|
INSTRUCTIONS TO
AUTHORS FOR ALLELOPATHY JOURNAL
1.
SUBMISSION OF
MANUSCRIPT:
Manuscript (Ms.) must be the report of original research
and neither simultaneously submitted to, nor previously
published in any other scientific Journal. Ms. should be
written in active voice, clear, concise, grammatical
English. Please submit Ms in MS Word. Contributors,
whose native language is not English, are strongly
recommended to get their Ms. checked by native English
speaker or a colleague with adequate experience in written
English. The submission of a Ms. implies that consent
of all authors and permission of the institute has been
obtained.
Please
submit Typescript (hard copy) Ms. in triplicate or by E.
mail to Regional Editors and one copy to Journal as
under:
1.1.
REGIONAL EDITORS:
Prof. J.V.
Lovett,
Lovett Associates Pty Ltd.,
PO Box 400, Hall ACT 2618, AUSTRALIA. E. Mail:
jinnie.lovett@bigpond.com
Prof. Manuel J. Reigosa,
Facultad Ciencias, Universidade de Vigo, Depto. Recursos
Naturos Ambiente, Apdo 874, E-36200, Vigo, SPAIN. E. Mail:
mreigosa@uvigo.es
Ms. from
China, Korea, Japan:
Prof. C. Kong, Institute of Applied Ecology, Chinese
Academy of Science,
P.O. Box 417,Wenhua
Road,
Shenyang –110016, CHINA, E. Mail:
kongch@mail.edu.cn
Ms. only
from India may be submitted to: Prof. S.S. Narwal,
Department of Agronomy,
Haryana
Agricultural
University,
Hisar-125 004,
INDIA.
E. Mail:
allelopathy1947@yahoo.com
,
narwal_1947@yahoo.com
1.2. Page
Charges:
There are no page charges for publishing the Ms in
Allelopathy Journal.
1.3. Time of
Publication:
The Accepted Ms. is published within 3-months after
acceptance.
2.
SCOPE:
Original Papers, Reviews, Short Communications, Reports of
Conferences and Meetings, Announcement of the future
Conferences/ Meetings And Book Reviews on all aspects of
allelopathy and related areas in both aquatic and
terrestrial ecosystems are invited.
3.
NOMENCLATURE:
The Latin binomial or trinomial (in italics) and the
authority must be written for plants, insects and the
microbes, etc. and full chemical names for compounds must
be written when first used in Introduction or Materials
and Methods. Crop cultivars (not experimental line) must
be identified by a single quotation mark when mentioned in
the text (e.g. cv. ‘Coral’), thereafter, the common or
generic names may be used. Don’t use
acronyms/abbreviations without its full form, give its
full form, when mentioned for the first time.
4.
UNITS OF MEASUREMTENT AND ABBREVIATIONS:
Metric Units should be used as per the International
System of Units. Abbreviations should be explained, when
they first appear in Text.
For mineral contents the elements (N, P, K, etc.) should be
used., Isotopes should be indicated as
14C,
32P. etc., Ions should be mentioned as H+
and Mg2+, etc., for molar concentration
italic M(underlined) should be used., Latin biological
names should be italicized (underlined).
5. REPORTING TIME AND DATES: Use the 24-h time system
with four digits, the first two for hours and last two for
minutes (e.g. 1430 h for
2.30 PM). Give dates in full e.g. 10 February, 1992.
6. MANUSCIPT PREPARATION
6.1. RESEARCH PAPER
The
Manuscript (Ms.) should be submitted in MS Word and
divided into following sections:
Abstract,
Keywords, Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results and
Discussion, Acknowledgement, References.
6.1.1. Scripts:
For faster publication, please critically follow
these instructions and the format of Journal. Type the Ms
in double space in 12 Font size (for Text), 10 Font Size
(for References/Bibliography) and 9 Font size (for Tables,
their Titles/ Foot notes etc.) on one side of A4 paper
with
4.00 cm margin on the left hand side. All pages should be
numbered consecutively in arabic numerals on the top
right hand corner. All abbreviations used should be fully
explained at first mention. Spelling should confirm to
British English
Oxford Dictionary. The Editorial Board and the Publisher do not
accept responsibility for loss of, or damage to
manuscripts, hence, authors are advised to retain copies
of all materials submitted.
