EFFECT OF TOMATO SPOTTED WILT VIRUS (TSWV) ON ROOT … · Its food value is very rich because of...

*Corresponding author: A A Farooq, Senior Plant Breeder, ACI-RDA-R&D Station, ACI Seed, RDA, Sherpur, Bogra-

5842. Cell phone: +8801717831742; Email:[email protected]

J. Sylhet Agril. Univ. 4(2):179-190, 2017 ISSN: 2308-1597

EFFECT OF TOMATO SPOTTED WILT VIRUS (TSWV) ON ROOT DEPTH, WEIGHT

AND YIELD OF TOMATO VARIETIES IN SOUTHERN BANGLADESH

A A Farooq*1, M N Alam

2 and A M Akanda

3

1Senior Plant Breeder, ACI-RDA-R&D Station, ACI Seed, RDA, Sherpur, Bogra-5842

2Professor, Department of Botany, Jahangirnagar University, Savar, Dhaka-1342

3Professor, Department of Plant Pathology, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman

Agricultural University, Gazipur-1706

(Available online at: www.jsau.com.bd)

Abstract

An attempt was made to evaluate the impact of Tomato Spotted Wilt Virus (TSWV) on root depth, fresh

root weight, dry root weight plant-1

and yield of twenty tomato varieties namely BARI Tomato-1, BARI

Tomato-2, BARI Tomato-3, BARI Tomato-4, BARI Tomato-5, BARI Tomato-6, BARI Tomato-7, BARI

Tomato-8, BARI Tomato-9, BARI Tomato-10, BARI Tomato-11, BARI Tomato-12, BARI Tomato-13,

BARI Tomato-14, Roma VF T-311, Unnayan F1, Udayan F1, Rio Grande, Tidy and Digonta. The study

was conducted at Amtoli Upazilla in Barguna district under the AEZ 18 in Bangladesh during winter

season of 2008-09. BARI-T2 showed the highest (45.19%) reduction of root depth and the lowest

(30.18%) reduction was recorded in Digonta. The percent reduction of fresh root weight plant-1

was

highest (46.94%) in BARI-T1 and lowest (28.11%) in Rio Grande. The percent reduction of dry root

weight plant-1

was lowest (32.73%) in BARI-T11 and highest (44.12%) in Roma VF. The fruit yield

reduction was observed higher due to early infection (67-87%) followed by mid (40-56%) and late

infection (20-29%) stages in all the varieties. The highest fruit yield reduction was obtained in BARI-T2

at early stage of infection and the lowest in BARI-T10 at late infection stage. The reduction of fruit yield

plant-1

was ranged from 44.10-55.68% depending on tomato varieties. The highest fruit yield reduction

was recorded in BARI-T2, while the lowest in BARI-T12 due to TSWV infection.

Keywords: Tomato spotted wilt virus, tomato, root, impact.

Introduction

Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum Mill.) belongs to the family Solanaceae is a popular vegetable crop in Bangladesh as

well as in many countries around the world. All cultivated types of tomato belong to Solanum lycopersicum and is

generally accepted to have originated in the western coastal plain of South America, extending from Ecuador to Chile

(Kinnet and Peet, 1997). Its food value is very rich because of higher contents of vitamin A, B, C and also minerals like

calcium (Bose and Som, 1990). It contains 'Lycopene' an antioxidant that can protect people from free radical injury.

In Bangladesh during these periods it was cultivated in 8.9, 11.7 and 15 thousand hectare with a production of 64, 89

and 100 thousand metric tons (Anonymous, 2004).The yield of tomato in Bangladesh is not enough satisfactory in

comparison with other tomato growing countries of the world (Aditya et al., 1997). Among the yield limiting factors of

tomato, virus diseases play an important role all over the world. So far 36 different virus diseases have been recorded

on tomato (Jones et al., 1991). Tomato spotted wilt virus (TSWV), transmitted by the thrips (Frankliniella occidentalis)

is one of the most devastating viral pathogens appeared as a dramatically increasing threat to tomato causing

tremendous yield loss throughout the tropics and subtropics. Diseases attributed to TSWV were first reported in

Australia in 1915 (Best, 1968).

TSWV has worldwide importance (Peters et al., 1998). This virus is damaging to all floral crops and currently causes

the most important disease of these hosts in the USA as well as in temperate and subtropical regions of the world

(Pfleger and Ascerno, 1989, Natalie, 2005). Severe yield losses associated with TSWV have been reported in tomato,

peanut, tobacco, pepper and potato as well as in some ornamental crops (Culbreath et al., 2006, Diffie et al., 2006).

