Survey of Heteroderid Nematodes Of

SURVEY OF HETERODERID NEMATODES OF UTTAR PRADESH AND STUDIES ON THE MORPHOMETRICS, SEASONAL FLUCTUATION IN POPULATION AND NON-CHEMICAL CONTROL OF Heterodera avenae WOLLENWEBER, 1924

ABSTRACT

Thesis Submitted for the Degree of Bottor of ^I)ilos(opt)p in BOTANY

MOHAMMAD RAIS SIDDIQUI

DEPARTMEiNT OF BOTANY ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY ALIGARH (INDIA) 1993

ABSTRACT

Heteroderid nematodes are those members of the

family Heteroderidae and superfamily Heteroderoidea in

which sedentary endoparasitic females on maturity

transformed into cysts containing eggs/larvae.

During the course of survey 1670 soil/root samples

of cereals, vegetables, pulses, oil seeds, ornamentals, and

weeds were collected and assayed for the occurrence of

heteroderid nematode species in 56 districts of Uttar

Pradesh.

Only species belonging to the genus Heterodera were

encountered. Their frequency and infestation levels were

determined. In all, seven species viz, H. avenae, H_. ca jani,

H. mothi, H_. cyperi, H^. zeae, H. sorghi and H. graminis

were encountered.

Out of them, H^. ca iani, ti_. zeae and H_. mothi, in

this order, was the most prevalent in the state and their

frequency of occurrence was also high.

Heterodera graminis was restricted to mountainous,

submountai.nous or the Gangetic plains. H_. sorghi and H. cyperi had been restricted to the Gangetic plains. H_.

avenae was encountered in the Gangetic and trans-Yamuna plains boardering Rajasthan, the state where from it was reported for the first time in India.

Studies on seasonal fluctuation of larvae and cysts

of H. avenae population of Aligarh indicated that optimal

number of larvae was isolated in Juanuary and that of cysts

in April. This held true for studies made in 1989 and 1990.

A detail study of H,. avenae, collected from Aligarh

and Ghaziabad, was undertaken by the author.

Studies dealing with effect of different hosts,

soil types and soil moistures on changes in measurements of

certain characteristics of larvae, males, females, cysts,

eggs and cone top structures of the two populations of U_.

avenae indicated that barring lip annules and lateral

incisures, the remaining characteristics are unstable.

However, they never exceeded the range of descriptions as

proposed by different taxonomists for this nematode.

For studying the host range of H. avenae, 37 plants

belonging to eleven families of Angiosperms were

inoculated. Avena sativa cv. Kent, Triticum aestivum cvs.

K-68, RR-21, Hordeum vulgare cv. Jyoti, Zea mays cv.

Shakti, Secale cereale, Phalaris minor and Polypogon

monospeliensis (family Graminae) were found susceptible to

both Aligarh and Ghaziabad populations. Sllene conoidea

(family Caryophyllaceae) when inoculated with two isolates of H_. avenae it was observed that cyst formation occurred with Aligarh and not with Ghaziabad isolate.

Unlike several scientist working on host

specialization, the author employed international

differentials in order to differentiate the Aligarh and

Ghaziabad isolates. Aligarh and Ghaziabad population of H.

avenae differs from one another on the basis of host

reaction on differentials viz., oat Sun II, Avena sterilis

and barley cultivar Siri which were different from earlier

reported biotypes from India and abroad.

The efficiency of chopped leaves of Calotropis

procera, Nerium indicum, Bougainvillia spectabilis, Ricinus

communis. Datura stramonium, Cannabis sativa, Xanthium

strumarim, and Eucalyptus citriodera have been evaluated

against wheat, barley and oat to manage the cereal cyst

nematode. The chopped leaves of the above plants when

amended with soil, had resulted in the better plant growth

of wheat, barley and oat and decreased the population of H_.

avenae. Significant increase in the growth of wheat, barley

and oat have been observed when 10 g and 20 g chopped

leaves of C. procera, N. indicum, ^. spectabilis, R.

communis, C. sativa and E. citriodera, applied to the pots

containing 1 kg autoclaved soil. Plants receiving 20 g

chopped leaves per kg soil were proved superior than those

in which 10 g chopped leaves were added. The best performance had been observed in the growth of wheat

receiving leaves of B. spectabilis and of barley and oat

receiving leaves of R. communis @ 20 g per kg soil.

SURVEY OF HETERODERID NEMATODES OF UTTAR PRADESH AND STUDIES ON THE MORPHOMETRICS, SEASONAL FLUCTUATION IN POPULATION AND NON-CHEMICAL CONTROL OF Heterodera avenae WOLLENWEBER, 1924

Thesis Submitted for the Degree of Bottor of $I)ilas(opl^p in BOTANY

MOHAMMAD RAIS SIDDIQUI

DEPARTMENT OF BOTANY ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY ALIGARH (INDIA) 1993

' 'SIM-;•;;...>•'•

•7*' .,: ' >:, ''iJi*3'

•.^•::,« •• f:',:.