6.1.2. Title page: This page should contain following informations
in order of (a) Running title, not exceeding 50
characters including letters and spaces, (b) Full title
of paper, it should be informative, contain maximum
number of key words and should not exceed 70 characters,
(c) Authors name and full mailing address at which
the research was conducted and the present address, if
different from the place of research,(d) Phone and FAX
numbers and E. Mail address of Correspondence
Author, (e) Abstract of 150-200 words, (f)
Key words not exceeding
10 in alphabetical order and (g) Introduction, if space is left. If
there are more than one authors, use * to indicate the
name of Correspondence Author as footnote.
6.1.3. Author’s
address: Multiple authors with different addresses must
indicate their respective address separately by
superscript number e.g. S.S. NARWAL and G.S.
DHALIWAL1.
Department of Agronomy, CCS Haryana Agricultural
University, Hisar-125 004, India.
Phone (Office):---------------, FAX
(office)---------------------Phone (Home):----------------
E. Mail: -----------
1Department
of Entomology,
Punjab
Agricultural University, Ludhiana-141 004, India.
IMPORTANT: Add Phone Number (Office, Home), FAX Number
with ISD and STD Codes and E. Mail address of
Correspondence Author.
6.1.4. Abstract: It should briefly (150-200 words) describe the
experiment(s) details including the year, place of study,
the purpose of research and main results.
6.1.5. Key words:
Add upto 10 key words in alphabetical order and separated
by commas.
6.1.6. Text: The paper may be written in the past tense and divided
into sections e.g. Introduction, Materials and Methods,
Results and Discussion and References. For paragraph,
leave 10 spaces at the start of line. Avoid too many
headings and sub-headings.
6.1.6.1. INTRODUCTION:
Why did you conduct the study? Present only essential
background, include a concise statement of objectives,
avoid detailed review, findings or conclusions.
6.1.6.2. MATERIALS AND METHODS:
What did you use and done in this study? Present full
details of the techniques, the treatments and the methods
of statistical analysis used in the past tense. For field
experiments, give site location (Latitude, longitude,
annual rainfall and mean height above Sea level), date,
month and year of start and completion, chemical
properties of soil (pH, soil fertility status ).
6.1.6.3.
RESULTS:
What did you find? Present the main statistical
significant findings of research in the past tense but do
not discuss them, if discussion is given separately. Do
not present the same data in both figures and tables. It
is necessary to analyse the data statistically, otherwise,
Ms. may not accepted. Tables, Figs and Photographs should
be kept separately i.e. not inserted in the typed text.
Indicate in left margin, the position of Table, Figs and
Photographs in Text.
(i)
Tables:
Type each table on separate page, number consecutively in
Arabic numbers and indicate its preferred position on the
typed script in the text. Give suitable title to each
table at the beginning of Table and write with pencil the
author(s) name(s) at the backside of each table, on the
top right hand side. The table width should not exceed
Journal Page size (18 x 13 cm, 9 Font size) and should not
contain unexplained abbreviations.
(ii). Figures:
Draw diagrams with computer and for better printing, send
print out from Laser Printer. Diagrams should not exceed
the Journal page size (18 x 13 cm). If possible, include legends in figure. Number illustrations in Arabic
numerals, mark with pencil all details on figure and write
the name(s) of author(s) at the back side on the top right
hand side of each one. Give suitable Title to each Figure
at its bottom. Indicate the preferred position of each
figure in text on the typed script.
(iii) Photographs: These should be included, when the results cannot be understood without
them and only good quality plates will be accepted. Submit
glossy prints of colour or black and white photographs, do
not write heavily on their back or use clips that may mark
or scratch them. Give suitable Title to each Figure at its
bottom.
6.1.6.4. Legends: If legends cannot be included in
Figure/Photograph, add at the end of Title. Legends and
Titles for all illustrations should be collected on
separate sheet of paper, marked with the author(s) name(s).
6.1.7. DISCUSSION: What do the results mean? Assess the scientific
significance of results, relate them to others work on the
subject and give author(s) conclusions. It should be
combined with Results section.
6.1.8. REFERENCES:
6.1.8.1 Text:
In the text, a reference should be quoted/Cited by
the Citation Number (based on alphabetical order of
references) enclosed in a parenthesis (in ascending
order). Separate two or more citations within a
parenthesis by comma.