Although most insecticides have little effect on spotted wilt incidence, use of phorate (Thimet or Phorate) in-furrow at

planting has shown consistent suppression of spotted wilt. It has also been found that use of classic herbicide tends to

increase severity of spotted wilt (Culbreat et al., 2006). Controlling weeds, avoiding contaminated host plants near the

vegetable crop, and eliminating thrips in greenhouses and solariums are the best way to manage this problem. Sprays to

control thrips have not been successful, probably because viruliferous thrips are constantly being blown into fields from

external virus reservoirs (Swift, 2006). In Bangladesh, 16 different viruses including TSWV have so far been recorded

Farooq et al. (2017)

180

(Akanda and Rahman, 1993, Akanda, 1994). But in depth studies on TSWV in Bangladesh have not yet been done. The

cultivation of resistant or tolerant varieties is eco-friendly and effective method of disease management. Therefore, the

research work has been undertaken to study the impact of TSWV on root depth, fresh root weight, dry root weight

plant-1

and yield of twenty tomato varieties in the field.

Materials and Methods

The experiment was conducted as a part of PhD research in a farmer`s field at Amtoli Upazilla in Barguna district of

Bangladesh during winter 2008-09. The soil of the experimental field was under the Agro Ecological Zone (AEZ) 18

(Young Meghna Estuarine Floodplain) having soil pH 6.1 to 6.8 and silty loam texture.

A total of twenty tomato varieties were used in the experiment namely BARI Tomato-1/Manik (BARI-T1), BARI

Tomato-2/Ratan (BARI-T2), BARI Tomato-3 (BARI-T3), BARI Tomato-4 (BARI-T4), BARI Tomato-5 (BARI-T5),

BARI Tomato-6/Chaity (BARI-T6), BARI Tomato-7/Apurba (BARI-T7), BARI Tomato-8/Shila (BARI-T8), BARI

Tomato-9/Lalima (BARI-T9), BARI Tomato-10/Anupoma (BARI-T10), BARI Tomato-11/Jhumka (BARI-T11), BARI

Tomato-12 (BARI-T12), BARI Tomato-13 (BARI-T13), BARI Tomato-14 (BARI-T14), Roma VF T-311 (Roma VF,

Country of origin, Holland, the Netherlands), Unnayan F1, Udayan F1, Rio Grande (Rio Grande, Country of origin

China), Tidy and Digonta. The seeds of these tomato varieties were collected from Bangladesh Agricultural Research

Institute (BARI), Joydebpur, Gazipur and from local markets.

The experimental field was ploughed and leveled to have a good tilth. Fertilizer dose was used as N-200, P2O5-100,

K2O-150, S-20 and B-2 kg ha-1

as suggested by Rahman et al. (1998). Cowdung was applied @ 5 t ha-1

. Cowdung and

all the fertilizers except urea were applied during final land preparation. Urea was applied in two splits, one at 21 and

other at 35 days after transplanting.

Tomato seedlings of the twenty varieties were raised separately in a well-drained nursery bed and 28 days old seedlings

were transplanted in the main field on first week of November 2008. Row to row distance 60 cm and plant to plant

distance 50 cm was maintained in the experimental field. Irrigation, staking of the plants and other intercultural

operations were done as and when required.

Tomato Spotted Wilt Virus (TSWV) was identified on the basis of field symptoms as described by Tisserat (2005),

Natalie (2005), Momol and Pernezny (2006) and Swift (2006). Later on it was confirmed by ELISA test. The protocol

was according to manufacturer’s recommendations. The data on the prevalence of TSWV and yield of tomato were

collected at three stages of the plant growth. Three growth stages of the plants were categorized as early (transplanting

to first flowering), mid (first flowering to first fruiting) and late stage (first harvesting to last harvesting).

Percent reductions of root depth, fresh root weight, dry root weight plant-1

and yield plant-1

were calculated following

the formula mentioned bellow:

Reduction percentage, P = A-A1

A ×100

Where, P = Reduction percentage of root depth, weight or yield plant-1

, A = Root (depth or weight plant-1

) or yield g

plant-1

of healthy plants and A1= Root (depth or weight plant-1

) or yield g plant-1

of infected plants.

Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) was followed with 3 replications. The data were analyzed statistically

using the analysis of variance (ANOVA) of MSTATC software for proper interpretation. The mean values were

compared by Duncan’s multiple range test (DMRT) at 5% level of significance. The correlation regression between

percent reduction of root depth, fresh root weight, dry root weight plant-1

and percent reduction of yield due to TSWV

infection were performed by correlation and regression model. To interpret the data bar diagrams and graphs were also

used when necessary.

Results and Discussion

Root depth (cm)

The effect of TSWV infection on the root depth of tomato plants is presented in Table 1, 2 and 3. The root depth of mid

stage infected plants was significantly (p=0.05) higher as compared to early (Table 1), late stage infected plants was

significantly (p=0.05) higher as compared to mid (Table 2) and healthy plants was significantly (p=0.05) higher as

compared to late stage infected plants (Table 3).

The percent reduction of root depth was found higher in early infected plants compared to mid and late stage infection.

The ranges of root depth reduction varied among the stages of infection which were 40-72%, 29-46% and 12-19% at

early, mid and late stages of infection, respectively, depending on tomato varieties (Fig. 1).

Impact of TSWV on root depth, weight and yield in Bangladesh

181

Results on the mean of different infected stages demonstrated that root depth of TSWV infected plants was

significantly (p=0.05) lower compared to healthy plants in all the cases (Table 4). The average reduction of root depth

varied from 30.18-45.19% depending on the varieties, however BARI-T2 showed the highest reduction and Digonta

showed the lowest (Fig. 2).

Table 1. Effect of TSWV infection on root depth (cm) at early and mid-stages of twenty tomato varieties

Varieties

Root depth (cm)

Stages of appearance of TSWV infection in plants

Early Mid

BARI-T1 12.45 o-q 21.03 g-j

BARI-T2 8.63 q 16.39 j-o

BARI-T3 15.00 l-p 26.62 c-f

BARI-T4 9.36 q 18.27 I-n

BARI-T5 10.42 pq 18.70 h-n

BARI-T6 25.66 d-g 38.19 a

BARI-T7 19.83 h-l 27.71 c-f

BARI-T8 12.74 o-q 23.66 e-h

BARI-T9 15.55 k-p 23.37 f-i

BARI-T10 13.40 n-q 22.49 f-i

BARI-T11 19.37 h-l 33.76 ab

BARI-T12 16.31 j-o 30.67 b-d

BARI-T13 15.15 l-p 26.52 c-f

BARI-T14 19.09 h-l 31.03 bc

Roma VF 14.53 l-p 27.74 c-f

Unnayan 13.64 m-q 29.80 b-d

Udayan 15.77 j-o 27.04 c-f

Rio Grande 18.83 h-m 28.85 b-e

Tidy 20.62 g-k 28.73 b-e

Digonta 22.77 f-i 25.74 c-g

Data with same letters in row or column are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT among the treatment means

of tomato varieties, virus infection and infection interaction

Table 2. Effect of TSWV infection on root depth (cm) at mid and late stages of twenty tomato varieties

Varieties

Root depth (cm)

Stages of appearance of TSWV infection in plants

Mid Late

BARI-T1 21.03 qr 30.56 h-k

BARI-T2 16.39 s 24.57 n-q

BARI-T3 26.62 l-o 38.66 bc

BARI-T4 18.27 rs 26.92 k-o

BARI-T5 18.70 rs 27.56 j-n

BARI-T6 38.19 bc 48.01 a

BARI-T7 27.71 j-n 38.62 bc

BARI-T8 23.66 o-q 35.19 c-f

BARI-T9 23.37 o-q 32.99 f-i

BARI-T10 22.49 pq 31.33 g-ij

BARI-T11 33.76 d-h 40.95 b

BARI-T12 30.67 h-k 37.14 cd

BARI-T13 26.52 l-o 33.03 f-i

BARI-T14 31.03 g-j 38.31 bc

Roma VF 27.74 j-n 34.55 d-g

Unnayan 29.80 i-l 36.85 c-e

Udayan 27.04 k-o 33.26 e-i

Rio Grande 28.85 j-m 34.22 d-h

Tidy 28.73 j-m 34.28 d-h

Digonta 25.74 m-p 31.29 g-j




182

Table 4. Effect of TSWV infection on root depth (cm) of twenty tomato varieties

Varieties Root depth (cm)