•••- ••*: :•:

^••^v^i-::

UH UNlVf

T4705

/•i- CHEC:raD-239«

AFFECTIONATELY DEDICATED

TO GRAND FATHER AND PARENTS

DEPARTMENT OF BOTANY ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY

A L I G A R H — 202 002 Telephone : 2 567 6

Dated 22- 6- ^75

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the thesis entitled "Survey of Heteroderid Nematodes of Uttar Pradesh and Studies on the Morphometries, Seasonal Fluctuation in Population and Non-Chemical Control of Heterodera avenae Wollenweber, 1924" is upto date and original research work of Mr. Mohammad Rais Siddiqui carried out under the supervision of Late Professor Syed Israr Husain and now submitted under the Chiarman, Department of Botany, Aligarh Muslim University, A]igarh in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Botany.

Chair'man

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

It immensely gratifies me to record my heartfelt sense of gratitude for Late Prof. Syed Israr Husain, Botany Department, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh who had suggested me a problem of vital interest, extended his guidance, and unceasing encouragement during his life time. He is no more, but he leaves behind, for me, his source of inspiring genius, his good deeds and virtues which shall always adorn my life.

I want to extend my grateful thanks to Prof. A.K.M. Ghouse, Chairman, Botany Department, A.M.U., Aligarh, who generously agreed to take the task of guiding me and also for providing the necessary laboratory facilities.

It is a great pleasure for me to place on record my sincere gratitude to 'Father of Nematology' in India Dr. Abrar Mustafa Khan, Professor Emeritus, Botany Department, A.M.U., Aligarh for critically reviewing this manuscript. His able guidance plentiful worthy suggestions made this work possible. During the entire pursuit of my studies I had the good fortune of enjoying his constant help and advice without which this work would not have been what it is .

I owe a deep debt of gratitude to Professors Khalid Mahmood, M.M. Alam, Zaiuddin A. Siddiqui, Botany Department, A.M.U. , Aligarh; Dr. D.R. Dasgupta, Head, Dr. E. Khan, Principal Scientist, Nematology Division, lARI, New Delhi and Dr. Ataul Haque Khan, Head, Dr. Anwar Masood, Botany Department, G.F. (P.G.) College, Shahjahanpur for rendering valuable suggestions, help, inspiration and encouragement.

I am grateful to Prof. S. Andersen, Land Brugents Plantenkultur , Copenhagen, Denmark and Prof. B.N. Mathur,

Nematology Department, Agricultural Research Station,

Durgapura, Jaipur for sending seeds of host differentials of oat, wheat and barley to conduct the biotype experiment.

I am also thankful to Drs. Lutfullah, Flroz Mohammad, Tabreiz A. Khan, Hisamuddin and Messrs. Abdul Malik, Ali Anwar, Munawar Fazal and S.R.M. Ata for their unceasing and relentless efforts in preparation of this manuscript. Sincere thanks are also due to colleagues and friends for their assistance.

Invaluable help in data analyses, and assistance in photography respectively made by Dr. Mohammad Azam, Computer Centre, Dr. Mohammad Yaqub, Statistics Department and Mr. Q.H. Ansari, Botany Department, A.M.U., Aligarh is gratefully acknowledged.

I am extremely indebted to my parents, wife and little daughter for their patience, sacrifice, encouragement and care during educational growth and preparation of the thesis.

The financial assistance in the form of J.R.F. and S.R.F. from D.S.T., Government of India is gratefully acknowledged.

MOHAMMAITRAIS SIDDIQUI

CONTENTS

Page INTRODUCTION ... 1 REVIEW OF LITERATURE ... 7 MATERIALS AND METHODS ... 57 STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH - GEOGRAPHY ... 74 EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS Survey of heteroderid nematodes and their identification in different districts of Uttar Pradesh. ... 77 Geographical distribution, frequency of occurrence and infestation levels of different species. Mountainous region ... 79 Sub-mountainous region ... 81 Ganga plain region ... 86 Trans-Yamuna region ... 91 Seasonal fluctuation of Heterodera avenae population in a naturally infested field. ... 93 Studies on the morphometries of two populations of H. avenae. ... 97 Effect of host on second stage larvae. ... 98 Effect of host on males .... 102 Effect of host on females .... 106 Effect of host on cysts and cone top structures ... 106 Effect of soil types on second stage larvae ... no Effect of soil types on males ... 115

Effect of soil types on females ... 119

Effect of soil types on cysts cone top structures ... 119 Effect of soil moisture on second stage larave ... 124 Effect of soil moisture on males. ... 129 Effect of soil moisture on females ... 133 Effect of soil moisture on cysts, cone top structures . . . 135 Studies on host range of two populations of H. avenae. . . . 135 Screening of the populations of \\. avenae for determining its biotypes. ... 144 Studies on the non-chemical control of H^. avenae. Effect of chopped leaves on growth of wheat . . . 150 Effect of chopped leaves on growth of barley ... 153 Effect of chopped leaves on growth of oat . . . 157

DISCUSSION SUMMARY REFERENCES APPENDICES (one to nine)