6.1.8.2 Bibliography:
List references alphabetically at the end of text in
following order: Citation Number, surname of author(s) and
initials (in capitals), year of publication (in
parenthesis), title of paper, name of Journal in full in
italics, volume in bold and first and last pages of the
reference. Add full title of Book, Thesis, Report,
Conference Proceedings. Please include Place of
publication and Publisher [and Editor(s) if appropriate]
for Books and Conference Proceedings as per Journal
format as under:
(i).
Periodicals: Shabana, N., Hussian, S. I. and Nisar, S.
(1990). Allelopathic effects of plants on nematodes.
Plant and Soil 126: 21-36.
(ii).
Books (Authored/Edited). Rice E. L. (1984).
Allelopathy. 2nd Ed.
New York: Academic Publishers. 424 pp.
(iii).
Book Chapter: Narwal, S. S. (1999). Allelopathy in
ecological agriculture. In: Allelopathy in Ecological
Agriculture (Eds. S. S. Narwal et al) pp.
11-32.
Dordrecht,
Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Authors must check that all references cited in the text
must appear in the list of references and vice versa and
that names and years must be same in two places.
6.2. SHORT COMMUNICATION
Everything is same as for Research paper,
except that Abstract is deleted and added as Conclusion at
the end of text.
6.3. REVIEW PAPER
The Reviews are usually solicited by the Chief Editor.
Writing instructions are same as for Research paper,
except that Contents are added before the Abstract and
following:
6.2.1. Title page:
It consists of Running Title, Full Title, Author(s), Full
Address, Detailed Contents of Review Paper, Abstract (if
space is left) and foot note with * for Correspondence
Author and for the address of author(s), if different from
the place of research done.
6.2.2. Text: It is divided into sections with following types of
headings (typed in Bold):
1.
MAIN HEADING
(Font size 12): Capital letters in Bold, type in the
centre of page
1.1. SUB HEADING
(Font size 10): Capital letters in Bold, type on left hand side, one line
above the text.
1.1.1. Sub sub heading:
Type on the left hand side, one line above the text.
1.1.1.1. Sub Sub Sub heading:
Type on the left hand side, in the line of the text.
7. REVISION OF MS: Manuscripts will be peer reviewed for contents and presentation by two
Reviewers and Regional Editors. If a Ms is returned for
revision, authors must return the revised Ms in triplicate
alongwith original within 15 days, afterwards revision may
not be accepted
8. PROOFS:
To avoid delay in publication of your Ms., please
return the Galley Proof within 3 days after receipt by E.
Mail/ AIRMAIL/ COURIER.
9. ELECTRONIC MANUSCRIPT
Manuscripts (Ms) are invited on CD to avoid possibility of
errors in typing and for reliable and fast delivery of
proofs. Original Ms (in triplicate) should be always
submitted on paper (hard copy). However a Ms accepted for
publication, after incorporating all the comments/queries,
typed in MS Word must be submitted to the Regional Editors
on virus free CD or by E. Mail Attachment along with its
three exactly matching printed hard copies on paper. The
CD without its two identical copies on paper will not be
accepted. Label the CD with name of software used, Date,
Authors name, File name and Ms. Title. Please ensure
that files sent in CD are not for read only memory.
10.
Additional Information:
The additional information can be obtained from the International
Allelopathy Foundation, by Phone/ FAX/ E. Mail etc. given
below
ALLELOPATHY JOURNAL
INTERNATIONAL ALLELOPATHY FOUNDATION
8/15, Haryana Agricultural University
Hisar-125 004,
INDIA
Phone/ FAX: + 91-1662-38083
E. Mail:
allelopathy1947@yahoo.com
,
narwal_1947@yahoo.com
MODEL MANUSCRIPTS
Many new Authors, submit manuscripts (Ms)
to allelopathy Journal written in their own style,
which (i) causes inconvenience in its processing,
(ii) delays its publication and (iii) results in wastage
of valuable time of Peer Reviewers and Editors. Therefore,
to help the Authors to know the format/style of
Allelopathy Journal and for uniformity of submitted Ms.,
the 'Model Ms' outlines are given in following pages for
(A) Research Paper, (B) Short Communication and (C) Review
Paper. The Authors are advised to (I) strictly follow the
outlines of ‘Model Ms.', (II) type throughout in 12 Font
in MS Word, (III) keep Figure size to (17.5 x 12.5
cm.) and (IV) submit Ms. in triplicate or by E. Mail
attachment. The ‘Model Ms’ just expains the Format/ Style
of Ms for submission and only Ms Outlines are given and
does not indicate any limitation of Pages in a Ms.
