RPF III

PROFORMA FOR SUBMISSION OF

FINAL REPORT OF RESEARCH PROJECTS

Part - I : General information

800 Project Code

8001 Institute Project Code No. : Path XII (813)

8002 ICAR Project Code No.

801 Name of the Institute and Division :

8011 Name and address of Institute :Indian Institute of Spices Research,

Calicut 673

8012 Name of Division/Section : Crop Protection/ Pathology

8013 Location of the Project : Plant Pathology Section, Indian Institute of Spices

Calicut 673 012

802 Project Title : Studies on fungal and viral diseases of ginger

803 Priority Area : 01,02 & 04

6031 Research Approach:

Applied Research Basic Research Process/Technology development Transfer of Technology

01 02 04

804 Specific area: Spices Research

805 Duration of Project:

8051 Date of start of project: 2002-

8052 Likely date of completion of project: 2007

8053 Period for which report submitted: 2002-2004

806 Total cost of the project/Expenditure incurred : Rs. 5,36,737

(Give reasons for variation, if any from original estimated cost)

As the project was closed by 2004, for commencing a net work project on Ginger and Turmeric)

Executive Summary

Application of Rogor along with Ridomil 0.125 % is found highly effective in controlling soft

rot of ginger caused by Pythium sp. As the soft rot disease is aggravated by the presence of insect

larvae of Mimigrella sp., seed treatment with a systemic insecticide is found useful in reducing the

disease incidence

Macrophomina species was found as the causative organism for dry rot disease. The fungus

appears only during the storage period in the rhizomes following the damage of the seeds by

mechanical means. The fungus is found to be non- infective to the crop under normal field conditions.

Fusarium oxysporum was identified as the cause of eye rot disease of ginger. The disease

occurs during the storage period. Heaping the rhizomes having meristamatic buds leads to rotting of

growing bud (eyes) by Fusarium sp. in most cases. Eye rot mostly occurs only in the lower layers of

heaped rhizomes. Upper layers of the stored rhizomes are relatively unaffected.

When the pathogens such as Fusarium and Macrophomina are artificially inoculated together,

there is a decrease in the disease incidence due to Fusarium sp. and there by an increase in the yield.

This may be due to the mutual antagonism existing among the pathogens. Under in vitro conditions

the pathogens are found to be antagonistic to each other.

Carbendazim and SAAF(a combination product of Mancozeb with Carbendazim; (Mancozeb

63%+ Carbendazim12%) were found to be inhibitory even at 50 ppm of the product when compared

to Mancozeb, Ridomil, Bordeaux mixture or COC, which have no effect even at 500ppm tested

The result of a pot culture experiment where healthy and diseased ginger rhizomes(steam

treated) planted in solarized, non solarized, fumigated soil with differential fungicidal and bio

control treatments showed that planting unhealthy or diseased rhizomes leads to disease even after

seed treatment. Treatment of diseased rhizomes with steam is not advisable, as it will kill the

meristamatic buds. All together the disease incidence was comparatively negligible in treatments

where absolutely healthy rhizomes were sown followed by treatment of the rhizomes with fungicide

coating .

Rhizobacteria influences the growth and yield of ginger by reducing the disease incidence

to minimum. IISR 51, 906, 151, 859 and 915 are promising isolates of such rhizobacteria

effective in reducing the disease incidence below the threshold level

Ginger is also highly susceptible to viral infection. 153 out of 660 accessions showed the

symptoms of chlorotic streak virus , rest of the accessions did not show any visible symptoms

Two hundred accessions were screened for soft rot and dry rot disease of ginger.

Observations on pseudostem incidence was monitored regularly and collected data on number of

pseudostem infected among the total pseudostems produced . Finally fresh yield was taken .

Resistance / susceptibility was measured by taking high yielders with >20% disease incidence .

808 Key words: Ginger, soft rot, dry rot, eye rot, Pythium miriotylum, Macrophomina sp, .etiology,

chlorotic leaf strea k, fungi, integrated management, virus

PART - II : INVESTIGATOR PROFILE

(Please identify clearly changes, if any in project personnel)

810 Principal Investigator :

8101 Name :R. Suseela bhai

8102 Designation :Senior Scientist

8103 Division/Section :Crop Protection/Pathology

8104 Location :Calicut

8105 Institute Address : Indian Institute of Spices Research, Calicut 673 012

811 Co-investigator:

8111 Name : A. Ishwara Bhat

8112 Designation : Senior l Scientist

8113 Division/Section : Crop Protection/Pathology

8114 Location : Calicut

8115 Institute Address : Indian Institute of Spices Research, Calicut, Kerala, 673

812 Co-Investigator:

8121 Name :Santhosh J Eapen

8122 Designation :Senior Scientist

8123 Division/Section : Crop Protection/Nematology

8124 Location : Calicut

8125 Institute Address : Indian Institute of Spices Research, Calicut 673 012

PART - III : TECHNICAL DETAILS

820 Introduction and Objectives :

8201 Project objectives :

1.Survey for the disease, isolation of the pathogen(s),

2. Pathogenicity and characterization of the pathogens

3. Evaluation of chemicals and bioagents under invitro and

in vivo conditions

4. Screen for the source of resistance

5. Integrated disease management

8202 Back ground information and importance of the project

821 Project technical profile:

8211 Technical Programme

(Indicate briefly plan of procedure, techniques, instruments and special materials, organisms, special

environments etc.)