INTRODUCTION

The members of Heteroderidae Filipjev and Schuurmans Stekhoven, 1934, are polyphagous as well as host specific. They are, undoubtedly, most highly evolved nematodes having developed specialized morphological and physiological characteristics which have enabled them to become highly successful plant parasites. Their specialized morphological characteristics include the swollen nature of the females with highly developed gonads capable of producing large number of eggs; terminal or subterminal vulva for efficient egg laying outside the host tissue in some species even if body remains partially or wholly embedded in the host root; and the trans formation of females (in certain forms) to cyst for better and efficient protection of eggs. Physiologically, they have evolved intimate relationships with their hosts by the development of specialized feeding sites within the plant tissues. The long term nature of interaction between these nematodes and the feeding cells (syncytia, formed by the break-down of walls between adjacent cells) has led in most cases, to a loss of nematode mobility, the adult female becoming sedentary endoparasites and bulk of the body exposed on the root surface with the anterior part of the body buried in the root abutting the feeding sites. Thus, the nematodes become dependent on the feeding cells for nourishment and to regulate their demands till host cells remain alive.

Family Heteroderidae constitutes one of the most

important group of phytoparasitic nematodes comprising cyst forming and non-cyst forming nematodes which parasitize cereals, pulses, fruit trees, ornamentals, grasses and cash crops. They are invariably the parasites of roots and cause substantial crop losses wherever they occur. In Rajasthan alone, which is one of the 25 Indian States, it has been estimated that 60 million rupees per year are lost in cereal production due to Heterodera avenae Wollenweber, 1924 (Van Berkum & Seshadri, 1970).

The heteroderid nematodes belong to the superfamily Heteroderoldea (Filipjev & Schuurmans Stekhoven, 1934) Golden, 1971 (Hoplolaimoidea as per Siddiqi,1986) which was represented by only five genera viz., Meloldogyne Goeldi,1892; Hypsoperine Sledge & Golden, 1964; Meloidodera Chitwood e_t _al., 1956; Cryphodera Colbran, 1966 and Heterodera Schmidt, 1871 until 1966. During the last few decades the taxonomic study of this important group of plant parasitic nematodes in different continents got impetus resulting in an exponential increase in the discovery and description of the members belonging to the superfamily. As many as 18 new genera namely, Meloidoderella Khan & Husain, 1972; Meloinema Choi & Geraert, 1974; Bursadera Ivanova & Krall, 1985; Cactodera Krall & Krall, 1978; Dolichodera Mulvey & Ebsary, 1980; Ephippiodera Shagalina & Krall, 1981; Punctodera Mulvey & Stone, 1976; Sarisodera Wouts & Sher, 1971; Bidera Krall & Krall, 1978; Globodera Skarbilovich, 1947 (Behrens, 1975); Atalodera Wouts & Sher,

1971; Sherodera Wouts, 1974; Zelandodera Wouts, 1973; Hylonema

Luc iet_ £l., 1978; Thecavermiculatus Robbins, 1978; Bravicepha- lodera Kaushal and Swarup, 1988; Afenestrata Baldwin and Bell, 1985, Ecphymatodera Baldwin e_t _al^. , 1989 and some having more than one species have been described from different continents belonging to families Meloidogynidae and Heteroderidae. The most important heteroderids are the cyst forming genera viz., Globodera and Heterodera.

The cyst forming nematodes constitute the most important nematode pests of agricultural crops all over the world. Generally, these nematodes have been considered and still viewed by some as problems mainly of temperate regions of the world. This contention was based on the fact that in the past, most of the recorded species were from temperate regions. However, Khan and Husain (1965) described Heterodera mothi from Aligarh, India, for the first time from tropics. Since then a large number of Heterodera species have been reported and described from various tropical and subtropical regions of the world.

About 19 species of cyst forming nematodes belonging to six genera viz., Meloidoderella, Globodera, Cactodera, Heterodera, Afenestrata and Bravicephalodera (Meloidoderella indica Khan and Husain, 1972; G. rostochiensis (Wollenweber, 1923) Behrens, 1975, G. pallida (Stone, 1973) Behrens, 1975; Cactodera cacti (Filipjev and Schuurmans Stekhoven, 1941) Krall and Krall, 1978; Heterodera avenae (Wollenweber, 1924) Krall and Krall, 1978; Heterodera cajani Koshy, 1967; H. carotae Jones, 1950; H. cyperi Golden, Rau and Cobb, 1962;

H.delvii Jairajpuri, Khan, Sethi & Govindu,1979, H.galeopsidls

Goffart, 1936; H. gramlnis Stynes, 1971; H. mothi Khan &

Husain, 1965; H. oryzicola Rao & Jayprakash, 1978; H. saccharl Luc & Merny, 1963; H. trifolii Goffart, 1932, H. zeae Koshy, Swarup & Sethi, 1971; H. sorghl Jain, Sethi, Swarup & Srivastava, 1982; Afenestrata sacchari Kaushal and Swarup, 1988 and Bravicephalodera bamboosi Kaushal & Swarup, 1988) have so far been described from India.