MODEL RESEARCH PAPER
Inhibitory potential of
compounds released from squash (Cucurbita spp.)
under natural conditions
P. T.
FUJIYOSHI, S. R. GLIESSMAN1* and J. H.
LANGENHEIM
Department of
Biology, University of California, Santa Cruz, CA 95064,
USA
Phone (Office):---------------, FAX
(Office)---------------------Phone (Home):----------------
E. Mail: -----------
(Received in revised form: October 23, 2001)
ABSTRACT
The squash (Cucurbita spp.)
extracts released under the natural conditions were tested
for phytotoxicity. The fog drip collected from the leaves
did not inhibit lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.) seed
germination or radicle elongation. Similarly, water
soluble root exudates also did not inhibit germination or
seedling growth of pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus).
Aqueous leachates from senescent leaves inhibited the
germination, radicle and hypocotyl elongation of corn (Zea
mays) and lettuce. However, the concentrations
used were greater than those likely found under field
conditions and showed little or no activity toward the
weed species. Hydrophobic root exudates collected by
adsorption to resin beads were inhibitory to lettuce seed
germination and radicle elongation. Volatiles from leaf
glandular trichomes stimulated the lettuce radicle
elongation. Ecologically realistic methodology thus shows
that suppression of weeds by squash is potentially
mediated allelopathically from root contact, but other
routes of release of inhibitory allelochemicals are
unlikely.
Key words:
Allelochemical release, allelopathic stimulation,
bioassay, Cucurbita, fog drip, root contact, root
exudates, volatiles.
INTRODUCTION
The use of
allelopathy in weed management has received significant
attention (11,35). In addition to numerous investigations
into weed suppression by cover crops (5,22,28,31) and
allelochemicals suitable for herbicide development (25),
there is a body of literature on allelopathic suppression
of weeds by crop plants themselves (9,21,24). The studies
involving squash (Cucurbita spp.) (4,17,19,20,29)
suggest that its effectiveness in weed suppression in
traditional Mesoamerican polyculture (3,6,17) is due to a
combination of competition for light and allelopathy.
Since allelopathy and light competition operate
simultaneously in the field (33), methods for separating
them have been proposed (13). In field studies and
laboratory experiments, we explored the contributions of
each factor. Results from the field studies supported the
suggestion that allelopathy was a contributing factor to
weed suppression (14).
MATERIALS
AND METHODS
I. Plant Extracts
Greenhouse-grown squash plants were Cucurbita maxima
Duch. ex Lam. 'Blue Hubbard', a variety shown to
suppress weeds (14). Field-collected material came from
the
University of California,
Santa Cruz Farm. Varieties were chosen based on their
commercial availability for over a century (37,39).
II. Bioassays
When large
volumes of plant extracts were available, a bioassay
similar to McPherson et al. (26) was conducted.
Seeds of test species were soaked for at least 1.0 h in
the extract or the control solution and germinated in
bioassay chambers. A 57 mOsm mannitol solution served as
the control for the 59 mOsm C. pepo 'Small Sugar'
5% leachate.
Statistical
analysis:
T -tests and ANOVA were performed on SPSS 6.1.1 for
Macintosh or William R. Rice's program STN dated 7 March
1996. Student-Newman-Keuls test was performed on SPSS
6.1.1 for Macintosh. The contingency test was done on
Rice's STN-FREQ dated 6 March 1996.
*Correspondence
author
1Department
of Environmental Studies.
RESULTS AND
DISCUSSION
Leaf leachates
Cucurbita pepo
'Small Sugar'
leaf leachates were more inhibitory towards the crops than
the weeds at the lower concentration (Table 1). Radicle
growth of corn and lettuce was significantly inhibited by
2.5% leachate by 34 % and 50 %, respectively,
Amaranthus retroflexus germination and seedling
elongation were inhibited only by 5% leachate and Malva
parviflora germination was too poor to draw any
conclusions.
