Effect of combined application of biofumigant, Trichoderma harzianum and Pseudomonas fluorescens on Rhizoctonia solani f.sp. sasakii
Banded leaf and sheath blight disease of maize is incited by Rhizoctonia solani f. sp sasakii (RSS) and it can be effectively managed by biointensive management package, such as use of biofumigation of soil with mustard plant material in combination with potential P. fluorescens and Trichoderma harzianum for enhanced yields. The viability of RSS inoculum decreased in all the biofumigation treatments as compared to untreated control. The decrease in the viability ranged from 81.7 to 99%. Maximum reduction in the viability was recorded in treatment biofumigation + seed treatment + soil drenching + foliar spray with P. fluorescens. The radial growth of the inoculum in different treatments showed significant differences when compared to control which ranged from 44.7 to 90 mm. Total bacteria, Trichoderma spp. and Pseudomonas spp. population were high in all bio-fumigant treatments 50 days after incorporation of mustard plant material in both green house and field studies.
KeywordsBiocontrol agents BLSB Maize Total bacteria Total fungi
- Biswas S, Datta M (2013) Evaluation of biological control agents against sheath blight of rice in Tripura. Indian Phytopathol 66(1):77–80Google Scholar
- Madhavi GB, Uma Devi G, Vijay Krishna Kumar K, Ramesh Babu T, Naidu TCM (2015) Evaluation of different brassica species and onion for their biofumigation effect against Rhizoctonia solani f. sp. sasakii in vitro. J Res ANGRAU 43(3&4):22–28Google Scholar
- Ou SH (1985) Rice diseases, 2nd edn. Commonwealth Mycological Institute, Kew, p 380Google Scholar
- Porter IJ (1991) Factors which influence the effectiveness of solarization for control of soil borne fungal pathogens in South Eastern Australia. Ph. D Thesis, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Australia. p 268Google Scholar
- Rajput LS, Harlapur SI (2015) Evaluation of fungicides and biocontrol agents for suppression of banded leaf and sheath blight of maize (Zea mays). Indian Phytopathol 68(2):149–155Google Scholar