Apparently, the discovery of new species or the report on the occurrence of already known species can be attributed to more intensified research activity on plant parasitic nematodes by nematologists rather than the belief of some due to unfavourable climatic conditions for these nematodes. There are however, certain heteroderid nematodes which are restricted to certain areas like Heterodera avenae which was known to be confined to certain areas in Rajasthan, Haryana, Punjab, Delhi, Himachal Pradesh and Jammu & Kashmir has now been reported to occur at several places in U.P. (Siddiqui et al., 1986). Similarly, Globodera spp. which were reported to occur only in the Nilgiri hills of Tamil Nadu has recently been reported to occur in Kerala, India (Ramana and Mohandas, 1988). Out of presently known genera of heteroderid nematodes only Meloidoderella, Globodera, Cactodera, Afenestrata and Bravicephalodera have yet been reported to occur in India.

Vasudeva (1958) for the first time, reported the occurrence of cereal cyst nematode (Heterodera avenae = H. major at the time of record) associated with the 'raolya' disease of wheat and barlev in Sikzr, Rajasthan, while in

Europe it was first recorded as early as 1874. H. avenae stands out as number one problem followed by Globodera rostochiensis, £. pallida, H. zeae and H. sorghi in India. H. avenae is the serious pest of cereals. Host preference varies in different countries. It causes severe damage to oats in Europe (Fiddian & Kimber, 1964)^ barley in India (Mathur e_t a_l. , 1974) and wheat in Australia (Meagher, 1974).

Year after year, cultivation of susceptible host in the infested field, helps in the build up of inoculum and at times the increase in five-fold as reported by Hesling (1958). Consequently, it takes heavy toll of our agricultural produc tion. Therefore, it is necessary to check further spread of this group of nematode.

Although considerable work on different aspects viz., host-range, biology, races, losses caused by H. avenae and its control have been carried out in India and abroad. For control, crop rotation, deep summer ploughing, trap crops, chemical control and plant resistance have been recommended. It is only recently that Bhatti (1988) investigated the efficacy of toxic substances obtained from different plants which he exploited for the control of H. avenae. There are, however, certain aspects thus, for not investigated or the informations are scanty. Keeping in view the above facts, author undertook the survey work on Heterodera species attacking cereals and non-cereals in the different districts of Uttar Pradesh. Besides this, he carried out experimental studies on H. avenae. The summarized plan of work is given

below :

1. Survey of heteroderid nematodes and their identification in different districts of Uttar Pradesh. 2. Geographical distribution, frequency of occurrence and infestation levels of different species. 3. Seasonal fluctuation of H. avenae population in a naturally infested field. 4. Studies on the morphometries of two populations of H. avenae. i) The influence of different hosts on the morphometries of the two populations of H. avenae. ii) The influence of soil types on the morphometries of two populations of H. avenae. iii) The influence of soil moisture on the morphometries of two populations of H. avenae.

5. Studies on the host range of two populations of H. avenae. 6. Screening of different populations of H. avenae for determining its biotypes. 7. Studies on the non-chemical control of H. avenae. i) Effect of chopped leaves on growth of wheat, ii) Effect of chopped leaves on growth of barley, iii) Effect of chopped leaves on growth of oat.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

SURVEY CONFINED TO INDIA

A number of surveys for plant parasitic nematodes have been carried out in India (Prasad e_t ^. , 1964; Swarup _e_t al. , 1964; Saxena and Husain, 1969; Sethi and Swarup, 1969; Yadav et al. , 1969; Rashid e_t ad., 1973; Mukhopadhyaya and Haque, 1974; Starr, 1979; Kaushik and Bajaj, 1980; Hasan, 1985; Dutta et_ al., 1987; Ahmad £t_ al^., 1988; Darekar _et al., 1990; Deshmukh e_t_ al., 1990). Most of these surveys were restricted to localities in the neighbourhood of some active centres of plant nematology and, at best, in relation to a particular crop (Prasad and Dasgupta, 1964; Singh and Mishra, 1974) or a particular nematode (Seshadri and Sivakumar, 1963; Koshy and Swarup, 1971) but extensive surveys specifically for heteroderid nematodes have been very few (Swarup e_t al. , 1964;

Siddiqi, 1964; Siddiqui et_ al., 1986a,b, 1989; Khan £t _al., 1989, 1990).

DISTRIBUTION OF CYST NEMATODES WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO SPECIES REPORTED FROM INDIA

Plant parasitic nematodes are ubiquitous organisms which can live in almost all kinds of environment. Agricul tural land represents a specialized environment, ranging from a dry, barren waste to a moist, lush jungle of plant growth. Plant parasitic nematodes are mostly those soil inhabiting species that are capable of withstanding the frequent changes

caused by agricultural practices. Some of them can live in a wide variety of habitats but some are found in very special situations.

It is a common observation that plant parasitic nematodes in the infested fields and in many cases governed by agricultural practices. The distribution and number of nematodes within host is important to understand the nature of disease by identifying the location of the initial disturbance in the individual plant. The distribution of nematodes within the plant is also governed by host susceptibility. Kerapfe (1960) observed the distribution of Heterodera schachtii larvae in the roots of Brassica rapa and Beta vulgaris and reported that larvae preferred feeding at the root tips, the points of origin of lateral roots and the intervening regions separately. The larvae were found in clusters at the points of origin of lateral roots giving a patchy distribution within root system. Krikpatrick e_t_ aj^. (1964) observed that plant parasitic nematodes preferred feeding or penetration at particular zones on the root and at specific stages in the root ontogeny. Some species prefer the meristem while others the zone of elongation and still others the region of matura tion. Nematodes also preferred tissues and cells within a particular region of the root for feeding, for instance, the apical meristem, the epidermis and the cortex or the stele.