Fog drip
Fog drip had
no activity Radicle length of lettuce treated with fog
drip (11.8 mm) was not significantly different from the
'control (12.0 mm). The fog drip falls on soil or nearby
plants and while it was not active in bioassay, it is
possible that on successive nights the drip falls in the
same place and could have concentrated during the day.
Thus the concentration used in the bioassay could have
been less than that in the soil near the plants.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like
to thank the Alfred Heller Endowed Chair and the W.K.
Kellogg Foundation for providing funds, the Center for
Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems for material and
lab space and Rob Kluson, Ana Luisa Anaya, Rob Franks,
Swamp Wood, Ricardo Santos, Jerry Brownrigg and Jonathan
Krupp for support and assistance.
REFERENCES
1. AI-Saadawi,
I. S., Rice, E. L. and Karns, T. K. (1983). Allelopathic
effects of Polygonum aviculare L. III. Isolation,
characterisation and biological activities of phytotoxins
other than phenols. Journal of Chemical Ecology
9: 761- c 774.
2. Amador, M.
F. and Gliessman, S. R. (1990). An ecological approach to
reducing external inputs through the use of intercropping.
In Agroecology: Researching the Ecological Basis for
Sustainable/e Agriculture (Ed., S. R. Gliessman), pp.
146-159. New York, USA: Springer-Verlag.
3. Anaya, A.
L., Ortega, R. C. and Nava Rodriguez, V. (1992). Impact of
allelopathy in the traditional management of
agroecosystems in Mexico. In: Allelopathy :
Basic and Applied Aspects (Eds., S.J.H. Rizvi and V.
Rizvi), pp. 271- 301. London: Chapman & Hall.
4. Anaya, A.
L., Ramos, L., Cruz, R., Hernandez, J. G. and Nava, V.
(1987). Perspectives on allelopathy in Mexican traditional
agro ecosystems: a case study in Tlaxcala. Journal of
Chemical Ecology 13: 2083- 2101.
5. Anaya, A.
L., Sabourin, D. J., Hernandez-Bautista, B. E. and Mendez,
I. (1995). Allelopathic potential of Ipomoea tricolor
(Convolvulaceae) in a greenhouse experiment.
Journal of Chemical Ecology 21: 1085- 1102.
6. Chacon,
J. C. and Gliessman, S. R. (1982). Use of the "non-weed"
concept in traditional tropical agroecosystems of
south-eastern Mexico. Agro-ecosystems 8:
1-11.
7. Connick,
W. J., Jr., Bradow, J. M., Legendre, M. G., Vail, S. L.
and Menges, R. M. (1987). Identification of volatile
allelochemicals from Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats.
Journal of Chemical Ecology 13: 463-472.
8. Dalton,
B. R., Blum, U. and Weed, S. B. (1989). Differential
sorption of exogenously applied femlic, p-coumaric, P-hydroxybenzoic
and vanillic acids in soil. Soil Science Society of
American Journal 53: 757- 762.
9. Dilday,
R. H., Lin, J. and Yan, W. (1994). Identifications of
allelopathy in the USDA-ARS rice germplasm collection.
Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 34:
907-910.
MODEL SHORT COMMUNICATION
Suppression effect of Capsicum chinense Jacq. on
Southern rootknot nematode [ Meloidogyne incognita
(Kofoid and White)] in peppers and tomato
J. K. PETERSON and H. F. HARRISON
USDA-ARS
Vegetable Laboratory, 2875 Savannah Highway, Charleston,
SC 29414, USA
Phone (Office):---------------, FAX
(office)---------------------Phone (Home):----------------
E. Mail: -----------
(Received in revised form: May 15, 2001)
Key
words: Capsicum annuum,
Capsicum chinense, companion
planting, Lycopersicon esculentum, Meloidogyne
incognita,
pepper, rootknot nematode, tomato
INTRODUCTION
In a
greenhouse study it was observed that roots of the
nematode (Meloidogyne incognita) susceptible tomato
(Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) cv. 'Rutgers'
showed reduced galling when intertwined with roots of a
nematode resistant pepper (Capsicum chinense Jacq.)