Healthy Infected

BARI-T1 37.09 hi 21.45 p-s

BARI-T2 30.31 j-m 16.61 s

BARI-T3 47.03 b 26.89 l-p

BARI-T4 33.18 i-k 18.27 rs

BARI-T5 33.72 ij 18.99 q-s

BARI-T6 55.53 a 37.44 g-i

BARI-T7 43.77 b-e 28.85 j-n

BARI-T8 43.33 b-f 23.98 n-q

BARI-T9 38.45 e-i 24.08 n-q

BARI-T10 37.85 f-i 22.51 o-r

BARI-T11 47.43 b 31.50 j-l

BARI-T12 43.98 b-d 28.16 k-n

BARI-T13 39.49 d-h 25.01 m-p

BARI-T14 45.41 bc 29.60 j-n

Roma VF 42.83 b-g 25.72 m-p

Unnayan 44.42 b-d 26.89 l-p

Udayan 40.61 c-h 25.47 m-p

Rio Grande 40.86 c-h 27.41 l-o

Tidy 40.66 c-h 27.99 k-o

Digonta 38.25 f-i 26.71 l-p



Table 3. Effect of TSWV infection on root depth (cm) at late stage and healthy plants of twenty tomato varieties

Varieties Root depth (cm)

Late stage infected plants Healthy plants

BARI-T1 30.87 st 37.09 k-p

BARI-T2 24.81 v 30.31 s-u

BARI-T3 39.05 i-l 47.03 b-d

BARI-T4 27.18 uv 33.18 q-s

BARI-T5 27.84 t-v 33.72 o-s

BARI-T6 48.49 b 55.53 a

BARI-T7 39.00 i-l 43.77 d-g

BARI-T8 35.55 l-q 43.33 e-g

BARI-T9 33.32 q-s 38.45 i-m

BARI-T10 31.65 rs 37.85 i-n

BARI-T11 41.36 f-i 47.43 bc

BARI-T12 37.51 j-n 43.98 d-g

BARI-T13 33.36 q-s 39.49 h-k

BARI-T14 38.69 i-l 45.41 b-e

Roma VF 34.90 m-r 42.83 e-h

Unnayan 37.22 j-o 44.42 c-f

Udayan 33.59 p-s 40.61 g-k

Rio Grande 34.56 n-r 40.86 g-j

Tidy 34.63 n-r 40.66 g-k

Digonta 31.60 rs 38.25 i-m




183

Fig. 1. Percent reduction of root depth due to TSWV infection at early, mid and late stages of twenty tomato

varieties.

Fig. 2. Average reduction of root depth due to TSWV infection of twenty tomato varieties.

Fresh and dry root weight (g plant-1

)

The results of fresh root weight at early, mid and late stages infected plants are presented in Fig. 3. The fresh root

weights of late stage infected plants were higher than mid stage followed by early stage of TSWV infection. The dry

root weight of late stage infected plants was also higher than mid stage followed by early stage (Fig. 4). The fresh and

dry root weight varied depending on tomato varieties and stages of TSWV infection.

Figs. 5 and 7 presented the percent reduction of fresh and dry root weight of all the varieties at different stages of

infection. Early stage infected plants showed higher reduction in both fresh and dry root weight which ranged from 39-

72% and 54-69%, respectively as compared to mid (30-47% in fresh and 28-44% in dry root weight) and late infected

plants (13-24% in fresh and 15-22% in dry root weight) depending on tomato varieties.

66 72

68 72

69

54 55

71

60 65

59 63 62

58

66 69

61

54 49

40 43 46 43 45 45

31 37

45 39 41

29 30 33 32

35 33 33

29 29 33

18 19 18 19 18 14

12

19 14

17 14 16 16 16

19 17 18 16 16

18

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

% R

ed

uc

tio

n o

f ro

ot

de

pth

Varieties

Early Mid Late

42.17 45.19

42.82 44.93 43.70

32.56 34.09

44.66

37.38

40.53

33.59 35.96 36.67

34.81

39.95 39.48 37.29

32.90 31.17 30.18

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

% R

ed

uc

tio

n o

f r

oo

t d

ep

th

Varieties


184

Results on the average fresh root weight and dry root weight of all stages infected plants are presented in Table 5 and

Table 6, respectively. Significantly (p=0.05) higher fresh and dry root weight were recorded in healthy plants in the

twenty tomato varieties compared to TSWV infected plants in all cases. In case of average of the three stages, the

reduction of fresh and dry weight of root in infected plants varied among the varieties. The reduction of fresh root

weight varied 28.11-46.94% and dry root weight varied 32.73-44.12% (Figs. 6 and 8).