In soil, a wide variety of plant parasitic nematodes generally exist in communities comprising populations of either different species of the same genus or of different

genera. Very wide fluctuation in the type of nematodes and their population structures are known to occur during a season or from season to season but unstable population of nematode seldom occurs. The unstable distribution may be random or more generally clustered and depends on several factors such as spatial pattern of the present or earlier grown hosts and distribution of roots, imperceptible environmental changes, land management practices, inherent reproductive capacities, migratory abilities, variation in edaphic factors and all other biological aspects of nematodes which are essential to understand the nematode population dynamics.

1. SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION

Research on distribution and abundance are likely to be complex and time consuming. However, the initial survey of species in soil should indicate which species is predominant and which are most likely to be important.

(A) Horizontal Distribution

A number of attempts have been made in different parts of the country to survey for the occurrence and damage caused by heteroderid nematodes in different crop plants. Table 1 gives the summary of the reports so far occurred in the literature.

Table - 1 : Cyst nematode species found in India.

Species Place of References occurrence

1. Heterodera avenae Rajasthan Vasudeva (1958), WoUenweber. 1924 Yadav & Verma (1970)

Himachal Koshy & S war up (1971) Pradesh,

Uttar Pradesh Swarup et_al. (1982 )

Leh, Jammu 6c Khan et^. ah (1990) Kashmir

H. cacti Filipjev & Schuurmans KarnataKa Kumar (1964) SFeKhoven. 1941

3. H. cajani Koshy, 1967 Delhi Koshy (1967)

Andhra Pradesh Koshy & Swarup (1971)

Bihar, Rajasthan Bhatti & Gupta (1973) and and Verma & Yadav (1975) Uttar Pradesh Janarthanan (1972) Tamil Nadu Siddiqui e^ :§k (1989) Madhya Pradesh H. carotae Jones, 1950 Himachal Swarup e^ aL (1964) Pradesh 11^. cyperi Golden, Rao & Cobb, KarnataKa Kumar (1980) (1962)

6. H. delvii Jairajpuri Khan, KarnataKa Jairajpuri et al. (1970) Sethi & Govindu, 1970

7. H. galeopsides Goffart, 1936 Delhi Swarup e^ aL (1964)

8. H. gambiensis Merny &: KarnataKa Krishnaprasad & Netscher, 1976 Krishnappa (1982)

9. H. graminis Stynes, 1971 Delhi & Sharma & Swarup (1984) Rajasthan

Uttar Pradesh Siddiqui et_ aL (1986a)

Mnnipur Khan et al. (1989)

Contd.

Place of Species occurrence References

10. H. mothi Khan & Husain, 1965 Uttar Pradesh Khan & Husain (1965) Haryana, Delhi Sharma & Swarup (1984)

Madhya Pradesh Siddiqui et_ al. (1988)

Punjab SaKhuja et^ ah (1988)

11. H. oryzicola Kerala Rao & JayapraKash Rao & JayapraKash, 1978 (1978) and Kuriyan et_ al. (1985)

Goa Koshy et al. (1987)

12. H. sacchari Luc & Merny, 1963 Delhi-Ghaziabad Swarup e^ ah (1964) Highway

13. U_. sorghi Jain, Sethi, Swarup & Uttar Pradesh Jain e^aL (1982) Srivastava. 1982 Haryana Dhawan et_ ^. (1983)

Andhra Pradesh Sharma & Sharma (1988)

Madhya Pradesh Siddiqui et^ aL (1989)

14. H. trifolii Goffart, 1932 Bihar Sen (1963)

Jammu & KashmirSwarup e^ sL (1964)

15. H. zeae Koshy, Sethi, and Rajasthan Koshy e^ _al. (1971) Swarup, 1971 Andhra Pradesh Koshy e^ aL (1971),

Bihar, Delhi, Koshy & Swarup (1971), M.P., Punjab &. Srivastava & Swarup U.P. (1975) Himachal PradeshSharma et al. (1984)

Gujrat MaKadia £t_ aL (1988)

Tamil Nadu Subramaniyan £^ aL (1990)

16. Globodera pallida Tamil Nadu Sharma & Swarup (1983) (Stone, 1973) Behrens, 1975 Kerala Ramana & Mohandas (1988)

Place of Species occurrence References

17. G. rostochiensis Tamil Nadu Jones (1961), Seshadri & ITVollenweber, 1923) SivaKumar (1962), Behrens, 1975 Prasad & Chawla (1965) Sharma & Swarup (1983)

18. Afenestrata sacchari Himachal Pradesh Kaushal <5c Swarup (1988) Kaushal & Swarup, 1988 19. Brevicephalodera bamboosi Assam Kaushal & Swarup (1988) Kaushal a Swarup, 1988

(B) Vertical distribution

The study of vertical distribution of plant parasitic nematodes in soil is difficult because of the complexity of many inter-related biotic and abiotic factors. Biotic factors in an animal's environment are considered to include all organisms and the non-living organic matter whereas principal abiotic factors include soil type, moisture, pH, temperature, aeration etc. which influence distribution and population of nematodes.