'Scotch Bonnet', growing adjacently in the bench. Thies
et al. (6) reported that a highly nematode resistant
Cayenne pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) used as a
rotational crop in rootknot infested fields allowed
subsequent successful growth of a highly susceptible
pepper. These observations indicate that companion
planting with nematode resistant peppers may provide
adequate protection to susceptible vegetable plants. This
study was designed to confirm these observations and
provide a quantitative measure of the efficacy of the
proposed companion planting.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The
Capsicum annuum breeding line PA-136 (I) and the
tomato cultivar 'Rutgers' were used as susceptible plants.
The highly nematode resistant G. chinense breeding
line PA-426 (2, 3) served as companion plant. A one week
old tomato or susceptible pepper seedling was planted in
the center of a 12 L pot, containing a mixture of 50% pure
coarse sand and 50% of a commercial peat, vermiculite
mixture. The susceptible, center plants were inoculated
with 10 ml of a nematode egg suspension (3000 eggs) in
water, dripped around the stem of the susceptible plant.
The egg suspension was prepared from infected peppers as
described by Hussey and Barker (5). After inoculation the
pots were thoroughly watered. An experiment, with either a
susceptible pepper or tomato, consisted of two treatments
viz., number of companion plants per pot (0,1,2,4) and
inoculation with nematode (not inoculated, inoculated).
The treatments were replicated 6 times and the pots were
arranged in a completely randomized design and the
experiments were repeated over time. One full set of
experiments was conducted in winter, when greenhouse
temperatures ranged between 20-29 °C and one set in summer
when temperatures -ranged between 24-32 °C. Eight weeks
after inoculation the plants were removed from the pots,
the soil washed from the roots and gall indices as well as
root dry weights were determined. Gall indices were
independently estimated by two persons and the numbers
were averaged for each plant. The following scale was
used: I -no galls; 2 -few galls, root system fully intact;
3 -many galls, root system in good condition; 4 -large
number of galls, throughout root system, root system
discoloured, barely functioning; 5 -massive number of
galls, degradation of root system.
Data
from two complete experiments were combined for analysis
of variance and means were separated using Duncan's
Multiple Range test at P = 0.05.
'Correspondence author
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The
nematode resistant pepper companion plants had no visible
infection and significantly reduced galling in the
susceptible tomato or pepper plants (Table 1). The
susceptible tomatoes and peppers showed the same trend;
reduced galling with increasing numbers of companion
plants. Dry weights of the root systems of the susceptible
tomato or pepper plants increased with more galling, even
though the number of thin feeder roots decreased sharply
when no companion plants were present. When four companion
plants were present, root dry weights of the susceptible
plants showed no significant differences between infected
and non-infected plants (Table 2 and 3). Root dry weights
of susceptible versus resistant plants are presented
separately, because the infected tomato plants attained
more dry weight in winter (Table 2, Experiment 1) than in
summer (Table 2, Experiment 2). Root dry weights of the
infected nematode susceptible pepper plants did not show
significant differences between infected and non-infected
plants (Table 2 and 3). Root dry weights of susceptible
versus resistant plants are presented separately, because
the infected tomato plants attained more dry weight in
winter (Table 2, Experiment 1) than in summer (Table 2,
Experiment 2). Root dry weights of the infected nematode
susceptible pepper plants did not show significant
differences between the two seasons (Table 3). When four
companion plants were present, their total root dry weight
was approximately 1.3 g/L. At this root density the
average gall index for the susceptible tomato plants
declined from 4.8 (degrading root system) to 3.3 where the
root system was in good condition. Similarly, the average
gall index for the susceptible pepper went from 3.6 (large
number of egg-masses, root system poorly functioning) to
2.2 (root system intact).
CONCLUSIONS
Fery and Thies
(2) evaluated the available sources of C. chinense
for resistance to M incognita and found that all
commercial sources of the two types (Habanero and Scotch
Bonnet) were moderately susceptible or susceptible.
However, four heirloom cultigens, all of the Scotch Bonnet
type, showed levels of resistance ~imilar to resistant C.
annuum. Three of the cultigens were studied in
detail (3) and released as PA-353, PA-398 and PA-426 (4).
The resistance in C. chinense was conditioned by a
single dominant gene, which is allelic to the dominant
gene that conditions much of the resistance in C.
annuum. It might be expected that sources of C.
annuum or C. chinense which have this dominant
gene could afford protection against M incognita
when used as companions with susceptible vegetable plants.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The
authors are thankful to Andrea Gilliard for her valuable
contribution to this paper.
