Comparative study of different application methodsof 14C-Fosthiazate in tomato plants

Nitesh Sharma • Surendra Kumar

Received: 18 June 2011 / Published online: 31 July 2011

� Akademiai Kiado, Budapest, Hungary 2011

Abstract A comparative study of different application

methods of nematicide 14C-Fosthiazate was done for the

uptake in tomato plants in two varieties Pusa Ruby and

Pusa Early Dwarf. The application methods used for the

research purpose are seed treatment, soil supplication and

drip application in presence and absence of surfactant

(Tween-80).It as found that percent absorption was the

highest in the drip irrigation method in presence of sur-

factant. The percent uptake of 14C-Fosthiazate in two

varieties of tomato plants was found to be higher in Pusa

Early Dwarf in all the treatment methods.

Keywords Fosthiazate � Lycopersicum esculatum �Nematicide � 14C-radiotracer � Uptake � Tomato

Introduction

As with damage caused by other crop pests and pathogens,

the extent of crop losses caused by nematodes is a topic of

debate [1]. The most comprehensive estimate was obtained

in a 1986 survey incorporating the responses of 371 ne-

matologists in 75 countries [4]. Estimates of nematode

damage to specific crops ranged from 3.3 to 20.6%, with a

mean of 12.3%. Annual production losses at the farm gate

(in year 2000 dollars) were $121 billion globally and $9.1

billion in the United States. Developing nations reported

greater yield loss percentages than did developed countries

[3].

Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) is one of the

most important vegetable crops grown throughout the

world for consumption in various forms. A number of viral,

bacterial, fungal and nematode pathogens attack tomato

and cause diseases of economic consequences.

Plant parasites (nematodes) are one important limiting

factor to different crops production in temperate, tropical

and sub-tropical agriculture [2, 3].

Root–knot nematodes (Meloidogyne species), reniform

nematodes (Rotylenchulus reniformis), cyst nematode

(Globodera rostochiensis) are known to attack tomato in

many different parts of the world. Tomato is regarded as

the most favourable host for root–knot nematodes [1, 6].

A comparative study of different application methods of

nematicide 14C-Fosthiazate was done for the study of

uptake in tomato plants in two varieties—Pusa Ruby and

Pusa Early Dwarf. The application methods used for the

research are seed treatment, soil application and drip

application in the presence and absence of a surfactant

(Tween-80). The nematode has been reported to attack

more than 3,000 host plants and responsible for supply of

food.

All India Co-ordinated Research Project (nematodes)

studied the percent yield loss due root-knot nematodes in

various vegetable crops and estimated to be 28–47% in

tomato, 26.2–50.0 in brinjal, 19.7–33.0 in chillies, 6.0–9.0

in okra, 38.0–47.2 in bitter gourd and 18.0–33.0 in melon.

There is a 43.48 and 28.60% loss due to Melidogyne

incognita in French bean and cowpea, respectively [7].

N. Sharma

Department of Chemistry, G. B. Pant University of Agriculture

and Technology, Pantnagar 263145, Uttarakhand, India

S. Kumar (&)

Radiations & Isotopic Tracers Laboratory, G. B. Pant University

of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar 263145,

Uttarakhand, India

e-mail: sk_tyagi@rediff.com

123

J Radioanal Nucl Chem (2011) 290:227–229

DOI 10.1007/s10967-011-1322-5

Experiment

Application of Fosthiazate

The application of 14C-Fosthiazate [(RS)-S-Sec-bentyle-o-

ethyl 2 oxo 1,3-thiazolidin-3-yl phosphonothioate)] which

was procured from BRIT,BARC Mumbai was done by taking

150 mL of Hoagland’s nutrient solution and in this solution

60 lL of radiolabelled 14C-Fosthiazate solution which con-

tained 3.24 microcurie radioactivity and 100 lL of surfactant

was added in the application with surfactant treatment and in

case of without surfactant application 100 lL of distilled

water was added to make same volumes. Now, this solution

was applied through soil treatment and drip application.

For seed treatment the 5 mL of nutrient solution was

taken and 60 lL of radiolabelled Fosthiazate was added

and 100 lL of surfactant was added in the application with

surfactant and in case of without surfactant application

100 lL of water was added. The seeds are now sown in the

petri dish and kept in dark for the germination process after

the germination the seedlings are transplanted to the pots

filed with soil. The counting was done by LKB RackBeta

1217 liquid scintillation counter and quench correction was

done by ESCR (external standard channel ratio method.

Results and discussion

Percent uptake of 14C-Fosthiazate through soil

application

From the data given in Table 1 and depicted in Fig. 1a and

b it is clear that the percent uptake of 14C-Fosthiazate in

both the roots and shoot was more in the presence of sur-

factant (Tween80) in both the varieties of tomato. The

surfactant causes the increase in the surface area the

nematicide for the uptake and which causes the higher

uptake of nematicide in the tomato plants.