Table 5. Effect of TSWV infection on fresh root weight (g) of twenty tomato varieties

Varieties Fresh root weight (g)

Healthy Infected

BARI-T1 75.04 c 39.82 l-p

BARI-T2 51.16 f-l 29.31 p

BARI-T3 75.25 c 44.28 j-m

BARI-T4 53.09 f-k 30.63 n-p

BARI-T5 50.71 f-l 30.19 op

BARI-T6 88.85 ab 57.21 d-h

BARI-T7 98.14 a 58.96 d-g

BARI-T8 73.14 c 42.12 k-m

BARI-T9 58.21 d-g 35.00 m-p

BARI-T10 56.91 d-i 34.92 m-p

BARI-T11 61.25 d-f 40.30 l-o

BARI-T12 88.98 ab 49.53 g-l

BARI-T13 66.66 cd 41.20 l-n

BARI-T14 72.67 c 45.93 i-m

Roma VF 86.66 b 46.31 h-m

Unnayan 67.47 cd 41.84 k-m

Udayan 64.98 c-e 40.65 l-o

Rio Grande 61.43 d-f 44.17 j-m

Tidy 91.17 ab 55.13 e-j

Digonta 64.56 c-e 44.63 j-m

Data with same letters in row or column are not significantly different at 5 % level by DMRT among the treatment means


Table 6. Effect of TSWV infection on dry root weight (g) of twenty tomato varieties

Varieties Dry root weight (g)

Healthy Infected

BARI-T1 36.05 bc 21.63 g-j

BARI-T2 20.02 i-l 12.62 q-s

BARI-T3 35.51 bc 21.65 g-j

BARI-T4 22.47 f-i 12.90 p-s

BARI-T5 20.26 h-k 12.13 rs

BARI-T6 41.03 a 26.24 de

BARI-T7 37.27 b 21.94 g-j

BARI-T8 18.44 j-n 11.21 s

BARI-T9 23.72 e-h 15.49 n-r

BARI-T10 23.68 e-h 14.62 o-r

BARI-T11 28.91 d 19.45 i-m

BARI-T12 37.66 b 21.73 g-j

BARI-T13 26.63 de 16.57 l-o

BARI-T14 33.56 c 21.30 h-j

Roma VF 32.91 c 18.39 j-n

Unnayan 17.01 k-o 10.85 s

Udayan 27.04 de 16.20 m-p

Rio Grande 25.08 e-g 15.95 m-q

Tidy 37.15 b 22.55 f-i

Digonta 25.57 d-f 15.39 n-r




185

Fig. 3. Effect of TSWV infection on fresh root weight (g) at early, mid and late stages of twenty tomato varieties.

Fig. 4. Effect of TSWV infection on dry root weight (g) at early, mid and late stages of twenty tomato varieties.

22

15

24

16 17

36 36

22 21 20

25

28

23 27

24 25 24

37 33 37

40

29

45

31 30

59 57

42 35 35

43

52

42

48 49

44 42

41

56

41

58

44

64

45 44

77 84

63

49 50 54

69

58 63

66

57 55 54

76

55

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Fre

sh

ro

ot

weig

ht

(g)

Varieties

Early Mid Late

12

8

12

7 7

17

13

6

10 9

13 13

11 14

10

7 9

10 13

9

23

13

23

14 13

27

23

12

17 15

21

23

17

22

18

11

17 17

24

16

30

17

29

18 17

35

30

16

20 20

24

30

22

28 27

14

22 21

31

21

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Dry

ro

ot

weig

ht

(g)

Varieties

Early Mid Late


186

Fig. 5. Percent reduction of fresh root weight due to TSWV infection at early, mid and late stages of twenty

tomato varieties

Fig. 6. Average reduction of fresh root weight due to TSWV infection of twenty tomato varieties