Suit e_t a_l. (1953) found greater number of Radopholus similis (Cobb, 1893) Thorne, 1949 at a depth of 1-5 feet. Witkowski (1958) observed that Rotylenchus robustus (de Man, 1876) Filipjev, 1936 was found 10-20 cm below soil surface while free living nematodes were concentrated in the upper

10 cm of soil. Baines et_ _al_. (1959) reported that Tylenchulus semipenetrans Cobb, 1913 may occur as deep as 8 feet depending

how citrus roots are, while Stephan et_ al. (1977) found that the highest number of citrus nematodes occurred at a depth of 1 foot. Luc and Hoestra (1960) found that most of the nematodes around coconut palm plantations were concentrated in the upper 60 cm of soil where there are most roots but Dolichodorus profundus Luc, 1960 occurred as deep as 1.2-2.0 metres. Weischer (1961) found twice as number of Hemicyclio- phora similis Thorne, 1955 at 50 cm depth than at 10 cm, while 90 per cent of the other plant parasitic nematodes occurred in the top 30 cm. Misra and Singh (1977) analysed soil samples collected from different depths and showed that nematodes were

most abundant in the top 10 cm layer of soil in the rhizosphere of sugarcane. This zone contained upto 55 per cent of the total population of all nematodes and their number decreased significantly in the samples drawn from deeper soil layers. The largest concentration of Hoplolaimus sp. was observed at 30-60 cm depth and the minimum number was extracted from 70-90 cm layer. Helicotylenchus sp. and Tylenchorhynchus sp. were most numerous in the top 10 cm zone while Pratylenchus sp. was observed only at top 30 cm soil layer. Husain e_t al. (1981) observed that high populations occurred where more feeder roots were present. Davis (1984) observed highest population of Tylenchulus semipenetrans in top 15 cm of soil profile.

Thus, it indicates that in most agricultural soils plant nematodes tend to concentrate at a particular depth which may vary with soil type, host plant, soil moisture, soil temperature and other factors. Various authors (Steiner, 1952; Bassus, 1962; Brodie and Quanttlebaum, 1970) have suggested that food, root depth, rainfall, height of water table, soil moisture, soil type, depth of subsoil and tempera ture influence the vertical distribution of nematodes in soil.

(a) Effect of soil type

There are contradictory reports on influence of soil type on nematode distribution and population fluctuations. This is because of wide variation in physical and chemical factors between localities,even where the textural composition

of soil is more or less similar.

The cultivation of crop on a certain soil type and the close association of a nematode species with the crop might produce an apparent nematode soil type relationship. Petherbridge and Jones (19A4) found infestation of H.schachtii on sugarbeet with most of the soil types except heavy soil. Kemper (1958) studied the distribution of G. rostochiensis on two farms and concluded that the infestations of G_, rosto chiensis were heavier on sandy soils where potatoes were grown more frequently. Endo (1959) grew strawberry and cotton seedlings in four soil types viz., sand, sandy loam, loam and clay loam and inoculated with 500 adults and larvae of Pratylenchus brachyurus (Godfrey, 1929) Filipjev and Stekhoven 19A1. He observed that the infestation was greatest in the sandy loam and least in sand and clay loam. Van Gundy and Rackham (1961) observed that the population increase of Hemicycliophora arenaria Raski, 1958 on tomato plants were greater in sandy soil or a mixture of equal parts of the two.

Certain nematode species such as Meloidogyne spp., Heterodera spp., Rotylenchus robustus and some other ecto- parasitic nematodes thrive in light soils; Pratylenchus penetrans (Cobb, 1917) Filipjev and Schuurmans Stekhoven, 1941 and Tylenchulus semipenetrans in sandy loam; Belonolaimus sp. and Hemicycliophora sp. in organic soils and Xiphinema americanum (Cobb, 1913), ^. neglectus Filipjev and Schuurmans

Stekhoven, 1941 and ?_. thornei Sher and Allen, 1953 in clay loam or clay soil (Wallace, 1963). Meagher (1968) found that

H. avenae was confined to the solonized brown soils or the friable grey soils and the friable grey soil of heavy texture. Further studies indicated that the rate of reproduction of H. avenae was much less in the red brown earths than in the other two soil types. A survey of H. avenae in England and Wales indicated that heavy infestations of H. avenae occurred on light soils than on the medium and heavy ones.