Percent uptake of 14C-Fosthiazate through drip

application

From the data presented in Table 2 and depicted in Fig. 2a

and b it is clear that the uptake of 14C-Fosthiazate under

drip application was higher in var. Pusa Early Dwarf than

Pusa Ruby in both the treatment methods with and without

the surfactant. The value of % uptake of Fosthiazate in

presence of surfactant for roots was found to vary from

0.020 to 0.047 and for shoot from 0.176 to 0.489 and in

without surfactant for roots 0.021 to 0.040 and for shoot

from 0.22 to 0.40. The surfactant effect is more on %

uptake of Fosthiazate in shoot than roots.

Percent uptake of 14C-Fosthiazate through seeds

treatment

The percent uptake of 14C-Fosthiazate through seed treat-

ment by soaking the seeds in the 14C-Fosthiazate nutrient

Table 1 Application of 14C-Fosthiazate through soil in tomato plants (var. Pusa Ruby and Pusa Early Dwarf) with and without surfactant

(TWEEN-80)

Variety % Uptake of 14C-Fosthiazate with surfactant % Uptake of 14C-Fosthiazate without surfactant

Roots Shoots Roots Shoots

Pusa Ruby 0.014 0.042 0.011 0.036

Pusa Early Dwarf 0.012 0.099 0.011 0.040

Fig. 1 a Percent uptake of 14C-Fosthiazate in tomato plants applied

through soil application (Var. Pusa Ruby PR) with and without

surfactant. b Percent uptake of 14C-Fosthiazate in tomato plants

applied through soil application (Var. Pusa Early Dwarf PED) with

and without surfactant

228 N. Sharma, S. Kumar

123

solution was found to be higher in var. Pusa Early Dwarf as

compared to var. Pusa Ruby.

From the results of the application of 14C-Fosthiazate

methods namely through soil application, drip irrigation

and seeds treatment, it was found that percent absorption

was the highest in the drip irrigation method and the least

in case of seeds treatment method.

The reason for the least effectiveness of seeds treatment

method could be related to the smaller seed size and hard

seed coat of tomato due to which the absorption of

14C-Fosthiazate through seed was less. This type of results

for the seed treatment method were earlier reported by [5]

for radio labeled 14C-carpropamid.

Conclusion

The percent uptake of 14C-Fosthiazate through drip appli-

cation method was observed more than the other applica-

tion methods. The percent uptake of 14C-Fosthizate was

more in Pusa Early Dwarf than Pusa Ruby in presence and

absence of the surfactant. In case of seed treatment method

of application of 14C-Fosthiazate in tomato plants it was

found that the overall uptake in the plants was low in

comparison of above two methods and in the comparison

between the different application methods of 14C-Fos-

thiazate to the tomato plants, it was found that drip appli-

cation method is best in all the application method.

Acknowledgment We acknowledge the university authorities and

the department staff for providing us the necessary help during the

research work.

References

1. Dropkin VH (1980) Introduction to plant nematology. Wiley, New

York

2. Evans K, Trudgill DL, Webster JM (1993) Plant parasitic

nematodes in temperate agriculture. CAB International, Walling-

ford, pp 648

3. Luc M, Sikora RA, Bridge J (2005) Plant parasitic nematodes in

tropical and subtropical agriculture, 2nd edn. CAB International,

Wallingford, pp 871

4. Qin S, Gan J, Liu W, Becker OJ (2004) Degradation and adsorption

of Fosthiazate in soil. J Agric Food Chem 52:6239–6242

5. Singh US, Rohilla R, Singh RL (2001) Uptake and translocation of

carpropamid in rice (oryza sativa L.). Pest Manag Sci 57:239–247

6. Taylor AL, Sasser JN (1978) Identification and control of root-knot

nematodes (Meloidogyne spp.) crop. North Carolina State Univer-

sity and U.S. Agency for International Development, Raleigh,

pp 111

7. Upadhyaya KD, Dwivedi K (2008) A text book of plant

nematology. Aman Publishing House, Meerut, p 144

Table 2 Application of 14C-Fosthiazate through drip irrigation in tomato plants (var. Pusa Ruby and Pusa Early Dwarf) with and without

surfactant (Tween-80)

Variety % Uptake of 14C-Fosthiazate with surfactant % Uptake of 14C-Fosthiazate without surfactant

Roots Shoots Roots Shoots

Pusa Ruby 0.020 0.176 0.020 0.022

Pusa Early Dwarf 0.047 0.489 0.040 0.026

Fig. 2 a Percent uptake of 14C-Fosthiazate in tomato plants applied

through drip application (Var. Pusa Ruby PR) with and without

surfactant. b Percent uptake of 14C-Fosthiazate in tomato plants

applied through soil application (Var. Pusa Early Dwarf PED) with

and without surfactant

Comparative study of different application methods of 14C-Fosthiazate 229

123