Fig. 7. Percent reduction of dry root weight

due to TSWV infection at early, mid and late stages of twenty tomato varieties

71 71 68 70 67

60 63

70 63 64

60

69 65 62

72

63 62

39

64

42 47

43 41 41 41 34

42 43 40 39

30

42 36 34

44

35 35 32 38 36

23

14 15 15 13 13 15 14 16 13 13

22

13 14

24

16 15 13 16 14

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

% R

ed

uc

tio

n o

f fr

esh

ro

ot

weig

ht

Varieties

Early Mid Late

46.94 42.70 41.16 42.30

40.47 35.61

39.92 42.41

39.88 38.64 34.20

44.34

38.20 36.79

46.56

37.99 37.45

28.11

39.54

30.87

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

% R

ed

uc

tio

n o

f fr

esh

ro

ot

weig

ht

Varieties

66 60

66 67 66

58

66 66

59 61

54

67

60 59

69

58

67

59 66 67

37 36 34 39 38 34

39 37

28

37

28

39 36 35

44

34 36 34 35 36

18 15 17

22 17 15

19 15

17 17 16 21

17 16 19 17 18 16 17 17

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

% R

ed

uc

tio

n o

f d

ry r

oo

t w

eig

ht

Varieties

Early Mid Late


187

Fig. 8. Average reduction of dry root weight due to TSWV infection of twenty tomato varieties

Fruit yield (g plant-1

)

The percent fruit yield reduction of twenty tomato varieties due to TSWV infection at three different infection stages

are presented in Fig. 9. The fruit yield reduction was observed due to early infection (67-87%) followed by mid (40-

56%) and late infection (20-29 %) in all the varieties. The highest fruit yield reduction was obtained in BARI-T2 at

early stage of infection and the lowest in BARI-T6 and BARI-T11 at late infection stage.

The mean of early, mid and late infection stages suggested that the infected plants yielded significantly (p=0.05) lower

compared to healthy in all the cases (Table 7). The average reduction of fruit yield plant-1

was ranged from 44.10-

55.68% depending on tomato varieties. The highest fruit yield reduction was recorded in BARI-T2, while the lowest

was in BARI-T12 (Fig. 10). The correlation regression between percent reductions of root depth, fresh root weight, dry

root weight and percent reduction of yield due to TSWV infection are presented in the Fig. 11. The results revealed that

percent reductions of root depth, fresh and dry root weight plant-1

had highly positive and significant correlation with

percent yield reduction of tomato due to TSWV infection at early, mid and late stages of infection. It indicated that with

the increase of percent reduction of fresh root weight and dry root weight plant-1

due to TSWV infection at any stage

percent reduction of yield of tomato also increased.

TSWV is damaging to all floral crops and currently causes the most important disease of these hosts in the USA

(Pfleger and Ascerno, 1989). TSWV was detected for the first time in epidemic proportions in tomato and Capsicum

annuum plants in Ontario. The yield loss was recorded as significant (Pitblado et al., 1990). TSWV was considered as a

severe one in respect of yield loss of tomato in Lazio, Italy, on protected tomatoes in the province of Rome (Tomassoli

and Barba, 1994). TSWV causes significant yield losses in tobacco, pepper and tomato in Hungary (Jenser et al., 1996).

In northeastern Spain, naturally infected tomato plants that developed Tomato spotted wilt virus symptoms at 24, 38, or

45 days after transplanting yielded significantly less and produced fewer and smaller tomatoes than those that

developed symptoms at 60, 67, and 74 days after transplanting (Moriones et al., 1998). During the 1980’s TSWV

caused significant losses on peanuts, tobacco and tomatoes in the Southeastern United States. It has also caused

significant losses of these crops in Eastern Europe and South America (Moyer et al., 1999). Severe yield losses were

estimated due to TSWV infection in peanut, tobacco, tomato, pepper and potato as well as in some ornamental crops in

Georgia (Diffie et al., 2006).

Table 7. Effect of TSWV infection on fruit yield (g/plant) of twenty tomato varieties

Varieties Fruit yield (g plant-1)