These findings are mostly based on survey results of prevalence Oniit distribution of nematodes. Experimental data on the effect of soil types on the activity of nematodes are

limited. Upadhyaya et^ al^. (1972) found that Ditylenchus dipsaci (Kuhn, 1957) Filipjev, 1936 multiplied on onion in clay soil and in soils with 8/11 or more of clay; Meloidogyne hapla Chitwood, 19A9 reproduced best in soils with 5/11 or more of sand, R_. robustus, Tylenchorhynchus dubius (Butschi, 1873) Filipjev, 1936; £. rostochiensis reproduced well on all soils. However, they concluded that in addition to granular composition, other soil factors are important for the survival and reproduction of several nematode species. Srivastava and Sethi (1984) observed that corn cyst nematode, H. zeae preferred moderately light soil for reproduction and addition of clay resulted in significant decline in cyst production. Maximum cyst production was recorded in sandy loam, sand mixture (2:3) and this appeared to be the best combination for nematode multiplication.

(b) Effect of temperature

Temperature, like other factors, influence nematodes directly or indirectly. It affects nematode activities such as hatching, reproduction, movement, development and survival in addition to its effect on the host plant. The temperature range for the majority of nematode species is 5-15°C (minimum), 15-30°C (optimum) and 30-40°C (maximum). The temperature below 5°C is either lethal or initiates quiescence while above 40°C is often lethal. However, individuals of different age or at different degrees of starvation may behave differently and different populations of the same species may have different temperature characteristics. For instance, Daulton and Nusbaum (1962) found that populations of M. javanica (Treub, 1885) Chitwood, 1949 from Georgia, North Carolina, USA and Southern Rhodesia differ in their tolerance to high and low temperatures.

Determination of the effect of temperature on the nematode reproduction is a complicated phenomenon because temperature affect the growth of plant itself. Changes in plant growth correspond changes in root morphology and physiology. Temperature partially determines the choice of crop plantings and rotations.

In addition to its direct effect on survival, tempera

ture also influences sex determination and rate of development

of plant parasitic nematodes. Cysts of H. avenae are reported

to require exposure to low temperature prior to hatching. It

was noted that in soybeans grown at 24°C, the develouin^

H. glycines were mostly males. The optimum temperature for

invasion of potatoes by G^. rostochiensis is 15-16°C (Chitwood and Buhrer, 1946), for emergence of larvae from cysts 21-25°C (Lownsbery, 1950) and for development 18~24°C (Ferris, 1957) but the development within the host is inhibited at 29-32°C (Fenwick, 1951; Ferris, 1957; Mai and Harrison, 1959). However, the emergence of larvae may continue until 36-37°C (Slack and Hamblen, 1959). The optimum temperature for movement of H. schachtii Schmidt, 1871 larvae is 15°C but for emergence of larvae from cyst is about 25°C (Wallace, 1958). When infected potatoes were exposed to temperature above

optimum for G_. rostochiensis (upto 38°C), the number of juveniles that became adults decreased with increase in temperature. The most sensitive stage was the preadult males (Trudgill e_t al., 1970). Low temperature, about 10°C, influences hatching of eggs of most populations of H. avenae (Gotten, 1962; Fushtey and Johnson, 1966; Banyer and Fisher, 1971; Williams and Beane, 1980).

Fisher (1981) observed that early development of second stage juveniles in the eggs of H. avenae proceeded faster at 20°C than at 15 or 10°C. Optimum temperature for penetration of roots by juveniles was initially about 25°C but later was about 20°C. This change was partly from the resultant of the optimum temperature for growth of roots and optimum temperature for penetration of juveniles. The rate of development of juveniles in roots increased upto 25°C but there was little difference between 20 and 25°C. More females

were produced at 15°C. Fagbenle e_t al. (1987) observed emergence of H. lesped^zae Golden and Cobb, 1963 juveniles from cysts and their invasion of striate lespedeza (Lespedgza striata) roots at 15-35°C and reported that maximum emergence of juveniles from Illinois and North Carolina populations occurred at 25°C. Juveniles from both populations invaded striate lespedeza roots at all temperatures but significantly more North Carolina juveniles penetrated at 30 and 35°C than did Illinois juveniles. Den Toom (1988) reported that !_. dubius reduced the growth of Lolium perenne mainly as a result of activity during first week is after seeding. The percentage decrease of dry matter yield was smaller when temperature was more favourable for plant growth.

Plant parasitic nematodes, while in soil, are confined to pore spaces and, therefore, are dependent upon water for their activities. Some species do survive in dry conditions but only when they are in quiscent stage. Any change in moisture content of the soil will have direct influence on nematodes. That is why, by and large extremes of moisture have proved to be unfavourable for nematodes. Flooding, for example, is reported to suppress the population of root-knot nematodes (Kincaid, 1946). Certain species of nematodes, on the other hand, such as Dolichodorus heterocephalus Cobb, 1914 (Perry, 1953), RadophoCuj gracilis (Golden, 1957) and D.dipsaci (Barker and Sasser, 1959) were, however, favoured by high soil moisture. Kort and S'Jacob (1956) observed that damage to

oats by H. avenae and to tobacco by ^. dipsaci was governed to a large extent by soil moisture. Hamblen and Slack (1959) reported that at high soil moisture H. glycines Ichinohe, 1952 produced a high proportion of white cysts on soybean roots but the rate of larval emergence was low. At low soil moisture, on the other hand, there was a decrease in the proportion of white cysts as well as the rate of emergence.