Survey ginger growing tracts and collection of infected plant materials of eye rot, dry rot and soft rot

and leaf spots of various types and isolation of the organisms. Pathogenicity under green house

conditions. In vitro evaluation of fungicides against various pathogens . Pot culture experiment using

different fungicides and bioagents individually and in combination. Evaluation of germ plasm

accessions for viral infections. Screening germ plasm accessions for soft rot disease resistance

8212 Total man months involvement of component project workers

R.Suseela Bhai- 2 Man months

A.Ishwara Bhat- 1 Man month

Santhosh J Eapen- 1 Man months

822 Final Report on the Project:

(Detailed report contaning all relevant data with a summary of results (not exceeding 2-5 pages)

1. Survey for the incidence and intensity of fungal and viral diseases:

A survey for dry rot and eye rot disease of ginger was conducted to study the intensity of these

diseases in different ginger growing tracts of Wyanad , Calicut and Kannur. Nine locations in

Wyanad, three locations each at Calicut and Kannur were visited. During the survey, samples were

taken from spice markets, stored ginger samples and field samples at the time of harvest from planters

in a random manner. From each lot, one kilogram of the sample was weighed and sorted for

symptoms showing dry rot and eye rot diseases.

Dry rot is characterized by the presence of black fungal growth of Macrophomina phaseolina inside

the rhizomes and eye rot is characterized by the rotting of the young emerging sprouts due to

Fusarium oxysporum. Survey report is given in Table 1. The survey clearly revealed that dry rot or

eye rot is not a serious problem in ginger. Among the fifteen samples observed, dry rot was observed

in only two samples (13%) in a very low intensity. The fungus enters the rhizomes through cut

portions or points damaged by pests. Fresh and healthy rhizomes stored with proper aeration are

found free from dry rot or eye rot. Similarly rhizomes treated with a combination of insecticide and

fungicide, which in turn will protect the cut open portion of the rhizomes from external infection also

showed comparatively negligible incidence. The intensity of the disease is found to be below the

economic threshold level.

Table 1 Survey for dry rot and eye rot diseases

Location Eye rot

Dry rot

Pest (Shrinked rhizome)

Treatments

Wyanad 1. Venugopala Menon , Puthalathu house, Thariode 2. George , Kavumvayal 3. Prabhakaran, Koovakkal 4.Vijayakumar, Pallikkunnil. Pulpally 5. Market sample, Pulpally 6. Market sample, Pulpally 7. Market sample , Pulpally 8. P M Paul , Nadavayal 9. Sasi , Mathalyil, Wyanad Calicut 10. Cheriyan, Mathirampally, Maramchatty (Plot 1) 11. Cheriyan, Mathirampally, Maramchatty (Plot 2)

12. IISR farm, Peruvannamuzhy Kannur 13. CP Mathew Cherukavungal 14. Joy George, Kallikkadavu (Plot1) 15. Joy George, Kallikkadavu (Plot2)

- - - - 8.5% - - - 6% - - 5% - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - 7% - - -

- +++ ++ - + + + + - + scales ++(Boring holes through the tip of meristem ++ - - -

Rhizomes treated with Monocrotophos 0.2% &Metalaxyl+ Mancozeb 0.2% Untreated Rhizomes Untreated Rhizomes No plant protection chemicals applied during growing stage. Fertilizer (17:17:17 complex) and cow dung applied twice. Rhizomes were very healthy Seed dressing with Quinalphos will be done 10 days before sowing (Only cowdung application in the field) Fuaradan applied just after germination, No fungicides applied No chemicals applied, Cow dung slurry, Bonemeal, Urea and Potash were applied in the field No treatments Rhizomes treated with Quinalphos and Mancozeb before of storage Rhizomes treated @ mancozeb 3gm and Quinalphos 3ml/litre No treatments No treatments

2. Studies on etiology and disease development: The external symptom of the disease appears as shrinkage of

the rhizomes on storage. The affected rhizomes show invariably black fungal growth in the cut end of the

rhizome, which on cutting open will reveal the extended growth of the fungus inside. In advanced stages of

infection, the infected areas will be reoccupied by mites which multiply and leave the fiber portion intact. The

fungus on re- inoculation to rhizomes under controlled conditions of storage reproduced the original symptoms .

But the crop is not susceptible to the fungus in the growing period . This is proved by inoculating the fungal

sclerotia into soil prior to the sowing of rhizomes. This rhizomes after harvest and storage showed the presence

of dry rot infection .

a) Isolation and identification of the pathogen(s) from samples collected from different locations and also

storage rots

The diseased specimens collected from different ginger growing areas of Calicut, Kanoor, Wyanad

and Karnataka areas were studied in the laboratory. Microscopic observation and culturing of the specimens in

specific media were done. The organisms obtained in culture were re inoculated to ginger seeds to test for

pathogenicity under varying conditions. The pathogenicity proved Koch�s postulates . Using this method,

Macrophomina species was found as the causative organism for dry rot disease. The fungus appears only during

the storage period in the rhizomes following the damage of the seeds by mechanical means. The fungus is found to

be non- infective to the crop under normal field conditions.