39.98 36.94

39.05 42.58

40.10 36.05

41.12 39.21

34.68 38.27

32.73

42.28 37.77 36.53

44.12

36.23 40.08

36.41 39.32 39.80

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

% R

ed

uc

tio

n o

f d

ry r

oo

t w

eig

ht

Varieties


188

Healthy Infected

BARI-T1 3862.69 ef 2059.19 l-o

BARI-T2 4033.43 e 1787.79 m-q

BARI-T3 3815.76 ef 1930.31 m-p

BARI-T4 1206.82 qr 574.00 s

BARI-T5 1342.01 pq 659.61 rs

BARI-T6 3860.25 ef 2093.25 k-o

BARI-T7 5724.63 ab 2683.28 g-l

BARI-T8 5308.68 bc 2444.59 h-m

BARI-T9 4291.11 de 2234.57 j-n

BARI-T10 3021.75 g-i 1636.57 n-q

BARI-T11 4334.44 de 2397.53 i-m

BARI-T12 4380.16 de 2448.46 i-m

BARI-T13 5412.87 bc 2878.37 g-j

BARI-T14 6265.74 a 3316.18 fg

Roma VF 3823.22 ef 1900.54 m-p

Unnayan 5173.14 bc 2729.24 g-k

Udayan 4785.43 cd 2416.26 i-m

Rio Grande 5127.05 bc 2799.43 g-j

Tidy 4381.95 de 2271.22 j-n

Digonta 3101.22 gh 1565.21 o-q

Data with same letters in row or column are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT among the treatment means of tomato

varieties, virus infection and infection interaction

Fig. 9. Percent reduction fruit yield per plant due to TSWV infection at early, mid and late stages of twenty

tomato varieties

Fig. 10. Average reduction fruit yield due to TSWV infection of twenty tomato varieties

70

87

77 79 76

67

80 79 72 70

67 70 68 68 77

72 74 68 71

75

47 54

44

53 51 46

56 54 48 47

42 40 46 46

52 47

51 47 46

50

23 26 28 25 26 24 24 29

24 20

25 22 26 27

23 23 23 21 27 24

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

% R

ed

uc

tio

n o

f fr

uit

yie

ld p

lan

t-1

Varieties

Early Mid Late

46.7

55.7

49.4 52.4 50.8

45.8

53.1 54.0

47.9 45.8 44.7 44.1 46.8 47.1

50.3 47.2 49.5

45.4 48.2 49.5

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

% R

ed

uc

tio

n o

f fr

uit

yie

ld p

lan

t-1

Varieties


189

Fig. 11. Correlation regression between percent reduction of (A) root depth, (C) fresh root weight, (D) dry root

weight and percent reduction of yield due to TSWV infection at early, mid and late stages of twenty

tomato varieties

Results of the present study are in agreement with the findings of the previous authors. Present investigation has

indicated early stage infection of TSWV caused severe reduction of root depth, fresh and dry root weight as well as

tomato yield plant-1

followed by mid and late stage infection. Percent reduction of root depth, fresh and dry root weight

plant-1

of all twenty tomato varieties were significantly and positively correlated with percent yield reduction at early,

mid and late stages of TSWV infection.

Conclusion On the basis of the results of the present study stated the following conclusion could be drawn:

i) Early stage infection of TSWV caused severe reduction of root depth, fresh root weight, dry root weight plant-1

and

yield of all twenty tomato varieties followed by mid and late stage infection though reductions varied depending on

tomato varieties.

ii) Correlation regression analysis revealed that percent reduction of root depth, fresh root weight and dry root weight

plant-1

of all twenty tomato varieties were highly significant and positively correlated with percent yield reduction at

early, mid and late stages of TSWV infection.

References Aditya T L, Rahman L, Alam M S and Ghoseh A K. 1997. Correlation and path co-efficient analysis in tomato.

Bangladesh J. Agri. Sci. 26 (1):119-122.

Akanda A M. 1994. Virus disease of tomato and eggplant and their control. Lecture note from the Trainers Training

programs on grafting technology of tomato and eggplant. IPSA-JICA publication. IPSA, Salna, Gazipur. pp

28-33.

Akanda A Mand Rahman M L. 1993. Problem and prospects of vegetable disease management. Workshop on research

and development of crops. Published by IPSA-JICA- USAID. IPSA, Salna, Gazipur. pp 76-84.

Best RJ 1968. Tomato Spotted Wilt Virus. In Advances in Virus Research, ed. K M Smith, Lauffer M A. Academic

Press New York. 13:65-145.

