Agricultural Science Digest

  • Chief EditorArvind kumar

  • Print ISSN 0253-150X

  • Online ISSN 0976-0547

  • NAAS Rating 5.52

  • SJR 0.156

Frequency :
Bi-monthly (February, April, June, August, October and December)
Indexing Services :
BIOSIS Preview, Biological Abstracts, Elsevier (Scopus and Embase), AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Submit

Agricultural Science Digest, volume 30 issue 1 (march 2010) : 54 - 56

EFFECT OF RATE OF APPLICATION OF FUNGAL AND BACTERIAL ANTAGONISTS ON BACTERIAL LEAF BLIGHT OF RICE

Gokil Prasad Gangwar, A.P. Sinha*
1Centre of Advanced Studies in Plant Pathology, G.B. Pant Univ. of Agric and Technology Pantnagar 263 145, India

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Gangwar Prasad Gokil, Sinha* A.P. (2024). EFFECT OF RATE OF APPLICATION OF FUNGAL AND BACTERIAL ANTAGONISTS ON BACTERIAL LEAF BLIGHT OF RICE. Agricultural Science Digest. 30(1): 54 - 56. doi: .

ABSTRACT

Four formulations of bioagents namely, T. harzianum (rice leaf isolate), PBA-2 (P. fluorescens
PBAP-27), PBA-3 (T. harzianum PBAT-43 + P. fluorescens PBAP-27) and Sudocel (P. fluorescens)
were tested at three rates of application (5, 10 and 15 gram per liter) against bacterial leaf blight of
rice under glasshouse condition. At 15 g/ liter of application, all bioagents were found effective over
chemical treatment in decreasing disease severity and in increasing grain yield and 1000 grain
weight. Maximum reduction in disease severity by 52.12, 43.26 and 37.94 per cent was exhibited by
T. harzianum at 15, 10 and 5 gram per liter, respectively. PBA-2, PBA-3 and T. harzianum showed
higher grain yield over chemical treatment.

REFERENCES

  1. Babu, A. G. C. and Thind, B. S. (2005). Annals SriLanka, Dept. Agric. 7: 23-37
  2. Chan, W. L., et al. (1990. Acta Agric. Unive. Zhejiangensis. 2: 61-67
  3. Kauffman, H. E., et al. (1973) Plant Dis. Rep. 57: 537–541.
  4. Manmeet, M. and Thind, B.S. (2002) Plant Dis. Res. 17(1): 21-28.
  5. Palaniyandi, V., et al. (2006) Canadian J. Microbiol 52(1): 56-65.
  6. Rangarajan, S., et al. (2003) Plant and soil. 251(1): 73-82
  7. Sindhan, G. S et al. (1997) Plant Dis. Res. 12(1): 29-32
  8. Srivastava, D.N. (1972). Indian Phytopath. 26:1-16
Reviewed By

Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    Editorial Board

    View all (0)