Fusarium oxysporum was identified as the cause of eye rot disease of ginger. The disease occurs

during the storage period. Heaping the rhizomes having meristamatic buds leads to rotting of growing bud (eyes)

by Fusarium sp. in most cases. Eye rot mostly occurs only in the lower layers of heaped rhizomes. Upper layers

of the stored rhizomes are relatively unaffected. Carbendazim and SAAF(a combination product of Mancozeb

with Carbendazim; (Mancozeb 63%+ Carbendazim12%) were found to be inhibitory even at 50 ppm of the

product when compared to Mancozeb, Ridomil, Bordeaux mixture or COC, which have no effect even at 500ppm

tested Seven fungicides viz. Metalaxyl( Ridomil mancozeb), Mancozeb (Indofil M45, Copper oxychloride,

Carbendazim Bavistin), Bordeaux mixture, Mancozeb+Carbendazim (Saaf) at different concentrations ranging

from 50-500ppm were tested against these pathogens such as Fusarium oxysporum, and Macrophomina sp.

under invitro conditions and the ED 50 value was established (Table �1)Carbendazim and SAAF(a combination

of Mancozeb- Carbendazim having Mancozeb 63%+ Carbendazim12%) were found to be inhibitory even at 50

ppm of the product when compared to Mancozeb, Ridomil, Bordeaux mixture or COC, which have no effect even

at 500ppm tested

Colletotrichum, Phoma and Pestalotiopsis species were isolated from leaf spot specimens collected

from Peruvannamuzhy ,Wyanad and Kannoor areas respectively and pathogenicity proved

Table-2 ED 50 value of different fungicides

Table-3 In vitro Effect of fungicides against Phoma sp causing

leaf spot disease of ginger.

Treatments Concentrations Phoma sp. 50 100 250 500 Ridomil 27.78 31.250 41.667 40.97 Indofil 36.113 33.33 34.03 37.50 Coc 0.0 0.0 2.843 22.22 Bavistin 100 100 100.0 100 BM 25.0 41.667 63.89 81.25 Saaf 100 100 100 100 CV** 11.67 7.07 5.77 6.07

** Significant at 1% level

Table -4 In vitro Effect of fungicides against Pestalotiopsis sp,. causing leaf spot disease of ginger

Fungicides F. oxysporum Macrophomina phaseolina

Metalaxyl 1250 ppm Not effective at 500ppm

Mancozeb 1070 ppm Not effective at 500ppm

Copperoxychloride Not effective at

500ppm

Not effective at 500ppm

Carbendazim 50 ppm 50 ppm

Bordeaux mixture 100 ppm

Mancozeb+Carbendazim 50 ppm 50ppm

Treatments Concentrations Pestalotiopsis 50 100 250 500 Ridomil 16.0 15.33 20.00 21.33 Indofil 6.0 10.0 19.53 28.67 Coc 7.0 19.0 16.0 23.33 Bavistin 100 100.0 100 100.0 BM 10 8.0 44.67 24.0 Saaf 100 100 100 100 CV 5.27 3.71 .81 5.71

Table -5 In vitro Effect of fungicides against Macrophomina sp.

Table 6 Table �7 In vitro Effect of fungicides against Fusarium sp eye rot disease of ginger

Table 6 2 In vitro Effect of fungicides against Pythium sp

.

Treatments Concentrations Macrophomina sp.

50 100 250 500

Ridomil 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Indofil 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Coc 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Bavistin 100 100 100 100

BM 0.0 62.59 71.85 74.073

Saaf 100 100 100 100

CV 0.0 2.40 2.52 2.87

Treatments Concentrations Fusarium sp. 50 100 250 500

Ridomil 10.53 9.65 12.28 20.03 Indofil 11.40 9.65 8.48 23.35 Coc 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 Bavistin 100 100 100 100 BM 0.0 0.00 1.75 3.34 Saaf 100 100 0.0 100 CV 8.8 3.8 5.9 4.91

Treatments Concentrations Pythium sp. 50 100 250 500

Ridomil 49.27 52.96 55.92 77.0

Indofil 0.0 0 0 0

Coc 0.0 0 72.59 93.33

Bavistin 0.0 0 4.817 34.44

BM 10.37 11.11 64.817 82.59

Saaf 15.19 17.11 16.67 26.927

CV 8.86 6.06 4.63 2.81

Table- 8 ED50 Values of different fungicides for checking the growth of various pathogens of ginger

b) Studies in relation to disease development using fungicidal treatment from the etiology view point.

A pot culture trial was conducted in relation to disease development using Integrated disease management

strategy from the etiology view point. The experiment consists of two main treatments of planting , viz in

fumigated and non-fumigated soil and four sub treatments for the rhizomes viz. 1) Heat treatment, solarization,

fungicide seed coating and control with out any treatments. After germination, the treatments consists of soil

application of different fungicides, phorate alone and in combination with fungicides, bioagents and PGPR

individually and in combination. The results showed that planting unhealthy or diseased rhizomes leads to

disease even after seed treatment with any one of the methods. Treatment of diseased rhizomes with steam is not

advisable, as it will kill the germinating sprouts. All together the disease incidence was comparatively negligible

in treatment where absolutely healthy rhizomes are sown followed by treatment of the rhizomes with fungicide

coating .