Culbreath A K, Todd J, Brown S, Baldwin R W J, Beasley J, Gorbet D, Kemerait B and Prostko E. 2006. Factors

affecting spotted wilt incidence and severity. SWE.AT. Participants from both research and extension from

y = 1.0072x + 10.172 R² = 0.9178

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 20 40 60 80

% R

ed

uc

tio

n o

f yie

ld

% Reduction of root deepth A

y = 0.949x + 11.629 R² = 0.9035

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 20 40 60 80

% R

ed

uc

tio

n o

f yie

ld

% Reduction of fresh root weight B

y = 1.039x + 8.5535 R² = 0.9489

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 20 40 60 80

% R

ed

uc

tio

n o

f yie

ld

% Reduction of dry root weight C


190

The University of Georgia, The University of Florida, Auburn University, and the USDA-

ARS.([email protected])

Diffie S, Wade L and Robinson A. 2006. Tomato spotted wilt virus vectored by thrips. TSWV website. Site maintained

by the University of Georgia. College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences. Tifton, GA.

(milto:[email protected])

Jenser G, Gaborjanyi R, Vasdinnyei R, Almasi A and Kuo C G. 1996. Tospovirus infections in Hungary. International

Symposium on Tospoviruses and Thrips of Floral and Vegetable Crops, Taiwan Agricultural Research

Institute, Taichung, Taiwan, 7-10 November 1995. Acta-Horticulturae 431:51-57.

Jones J B, Jones J P, StallRE and Zitter T A (Eds.). 1991. Compendium of Tomata Diseases. APS Press, Minnesota,

USA. 73p.

Kinnet J M and Peet M M. 1997. Tomato. In:The Physiology of Vegetable Crops (Wine, H.C. ed.). CAB International,

UK. pp. 207-258.

Momol T M and Pernezny K L. 2006. Specific Common Diseases. Florida Plant Disease Management Guide.

Everglades Research and Education Center. University of Florida. Florida Cooperative Extension Service,

IFAS. PDMG. 3: 53p.

Moriones E, Aramburu J, Riudavets J, Arno J and Lavina A. 1998. Effect of plant age at time of infection by Tomato

spotted wilt tospo virus on the yield of fieldgrown tomato. European Journal of Plant Pathology. 104:295–300.

(http://www.springerlink.com /content/q01j774308058607/fulltext.pdf)

Mound L A. 1996. The Thysanoptera vector species of tospovirus.ActaHortic. 431:298-309.

Moyer J W, German T, Sherwood J L and Ullman D E.1999. An Update on Tomato Spotted Wilt Virus and Related

Tospoviruses. Plant Pathology on-line. American Phytopathological Society.(mailto:[email protected])

Natalie P G. 2005. Tomato Spotted Wilt Virus. New Mexico State University and the U.S. Department of Agriculture

cooperating. Electronic Distribution August 2000. Guide H-242. (http://www.nmu.edu/web-legal)

Peters D and Goldbach R. 1998. An updated list of plant species susceptible to tospoviruses. Fourth International

Symposium on Tospovirus and Thrips in Floral and Vegetable Crops. eds. Wageningen, the Netherlands.

pp.107-110.

Pfleger F L and Ascerno M E. 1989. Tomato spotted wilt virus in Minnesota. MinnesotaState Florists Bulletin 38(3):8-

12.

Pitblado R E, Allen W R, Matteoni J A, Garton R, Shipp J L and Hunt D W A. 1990.Introduction of the Tomato spotted

wilt virus and western flower thrips complex into field vegetables in Ontario, Canada. Plant Disease

74(1):81p.

Rahman M A, Haider J, Sinha U K, Chowdhury A R and Chowdhury M M U. 1998. Economically viable rates of

fertilizers and manures for maximizing growth and yield of year round tomato. Bangladesh J. Agric. Res.

23(3):551-559.

Swift C E. 2006. Fact sheet on Tomato spotted wilt virus. Tri river area. Colorado StateUniversity Cooperative

Extension. 2775 US Hwy 50, Grand Junction, CO. 81503. (http://www.ext.colostate.edu)

Tisserat N. 2005. Virus Diseases of Tomato. Extension Plant. Pathology. Kansas State University Agricultural

Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service. P2. ([email protected])

Tomassoli L and Barba M. 1994. Tomato spotted wilt tospovirus has spread to Lazio. Informatore-Agrario. 50(39):103-

104.

Tsuda S. 1999. Tomato spotted wilt tospovirus: Plant-infecting Bunyaviridae. Virus 49:119-130.

mailto:[email protected]



http://www.nmsu.edu/web_legal/




EFFECT OF TOMATO SPOTTED WILT VIRUS (TSWV) ON ROOT … · Its food value is very rich because of...

Documents

Transcript of EFFECT OF TOMATO SPOTTED WILT VIRUS (TSWV) ON ROOT … · Its food value is very rich because of...