REFERENCES
1. Dukes, P.D.,
Fery, R.L. and Thies, J.A. (1997). PA-136 Cayenne pepper,
an exceptional host for production of southern root-knot
inoculum. HortScience 32: 335.
2. Fery, R.L. and Thies, J.A. (1997). Evaluation of Capsicum chinense
Jacq. cultigens for resistance to the southern
rootknot nematode. HortScience 32: 923-926.
3. Fery, R.L. and Thies, J.A. (1998). Genetic analysis of resistance to
the southern root-knot nematode in Capsicum chinense
Jacq. Journal of American Society of Horticultural
Sciences 123: 1008-1011.
4. Fery, R.L. and Thies, J.A. (1998). PA-353, PA-398 and PA-426:
southern root-knot nematode-resistant Capsicum chinense
Jacq. germplasm lines. HortScience 33:
760- 761.
5. Hussey, R.S. and Barker, K.R. (1973). A comparison of methods of
collecting inocula of Meloidogyne spp., including a
new technique. Plant Diseases Reporter 57:
1025-102
MODEL REVIEW PAPER
Allelopathy
in parasitic weeds management: Role of catch and trap
crops
B.M. CHITTAPUR*, C. S. HUNSHAL and H.
SHENOY
Department of
Agronomy
University of
Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad -580 005, Karnataka, India
Phone (Office):---------------, FAX
(office)---------------------Phone (Home):----------------
E. Mail: -----------
(Received in
revised form: December 22, 2002)
CONTENTS
1.
INTRODUCTION
2. CATCH
AND TRAP CROPS
2.1. Catch
crop
2.2. Trap
crop
2.3.
Identification of catch and trap crops
3. BIOLOGY
AND HOST PARASITE RELATIONS
3.1.
Striga sp.
3.2.
Orobanche spp
4. WEED
MANAGEMENT
4.1.
Striga spp. management
4.2.
Orobanche spp. management
4.3. Catch
and trap cropping for other parasitic weeds
5. FUTURE
LINES OF WORK
6.
REFERENCES
ABSTRACT
Integrated weed management
systems involving catch crops and trap crops are needed to
reduce the herbicides use in agriculture. The catch or
trap cropping is done to induce the germination of
parasitic weeds seed but do not allowing it to produce
seed. The effective catch crops viz., fodder millet (Panicum
miliaceum L.), sorghum (Sorghum bicolor Moench.),
corn (Zea mays L.), sudangrass (Sorghum
Sudanense Stapf.) have been identified for the
management of Striga asiatica [(L.) O.Kuntze) and
the cowpea (Vigna catjang Walp.) for S.
gesnerioides [(Wild.) Vatke]. Cotton (Gossypium
spp.), soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.) and peanut
(Arachis hypogaea L.) are the important trap crops.
Intercropping of soybean or peanut with sorghum
effectively controls the S. hermonthica [(Del.)
Benth).
Keywords: Catch crop,
Cuscuta sp, host parasite relation, Orobanche
sp, Striga sp .trap crop.
I.
INTRODUCTION
Weeds cause
appreciable losses in grain production and depletes the
nutrients in arable land. As the growth of parasitic weeds
depend on the host, hence, they cause substantial damage
to agricultural crops. There are about 1800 species of
parasitic weeds world-wide, of these Striga, Orobanche
and Cuscuta are most harmful to crops (30).
Striga and Orobanche threaten crop production
in 5% of the world's arable land, in the drier and warmer
regions of Africa and Asia. Total crop losses in some
areas have resulted in migration of villages (31).
Orobanche is also equally devastating in the
Mediterranean region. Hence, there is need to develop a
comprehensive management system for their control.
Herbicides effectively control the weeds. Though,
post-emergence herbicides are effective, but these weeds
cause considerable damage to crops in the pre-emergence
stage.
2. TRAP AND
CATCH CROPS
Parasitic
weeds produce large number of seeds with prolonged
longevity in the soil. A chemical stimulant is required to
break their seed dormancy and initiate seed germination.
This chemical is synthesized and released as root exudates
by the host of the parasitic weed or other plants, which
can serve as catch crops or as trap crops. The primary
consideration in parasitic weed management, is the
reduction of the parasitic weed seed bank in soil.