Yield data

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

B A

Treatments

Yiel

d(kg

)

Potphos bav th pgpr th+pgpr

phorate bav+pho Ako+pho COC BM

COC+pho BM+Ph con

Fig-1 Effect of fumigation (A) and non-fumigation (B) of soil with differential treatment of rhizomes of ginger

Viz. 1. heat treatment 2. solarization 3.Conventional treatment with fungicide and insecticide before storage and

4. Untreated control

Pot culture experiment:

To prove nature of infection by Pythium, Macrophomina and Fusarium, a pot culture study was conducted

with artificial inoculation of Pythium sp, Macrophomina and Fusarium individually and in combination with

Fungicides ED 50 value (in ppm) Fusarium

oxysporum Macrophomina phaseolina

Phomasp. Pestalotipsis Pythium myriotylum

Metalaxyl 1250 - 609 1172 100 Mancozeb 1070 - 667 872 - COC - - 1125 1072 -250 Carbendazim 50 50 50 50 726 Bordeaux mixture 100 250 559.66 192 Mancozeb+ Carbendazim

50 50 50 50 926

Pythium sp. in pot prior to sowing of seeds. Fungicides such as, Bavistin, Saaf ,Ridomil and Mancozeb

individually and along with Rogor was given as differential treatments. The experiment consists of eight

treatments, with ten pots per treatment. Fungicides were given as seed treatment as well as soil drenching and

repeated the drenching twice. First soil application was given at the time of sowing, and other two applications

at one month interval from germination.

Table 9: Disease incidence due to various fungi under artificially inoculated conditions

Table 10 Effect of treatments on yield due to various fungi under artificially inoculated conditions

Conclusion: Application of Rogor along with Ridomil 0.125 % is found highly effective in controlling soft

rot of ginger caused by Pythium sp. It is clear from the experiment that Fusarium or Macrophomina sp. as

such is not pathogenic to ginger under field conditions. Secondly when the pathogens are inoculated together,

there is a decrease in the disease incidence and there by an increase in the yield. This may be due to the

mutual antagonism existing among the pathogens. This is proved by in vitro experiments. Under in vitro

Treatments Concentration. Pythium Pythium+ Macrophomina +Fusarium

Fusarium Macrophomina

T1 Rogor 2ml/l 39.33 17.11 0.48 2.30 T2 Carbendazim 2.5g/l 64.33 38.44 0.49 2.4 T3 Ridomil MZ 1.25g/l 5.667 2.33 1.36 0.43 T4 Rogor, Carbendazim 2ml +2.5g /l 16.33 9.24 0.0 2.0 T5 Rogor+ Ridomil MZ 2ml + 1.25g/l 14.33 1.853 0.44 2.67 T6 Rogor, carbendazim& Ridomil MZ

2ml 2.5g+1.25/l

22.33 8.6 0.0 0.0

T7 Rogor+ Saaf 2ml+ 2.5g/l 41.78 14.833 0.44 3.45 Control 64.22 45.443 1.19 8.93 lsd 7.262 7.285

Treatments Concen tration

Pythium Pythium+ Macrophomina +Fusarium

Fusarium Macrophomina

T1 Rogor 2ml/l 0180 AB 0705 ABC 1845 A 2825 A T2 Carbendazim 2.5g/l 0065 A 0190 A 2455 A 2295 A T3 Ridomil MZ 1.25g/l 0545 CD 0970 BC 2660 A 2460 A T4 Rogor, Carbendazim

2ml +2.5g /l

0540 CD 0775 BC 2225 A 2040 A

T5 Rogor+ Ridomil MZ

2ml + 1.25g/l

0645 D 1255 C 1775 A 1380 A

T6 Rogor, carbendazim& Ridomil MZ

2ml 2.5g+1.25/l

0625 D 1095 BC 2400 A 1360 A

T7 Rogor+ Saaf 2ml+ 2.5g/l 0282 ABC 0685 ABC 2235 A 0401 A T8 Control No

treatments 0410 BCD

0672 AB 2080 A 0815 A

conditions the pathogens are found to be antagonistic to each other. Similarly as the soft rot disease is

aggravated by the presence of insect larvae of Mimigrella sp., seed treatment with a systemic insecticide is

found useful in reducing the disease incidence.

Field trial for the management of dry rot disease using chemical, biological and IDM strategies

Field trial was done in Peruvannamuzhy farm for the evaluation of dry rot and eye rot disease of ginger. The

experiment was designed in RBD with 13 treatments. Stored rhizomes treated with Mancozeb and Quinalphos

was used as the seed material. First application of the chemicals was given as seed dressing and soil drenching

at the time of sowing and subsequent applications after germination. A third application was given one month

after germination. Observations were taken on disease incidence at regular intervals. No disease incidence of

any sort was observed during the trial period. Observations on dry rot and eye rot disease incidence were

taken two weeks after harvest.

Table-11 Treatment details

Treatmentsments

First Application Seed treatment + Soil drenching

Second Application Soil drenching

Third Application - Soil drenching

T1 Potassium Phosphonate(0.3%) Akomin

Akomin Akomin

T2 Carbendazim (0.2%) -Bavistin Carbendazim Carbendazim

T3 Trichoderma harzianum (500 g/bed) Trichoderma harzianum Trichoderma harzianum

T4 PGPR IISR 51(48 hr old culture in Nutrient broth diluted 10 times and applied @ 2 lit/bed

PGPR IISR 51 PGPR IISR 51

T5 Trichoderma harzianum (500 g/bed)+ PGPR IISR 51

Trichoderma harzianum (500 g/bed)+ PGPR IISR 51

Trichoderma harzianum (500 g/bed)+ PGPR IISR 51

T6 Phorate(No seed treatment, only soil application @ 100g/bed

Phorate Phorate

T7 Carbendazim+ Phorate Carbendazim + Phorate Carbendazim + Phorate

T8 Akomin+ Phorate Akomin+ Phorate Akomin+ Phorate T9 Copper oxy chloride(0.2%)(COC) Copper oxy chloride(0.2%) Copperoxy

chloride(0.2%) T10 Bordeaux mixture 1% Bordeaux mixture 1% Bordeaux mixture 1%

T11 COC(0.2% +Phorate COC +Phorate COC +Phorate T12 BM+ Phorate BM+ Phorate BM+ Phorate T13 Control (No treatments)

