mildew in relation to weather parameters. Indian Phytopathology 72, 235–241 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42360-019-00124-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42360-019-00124-x

Keywords

Navigation