* Correspondence Author
3. BIOLOGY AND
HOST-PARASITE RELATIONS
3.1. Striga
Striga
is an
important genus in family Scrophulariacae associated with
grasslands in tropics and sub-tropics. Its 36 species and
subspecies are mostly distributed in African savannas and
4 important species in Asia [S. asiatica (=S.
lutea), S. hermonthica, S. gesneriodies
and S. euphrasoides (=S. angustifolia).
All the species, except S. gesneriodies
parasitise the roots of grasses. S. hermonthica
seed germinates in response to germination stimulants
exuded by cereal roots (28). A striga plant
produces several thousand seeds, which remain viable in
the soil for upto 20 years (11).
3.2.
Orobanche
The family Orobanchaceae has 17 genera and 150 species. The genus
Orobanche contains 60 species, except O.
cernua all are unbranched and parasitic. All species
are devoid of chlorophyll and variable in colour. The
parasite lives entirely on the host through attachment of
strong haustoria to their roots. Each plant produces
between 40,000 to 1,20,000 small seeds which remain viable
in the soil for more than a decade. When grazed, seeds
pass through alimentary tracts of animals unharmed. Under
the influence of chemical in root exudate, seeds germinate
up to a distance of
10 mm, but
only seeds within 2 to 3 mm of the root surface infect the
host plant.
4. WEED
MANAGEMENT
In Indian
agriculture, crop mixtures and crop rotations are common,
these stopped the build up of host specific pests
including parasitic weeds. Therefore, problem of parasitic
weed is not as severe as in Africa or Mediterrenean
countries. However, with the introduction of hybrid
sorghum, CSH-I, the problem of Striga has increased
(as one of the hybrid parents is from Africa). The
rotation of cotton with sorghum kept the Striga
under control. Now soybean production has become popular,
hence, Striga may remain under control in the near
future. In tobacco areas, sunnhemp green manure is
becoming popular which will keep these parasitic weeds
under control.
5. FUTURE
LINES OF WORK
I. Identify
the new and potential plant species With allelopathic
effects on the highly evolved parasitic weeds. For
example, stray studies with Cymopsis tetragonaloba
indicated stunted growth, premature cessation and
degeneration of flowers in Cuscuta chinensis, an
obligate stem parasite and stimulation of seed germination
and failure of establishment in Alectra vogelii, a
root parasite. Therefore, extensive study on this crop for
its allelopathic uses are essential.
2. Sunflower
is major host for some Orobanche spp. Hence,
its potential as trap crop may be studied.
3. Studies are
needed to develop new integrated weed management systems
involving trap/catch crops in view of environmental
concerns associated with herbicides. Moreover, such
systems are compatible with the existing farming
conditions in semi-arid tropics. .
4.
Identification and isolation of allelochemicals from the
root exudates needs emphasis so that synthetic stimulants
with longer persistence in soil can be formulated for
control of parasitic weeds.
6. REFERENCES
1.
Abu-Irmaileh, B.E.
(1984). Effects of planting flax on the subsequent
infestation of tomato by Orobanche ramosa. In:
Proceedings of 3rd International. Symposium on
Parasitic Weeds, (Eds., C. Parker, L.J. Musselman, R.M.
Polnill and A.K. Wilson) pp 250-255. Aleppo, Syria: ICARDA/International
parasitic weeds research.
2.
Anonymous. (1993).
Final Report-ICAR Ad-hoc project on Management of
Parasitic weeds. Dharwad, India: Division of Agronomy,
University of Agricultural Sciences.
3.
Bebawi, F.F. (1987).
Cultural practices in witch weed management. In:
Parasitic Weeds in Agriculture Volume I:
Striga (Ed., L.J. Musselman) pp. 159 -172. Florida,
USA: CRC Press Inc.
4.
Bebawi, F.F. and
Mutwali, E. M. (1991). Witch weed management by sorghum-sudangrass.
Seed size and stage of harvest. Agronomy Journal
83 : 781- 786.
5.
Bell-Ielong, D.,
Butler, L.G., Ejeta, G. and Hess, D. (1994.) Do phenolics
from the parasitic weed Striga inhibit host growth?
Acta horticulturae 381 : 683-686.
|