Table-12 Effect of soil application of chemicals and bioagents in controlling dry rot diseases

(Field trial)

The fungus Macrophomina phaseolina appears only during the storage period in the rhizomes

following the damage of the rhizomes by mechanical means. Itis found to be non- infective to the crop under

normal field conditions. Therefore soil application of the chemicals or bioagents is not required for controlling

dry rot incidence. Fusarium oxysporum was identified as the cause of eye rot disease of ginger. The disease

mostly occurs during the storage period. Heaping the rhizomes leads to rotting of growing buds (eyes) by

Fusarium sp. and mostly develops only in the lower layers of heaped rhizomes. Upper layers of the stored

rhizomes are relatively unaffected.

2. Screening of germplasm accessions for soft rot and dry rot disease

For soft rot disease, the pathogen was artificially inoculated to pots already planted with ginger. Observations

on pseudostem infection was monitored regularly and collected data on number of pseudostem infected among

the total pseudostems produced . Finally fresh yield was taken . Resistance / susceptibility was measured by

taking high yielders with >20% disease incidence. Such selected lines will again be subjected to secondary

screening and tertiary screening for confirmation of tolerance. For dry rot disease the Macrophomina was

inoculated to pots already planted with ginger. Observations on infection were taken after harvest (post harvest

storage for two weeks). The results are presented below

542 accessions of ginger were screened against soft rot disease caused by Pythiuim sp. A rating of 0-5 scale-

( 0 = 0-5%, 1 = 6-25%, 3 = 26-50%, 5 = >50%) was given to accessions for short listing moderately

tolerant lines. But the yield in the moderately tolerant accessions were comparatively less. So for the purpose

of selecting high yielding and moderately tolerant lines, accessions were sorted with > 25 % infection having

high yield . Accordingly only nine accessions viz. 6, 17, 130, 155, 208, 261, 269, 271 and 274 were selected as

moderately tolerant in the preliminary screening.

Tratments Details Treatments

Yield(Fresh wt. Kg)

Dry rot incidence

Eye rot incidence

T1 Akomin 3160 0.06 23.42 T2 Bavistin 4045 0.12 17.80 T3 Tricho 4530 1.69 20.55 T4 PGPR 3365 0.56 13.97 T5 Tricho+Pgpr 3195 0.75 17.10 T6 Phorate 3885 0.51 10.35 T7 Bav+Pho 3345 0 7.89 T8 Ako+Pho 3335 0 7.29 T9 COC 4105 0 11.80 T10 BM 4700 0 19.15 T11 COC+Pho 3845 0 7.80 T12 BM+Pho 4220 0 15.17 T13 Control 5555 0.72 13.32 c.d. (p=0.05) 1275

Table-13 Percentage disease incidence in each accession (2002-2003)

Rating 0-5 scale- 0 = 0-5%, 1 = 6-25%, 3 = 26-50%, 5 = >50%

Acc: No

% Infection

Acc: No

% Infection

Acc: No

% Infection

Acc: No

% Infection

Acc: No

% Infection

Acc: No % Infection

1 100 43 28.57 86 41.66 144 41.67 205 6.67 243 66.66 2 46.47 44 10.0 87 30.76 145 8.01 206 0.0 244 42.85 3 42.85 45 15.38 89 64.28 146 72.72 207 75.0 245 37.5 4 9.82 46 75.0 90 8.33 151 100.0 208 0.0 246 2.88 5 5.56 48 62.5 91 14.28 153 66.67 209 42.85 247 9.09 6 0.0 49 100.0 92 57.14 154 45.45 210 28.57 248 42.85 7 61.53 50 40.0 93 22.22 155 5.0 211 30.77 249 50.0 8 46.67 51 40.0 94 38.46 157 28.57 212 53.85 9 35.71 53 52.94 95 10.53 158 50.0 213 41.67 11 55.0 56 50.0 96 22.22 159 50.0 214 72.72 12 50.0 57 0.0 97 0.0 160 22.22 215 54.54 13 33.33 58 30.0 98 8.33 162 81.81 216 12.5 14 40.40 59 55.55 101 6.67 164 33.33 217 50.0 15 33.33 60 12.5 103 75.0 165 50.0 218 90.0 17 9.09 61 26.08 104 53.84 167 53.85 219 41.66 18 37.5 62 14.29 105 5.0 171 20.0 220 15.38 20 85.71 63 75.0 106 25.0 176 30 221 44.44 21 22.22 64 7.14 107 0.0 178 25.0 222 36.36 22 25.0 65 84.60 108 11.76 179 33.33 223 63.63 23 63.63 66 15.38 109 58.82 181 66.66 224 20.0 24 6.25 67 53.33 110 87.5 182 50.0 225 85.71 25 18.75 68 42.85 111 5.88 184 18.18 226 57.14 26 62.5 69 8.33 114 50.0 187 78.57 227 15.38 28 46.66 70 57.14 115 53.33 190 34.92 228 66.67 29 87.5 71 55.55 116 33.33 191 25 229 50.0 30 15.0 72 38.39 117 50.0 192 13.64 230 100 31 0.0 73 28.57 121 100.0 193 23.08 231 62.5 32 0.0 74 50.0 127 33.33 194 50.0 232 28.57 33 0.0 75 25.0 128 100.0 195 38.46 233 54.55 34 36.58 76 7.14 129 44.44 196 100 234 57.14 35 12.5 77 14.28 130 0.0 197 9.09 235 46.15 36 20.0 78 44.44 131 31.76 198 23.08 236 57.14 37 5.5 79 80.0 134 30.76 199 66.66 237 100.0 38 21.42 81 62.5 135 92.86 200 62.5 238 54.54 39 12.5 82 100.0 137 100.0 201 70.0 239 45.45 40 36.36 83 21.42 139 50.0 202 83.33 240 30.0 41 33.33 84 90.0 141 90 203 36.36 241 50.0 42 8.33 85 6.66 142 25 204 66.67 242 11.11

