Skip to main content
Log in

Reproductive capacity of Heterodera schachtii on Thlaspi arvense, Capsella bursa-pastoris and varying populations of Chenopodium album

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Weed management in field crops is based on threshold levels. Direct yield reductions by weeds can be quantified, but indirect effects by serving as alternate hosts of plant–parasitic nematodes are more difficult to assess. In Germany, intensive cultivation of sugar beet in 3-year rotations with cereals provides long fallow periods between harvest and planting of the following crop. Weeds developing during this period could serve as hosts of Heterodera schachtii, the sugar beet cyst nematode. In previous studies, only limited nematode population density effects were detected during the stubble period. Physiology and population characteristics of the potential host plants may impact reproduction potential of H. schachtii. In a microplot experiment, reproduction of H. schachtii was measured under Capsella bursa-pastoris, Chenopodium album and Thlaspi arvense, and compared to that under susceptible Beta vulgaris during the vegetation period from spring to late summer. There was no difference in population density of H. schachtii on the weed species, but all were much lower than under B. vulgaris. In a greenhouse study, the reproduction of H. schachtii on nine populations of C. album from different regions of Germany was compared to that on each of a susceptible and resistant cultivar of B. vulgaris and Raphanus sativus. All C. album populations supported lower reproduction (<2 %) than the susceptible sugar beet and oilseed radish. Lower nematode population density and negligible reproductive potential on a diverse selection of C. album support the hypothesis that the risk of H. schachtii population buildup under these weeds is limited.

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
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Augustin B (2013) Einfluss von Unkräutern auf die Populationsdynamik des Rübenzystennematoden. J Cultiv Plants 65:395 (abstract)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Daub M, Westphal A (2012) Integrated nematode management at crop rotation systems with sugar beets. Sugar Ind Zuckerind 137:110–119

    Google Scholar 

  3. Duncan LW, Noling JW (1998) Agricultural sustainability and nematode integrated pest management. In: Barker KR, Pederson GA, Windham GL (eds) Plant and nematode interactions. American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, Soil Science Society of America, Madison, pp 251–287

    Google Scholar 

  4. Gleissl W, Bachthaler G (1988) About significance of weeds as host plants of the sugar-beet nematode Heterodera schachtii in weeds control according to thresholds (text in German). Angew Bot 62:193–201

    Google Scholar 

  5. Gleissl W, Bachthaler G, Hoffmann GM (1989) Investigations on the suitability of weeds of various geographical origins as hosts of the sugar-beet nematode Heterodera schachtii Schmidt (text in German). Weed Res 29:221–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Griffin GD (1982) Differences in the response of certain weed host populations to Heterodera schachtii. J Nematol 14:174–182

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Koch DW, Gray FA (1997) Nematode-resistant oil radish for control of Heterodera schachtii. I. sugarbeet–barley rotations. J Sugar Beet Res 34:31–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Meinecke A, Westphal A (2014) Quantitative reproductive potential of Heterodera schachtii on weeds typical for late summer fallow in sugar beet rotations. Weed Res 54:624–634

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Meinecke A, Ziegler K, Bürcky K, Westphal A (2014) Composition of the stubble weed flora and its role for Heterodera schachtii in the year preceding sugar beet production. Weed Res 54:614–623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Müller J (1980) Ein verbessertes Extraktionsverfahren für Heterodera schachtii. (An improved method for the extraction of Heterodera schachtii.). Nachr Dtsch Pflanzenschutzd 32:21–24 (English abstract)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Müller J (1998) Resistance and tolerance to beet cyst nematodes (Heterodera schachtii) in sugar beet cultivars. Zuckerindustrie 9:693–699

    Google Scholar 

  12. Müller J, Klinke A (1996) Selektion virulenter Populationen von Heterodera schachtii und ihre Nutzung zur Charakterisierung von Resistenzgenen in Beta-Rüben. Mitt Biol Bundesanst Land- Forstwirt Berlin-Dahlem 317:102–116

    Google Scholar 

  13. Müller J, Rumpenhorst HJ (2000) Testing of crop cultivars for resistance to noxious organisms at the Federal Research Centre: “Rübenzystennematode”. Mitt Biol Bundesanst Land- Forstwirt Berlin-Dahlem 372:9–22

    Google Scholar 

  14. Müller J, Steudel W (1983) Der Einfluss der Kulturdauer verschiedener Zwischenfrüchte auf die Abundanzdynamik von Heterodera schachtii Schmidt. Nachrichtenbl Deut Pflanzenschutzd 35:103–108

    Google Scholar 

  15. Niere B (2006) On the assessment of resistance of potato varieties to the potato cyst nematodes Globodera pallida and Globodera rostochiensis. Mitt Biol Bundesanst Land- Forstwirt Berlin-Dahlem 404:31–39

    Google Scholar 

  16. Norton DC (1978) Ecology of plant-parasitic nematodes, vol xv. Wiley, New York, p 268

    Google Scholar 

  17. Roberts PA (1993) The future of nematology: integration of new and improved management strategies. J Nematol 25:383–394

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Steiner AA (1968) Soilless culture. In: Proceedings 6th Colloquium International Potash Institute, Florence

  19. Steudel W, Schlang J, Müller J (1989) Untersuchungen zum Einfluß einiger Zwischenfr€uchte auf die Abundanzdynamik das Rübennematoden (Heterodera schachtii Schm.) in einer Zuckerrüben-Getreide-Fruchtfolge. Nachrichtenbl Deut Pflanzenschutzd 41:199–203

    Google Scholar 

  20. Westphal A (2013) Vertical distribution of Heterodera schachtii under susceptible, resistant or tolerant sugar beet cultivars. Plant Dis 97:101–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This project was conducted as internship project of the first author in conjunction with enrollment at the University of Göttingen. The authors would like to thank the Institute of Plant Protection in Field Crops and Grassland where this study was conducted during the employment of A. Westphal. The provision of seed sources and discussions of M. Anselstetter, E. Goebel, H. Nordmeyer and H.P. Söchting are greatly appreciated. The support of the weed science group and various workgroups of JKI Braunschweig are acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andreas Westphal.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Muhammad Ahmad, Somayyeh Sedaghatjoo and Andreas Westphal declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Muhammad Ahmad and Somayyeh Sedaghatjoo contributed equally to this research.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ahmad, M., Sedaghatjoo, S. & Westphal, A. Reproductive capacity of Heterodera schachtii on Thlaspi arvense, Capsella bursa-pastoris and varying populations of Chenopodium album . J Plant Dis Prot 123, 37–42 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41348-016-0002-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41348-016-0002-7

Keywords

Navigation