Table-14 Percentage disease incidence in each accession (2003-2004)

4. Recording incidence of streak virus in the germplasm

Sixhundred and fifty germplasm accessions under the conservatory were scored for viral s+ymptoms under

natural conditions, 281 accessions were found to be infected by chlorotic leaf streak virus and 369 accessions

were found free from disease symptoms

. Table- 15 Ginger accessions found infected with virus under natural conditions

3 27 54 78 94 215 298 399 468 541 512 607 5 29 55 82 95 227 340 402 470 551 513 614 6 30 56 85 96 236 343 403 471 552 514 615 7 31 57 101 135 237 346 408 476 559 517 621 9 32 58 107 139 248 353 410 478 560 518 622 11 33 59 108 141 249 354 422 479 562 519 629 15 36 60 109 154 250 355 424 482 573 524 654 17 37 61 111 160 254 356 425 483 576 528 657 19 41 62 114 181 256 357 428 486 578 584 20 45 66 115 182 270 372 430 487 581 585 21 46 68 116 191 275 375 434 490 582 586 22 49 71 117 192 277 386 435 491 495 589 23 51 72 121 194 289 388 436 535 499 591 24 52 76 128 195 291 397 446 539 505 600 25 53 77 129 198 292 398 467 540 509 602

Sl.No

Acc.No

% Disease incidence

Yield (g)

Sl.No

Acc.No

% Disease incidence

Yield (g)

Sl.No Acc. No

% Disease incidence

Yield (g)

1 251 0 140 21 295 20 145 41 464 25 165 2 261 0 210 22 341 11.11 100 42 467 14.29 25 3 264 0 135 23 342 16.67 80 43 472 25 90 4 273 0 145 24 348 25 45 44 477 10 45 5 274 0 200 25 349 8.33 110 45 480 20 60 6 291 0 50 26 369 16.67 100 46 487 5.88 45 7 357 0 30 27 376 20 65 47 505 12.5 95 8 375 0 120 28 385 16.67 5 48 515 23.08 75 9 394 0 90 29 400 11.11 55 49 523 20 70 10 434 0 10 30 401 20 140 50 524 18.18 25 11 526 0 15 31 403 15.38 70 51 529 12.5 105 12 527 0 50 32 409 20 85 52 531 14.29 55 13 259 22.22 105 33 411 25 30 53 532 14.29 70 14 260 22.22 140 34 416 11.11 55 54 537 7.69 0 15 262 12.5 20 35 419 16.67 55 55 541 25 0 16 269 25 190 36 430 18.18 0 17 271 18.18 180 37 445 16.67 10 18 272 16.67 65 38 447 16.67 50 19 278 14.29 125 39 448 8.33 60 20 294 25 90 40 449 25 20

Dry rot screening :

400 accessions were screened for dry rot resistance under green house conditions , forty five accessions

showed dry rot infection two weeks after harvest. There is no dry rot incidence at the time of harvest

Table-16 Accessions showing ( 0-25 ) infection by Pythium and Macrophomina sp.

Acc: No

Soft rot % Pythium % Infection

Dry rot/ (Macrophomina)

Acc: No Soft rot Pythium ( % Infection) (PY)

Dry rot (Macro phomina)

4 9.82 - 93 22.22 - 5 5.56 + 95 10.53 - 6 0.0 - 96 22.22 - 17 9.09 - 97 0.0 - 21 22.22 + 98 8.33 - 22 25.0 - 101 6.67 - 24 6.25 - 105 5.0 - 25 18.75 - 106 25.0 - 30 15.0 - 107 0.0 - 31 0.0 - 108 11.76 - 32 0.0 - 111 5.88 - 33 0.0 - 130 0.0 - 35 12.5 ++ 142 25 - 36 20.0 + 145 8.01 - 37 5.5 - 155 5.0 - 38 21.42 +++ 160 22.22 - 39 12.5 - 171 20.0 - 42 8.33 - 178 25.0 - 44 10.0 - 184 18.18 - 45 15.38 + 191 25 - 57 0.0 - 192 13.64 - 60 12.5 - 193 23.08 + 61 26.08 + 197 9.09 - 62 14.29 - 198 23.08 + 64 7.14 - 205 6.67 - 66 15.38 - 206 0.0 - 69 8.33 - 208 0.0 + 75 25.0 - 216 12.5 - 76 7.14 + 220 15.38 + 77 14.28 - 224 20.0 + 83 21.42 - 227 15.38 - 85 6.66 - 242 11.11 - 86 41.66 - 246 2.88 + 90 8.33 - 247 9.09 - 91 14.28 +

Efficacy of PGPR�s in controlling soft rot disease of Ginger caused by Pythium sp.

Twenty different isolates of PGPR from the biocontrol repository of IISR Calicut were evaluated for their

efficacy in controlling soft rot disease of ginger both under invitro and invivo conditions. Pot culture( invivo

)experiment was done at Chelavoor with 24 treatments including conventionally used chemical and untreated

control .Three replications were maintained for each treatments. The treatment details are given below.

T1- T20: - Twenty PGPR isolates Viz. � IISR 6, IISR13, IISR 51, IISR 853, IISR 859, IISR 906, IISR907,

IISR909, IISR910, IISR 912, IISR 913, IISR914, IISR 915, IISR147, IISR148, IISR149, IISR150 IISR151,

IISR 152, IISR 153

T 21: RidomilMZ

T22 : Trichoderma harzianum

T 23 : Pathogen alone(P.myriotylum)

T 24 Absolute control

The data were recorded on percentage disease incidence. Mycorrizal colonization , VAM spore load and yield.

The results are presented in Table 17 and 18.

Table �17 In vitro evaluation of Rhizobacteria against Pythium sp

.

Sl.no Isolate Growth /day (mm)

% inhibition

1. IISR 6 11.08 21.81 2. IISR 13 3.58 74.74 3. IISR 51 3.75 73.54 4. IISR 853 6.25 55.89 5. IISR 859 4.25 70.01 6. IISR 906 3.50 75.30 7. IISR 907 3.58 74.74 8. IISR 909 2.17 84.69 9. IISR 910 5.50 61.19 10. IISR 912 4.58 66.13 11. IISR 913 3.67 74.10 12. IISR 914 14.17 0.0 13. IISR 915 3.75 73.54 14. IISR 147 4.92 65.28 15. IISR 148 4.00 71.77 16. IISR 149 4.75 66.48 17. IISR 150 3.83 72.97 18. IISR 151 3.50 75.30 19. IISR 152 10.83 23.57 20. IISR 153 4.00 71.77 21. CONTROL 14.17 -

Table-18 Intensity of root colonization, % root infection, VAM spore load in the soil, disease incidence and

yield

Conclusion:

The data very clearly indicated that certain rhizobacteria influences the growth and yield of ginger by reducing the

disease incidence to minimum. IISR 51, 906, 151, 859 and 915 are such rhizobacteria found to be promising in

reducing the disease incidence below the threshold level.

8221 Achievemments in terms of targets fixed for each activity

1. Survey for the incidence and intensity of fungal and viral diseases.

A survey for dry rot and eye rot disease of ginger was conducted to study the intensity of these diseases in

different ginger growing tracts of Wyanad , Calicut and Kannur. Nine locations in Wyanad, three locations each

at Calicut and Kannur were visited

2.Studies on etiology and disease development

Macrophomina species was found as the causative organism for dry rot disease. The fungus appears only during

the storage period in the rhizomes following the damage of the seeds by mechanical means. The fungus is found to

be non- infective to the crop under normal field conditions.Fusarium oxysporum was identified as the cause of eye

rot disease of ginger. The disease occurs during the storage period. Heaping the rhizomes having meristamatic

Treatments Intensity of root colonization

% root colonization

*Spore load/g

% disease incidence

Yield(g)

1 IISR 6 +++ 100 32.5 CDEF 32.223 26.00 2 IISR 13 + 36.36 16.0 FG 26.787 55.0 3 IISR 51 +++ 91.67 61.5 A 4.167 A 66.667 4 IISR 853 - 0 21.0 EFG 33.33 35.00 5 IISR 859 ++ 70.83 34.0CDE 14.167 26.667 6 IISR 906 + 16.67 32.0CDEF 3.33 A 43.33 7 IISR 907 ++ 100 27.0ABC 45.717 23.33 8 IISR 909 ++ 38.46 12.5 BCD 75 0.00 9 IISR 910 +++ 90.0 49.0 ABC 55.56 13.667 10 IISR 912 ++ 66.67 55.0 AB 41.67 41.00 11 IISR 913 ++ 83.33 53.5 AB 20 50.00 12 IISR 914 ++ 87.50 61.0 A 16.39 22.667 13 IISR 915 ++ 60.0 60.0 A 14.813 71.667 14IISR 147 + 62.50 16.5 FG 33.597 21.667 15 IISR 149 +++ 62.50 41.0 BCD 41.93 13.33 16 IISR 150 + 41.67 17.5 EFG 36.19 20.00 17 IISR 148 ++ 45.83 10.0 G 33.13 22.00 18 IISR 151 ++ 50.0 31.0 DEF 6.667 A 43.33 19 IISR 152 ++ 100 55.0 AB 34.167 23.33 20 IISR 153 + 36.36 18.0 EFG 21.39 48.33 21 Ridomil MZ + 36.36 11.0 G 36.7 24.00 22 T. harzianum ++ 61.11 18.0EFG 72.85 19.33 23 Pythium alone + 45.0 31.0DEF 67.14 6.67 24 Absolute Control

+ 40.0 11.0 G 0.00 66.67

LSD at 0.05% 13.987 16.054

buds leads to rotting of growing bud (eyes) by Fusarium sp. in most cases. Eye rot mostly occurs only in the

lower layers of heaped rhizomes. Upper layers of the stored rhizomes are relatively unaffected. Carbendazim and

SAAF(a combination product of Mancozeb with Carbendazim; (Mancozeb 63%+ Carbendazim12%) were found

to be inhibitory even at 50 ppm of the product when compared to Mancozeb, Ridomil, Bordeaux mixture or COC,

which have no effect even at 500ppm tested

The results showed that planting unhealthy or diseased rhizomes leads to disease even after seed treatment.

Treatment of diseased rhizomes with steam is not advisable, as it will kill the meristamatic buds. All together the

disease incidence was comparatively negligible in treatment where absolutely healthy rhizomes are sown

followed by treatment of the rhizomes with fungicide coating

Application of Rogor along with Ridomil 0.125 % is found highly effective in controlling soft rot of ginger

caused by Pythium sp. It is clear from the experiment that Fusarium or Macrophomina sp. as such is not

pathogenic to ginger under field conditions. Secondly when the pathogens are inoculated together, there is a

decrease in the disease incidence and there by an increase in the yield. This may be due to the mutual antagonism

existing among the pathogens. This is proved by in vitro experiments. Under in vitro conditions the pathogens

are found to be antagonistic to each other. As the soft rot disease is aggravated by the presence of insect larvae of

Mimigrella sp., seed treatment with a systemic insecticide is found useful in reducing the disease incidence.

2.Screening germplasm accessions for soft rot and dry rot disease 542 accessions of ginger were screened

against soft rot disease caused by Pythiuim sp. a rating of 0-5 scale-( 0 = 0-5%, 1 = 6-25%, 3 = 26-50%,

5 = >50%) was given to accessions for shortlisting moderately tolerant lines.

4. Recording incidence of streak virus in the germplasm:153 out of 660 accessions showed the symptoms of

chlorotic streak virus , rest of the accessions did not show any visible symptoms

8222 Questions � Answered

Causal organism associated with dry rot and eye rot disease of ginger is Macrophomina sp. and Fusarium sp.

Respectively.The fungiicides viz. carnendazim and carbendazim Mancozeb mixture even at 50 ppm is

inhibitory to the fungus under invitro conditions.

8223 Process/Product/Technology/Developed

8224 Practical Utility (Not more than 150 words)

Survey for the eye rot and dry rot disease clearly revealed that these two diseases are of very negligible.

Management practices under field conditions are not necessary to mange the disease. These diseases can be

eliminated through proper storage. Storing rhizomes with out injury will help in reducing the disease incidence to

zero. Carbendazim and SAAF(a combination of Mancozeb- Carbendazim having Mancozeb 63%+

Carbendazim12%) were found to be inhibitory even at 50 ppm

The Rhizobacetrial isolates found promising in controlling soft rot disease of ginger can be developed for the

biological control of soft rot disease of ginger caused by Pythium sp.Glomus sps. Was found to be the

predominating mycorrhizae associated with ginger.This vesicular arbuscular mycorrhizae (VAM) associated with

ginger can be multiplied and fortified with soil while planting rhizomes which enhances the root development

which in turn increases the yield.

8225 Constraints, if any Nil

823 Publications and Material Development

(One copy each to be supplied with this proforma.)

1. Influence of PGPR (Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria) on VAM (VesicularArbuscular

mycorrhizae) colonization in ginger and their combined effect on soft rot disease - M.Sc dessertation

2. Pathogenicity and Characterization of Pythium sp. causing soft rot disease of ginger- M.Sc dissertation

8232 Popular articles

8233 Reports

Annual report 2003, 2004

8234 Seminars, Conderences and workshops(relevant to the project) in which the scientists have

participated.(List abstracts forwarded)- N

824 Infrastructural facilities developed

(Details of field , laboratory, note books and final material and their location)-Available at Biocontrol Unit of

IISR Calicut

825 Comments/suggestions of project leader regarding possible future line of work that may be taken up arising

out of this project

The incidences of diseases such as eye rot and dry rot are very negligible and below the economic threshold

level. With this existing project the etiology of the disease was proved , fungicides were evaluated and results

presented . More studies are warranted on soft rot disease of ginger which is the major problem in ginger

growing tracts. Hence a full fledged institute project has been taken for the management of the rhizome rot

complex of ginger and turmeric

PART - IV PROJECT EXPENDITURE

(Summary) Year 2002-2004

830 Total Recurring Expenditure

8301 Salaries: (Designation with pay scale) I) Scientific (Sr. Scientist ) 12000-420-18300 : 2, 40,000 ii) Technical (T3) 4500-125-7000 : 84755

iii) Supporting : 59394 iv) Wages : 7626

Sub Total : 3,91,775.00 8302 Consumables

I) Chemicals : 41228 ii) Glasswares : 37535

iii) Others : 8750 Sub Total : 87513

8303 Travel : 8000 830 Miscellaneous : 49450

(Other costs) 8305 Sub total : 5,36,737

(Recurring) 831 Total Non-recurring Expenditure

(Equipments & works) I)

:Nil ii) iii)

832 Total

(830 and 831) : 5,36,737

Part-V : Declaration

This is to certify that the final report of the project has been submitted in full consultation with the

project workers as per the approved objectives and technical programme and the relevant records,

note books, materials are available for the same.

Signature of the Project Investigator:

Co Investigators:

1.A Ishwara Bhat

2. Santhosh J Eapen

Signature and comments of the Head of the

Division/Section

Signature and Comments of the

Joint Director (Research)

Signature and Comments of the Director