Rainfall often varies widely from year to year and within a year. Thus, the influence of soil moisture is sometimes evident in the relationship between rainfall and nematode population changes. Minton e_t _al_. (1960) found correlation between rainfall and population size of Hoplolaimus tylenchiformis Daday, 1905 but no correlation was observed for M. incognita acrita Chitwood, 1949; Trichodorus christiei Allen, 1957; ^. brachyurus and Criconemoides curvatum (Raski, 1952) Luc and Raski, 1981. Norton (1959), on the other hand, found increase in the population of £. projectus Jenkins,1956; Tylenchorhynchus brevidens Allen, 1955 and Aphelenchus avenae Bastian, 1865 after rainfall. He attributed this increase due to increased hatching in most soil while Hollis and Johnston

(1957) observed a decrease in number of T_. martini Filipjev, 1956 in a soybean crop with the increase in rain.

Various observations on the distribution of nematodes in the soil suggest that there is a little seasonal vertical migration of nematodes (Hoff and Mai, 1964; Koen, 1966;

Richter, 1969). However, there are few data on the relation ship between the moisture profile and nematode distribution,

migration or populatio n changes. Yuen (1966) indicated that

distribution may be related to moisture. Zuckerraan e_t al.

(1964), on the other hand, found that downward migration of Hemicycliophora similis in Cranberry bogs during dry summer period was reversed by irrigation.

The movement of water down through the soil may affect nematodes. Radopholus similis can be transported down to the water table or into drainage pipes (Ducharme, 1955). Tommerlin (1971) demonstrated that variations in soil moisture between soil types, because of differences in drainage possibly explain why R_. similis is more destructive to citrus seedlings in fine sandy than in loamy sand soils.

Goodell and Ferris (1989) studied the influence of environmental factors on the hatch and survival of M.incognita. Influence of soil moisture on hatching was measured by placing egg masses in Hesperia sandy loam and subjecting them to suction pressure ranging from -1.1 bars to -4.5 bars. Suction potentials of less than -2 bars reduced hatch and less than -3 bars inhibited hatch.

(d) Effect of soil pH

The pH of a soil affects plant growth and chemical reactions in the soil and also determines the availability of nutrients to the plant. Soil pH, therefore, affects nematodes indirectly through the host plant (Loewenberg e_t al., 1960; Wallace, 1966; Morgan and MacLean, 1968). In general, there is little evidence that soil pH is a major abiotic factor in

the ecology of nematodes, however extremes of pH inhibit plant growth and this affect parasitic nematodes indirectly. Studies on the ecology of soil nematodes indicated that pH had little direct effect on nematodes (Yeats, 1968). It is known that a soil pH between 5.0 and 7.0 has little effect on nematodes. Lime is often used to neutralize soil acidity, causes no decrease in population of nematodes. Fertilizers and organic matter may influence nematode populations directly by increasing host plant growth. Ellenby (1946) reported that both alkaline as well as acidic conditions inhibit larval emergence from cysts of G_. rostochiensis. Fenwick (1951), on the other hand, observed no difference in total emergence or rate of emergence of ^. rostochiensis between pH 3.0-8.0. Simon (1955) observed a close correlation between soil pH and the infestation level of H.schachtii in Belgium while Pertherbridge and Jones (1944) stated that H. schachtii was absent from areas in the Fen districts of England where the soil was markedly acidic, probably because such soils are unsuitable for sugarbeet growing crops.

Morgan and MacLean (1968) studied correlation between pH and nematode numbers and reported that ^. penetrans maintained itself over the pH spectrum of most agricultural soils (pH 5.1-6.5) but thrived best at pH 5.5-5.8. They noticed a rapid decline in numbers above pH 6.6. Burns (1971) reported that highest number of ¥_. alleni Ferris, 1981 occurred around soybean plants at pH 6.0 and low number at pH 4.0 probably due to higher levels of potassium, manganese and phenols in the soybean plants at this pH.

Babatola (1981) observed that Hirschmanniella spp. viz., H. spinicaudata Luc and Goodey, 1964; H. imauri Sher, 1968, and H. oryzae Luc and Goodey, 1964 survived at wide pH range except at pH 3.0 or 4.0. Gnanapragasam (1987) observed that tea fields with high acidity were subjected to severe damage from an even lower population of Pratylenchus loosi Loof, 1960 than those in soils with an optimum pH.

2. TEMPORAL DISTRIBUTION

The distribution and abundance of plant parasitic nematodes are never static and the number is governed by host physiology, host maturity and senescence. In order to understand the spatial distribution of nematode, it is necessary to collect soil and root samples at various depths on several occasions during the growing season of the host and in several consecutive seasons. Account must also be taken of changes in distribution with time both horizontally and vertically. There are numerous references in the literature to seasonal fluctuations in nematode numbers with suggestions for the factors causing them (Griffin and Darling, 1964; Ducharme, 1967; Barker £t_ aj^., 1969; Meagher, 1970; Banyer and Fisher, 1971; Franklin et_ al., 1971; Husain et_ al^., 1981).

Meagher (1970) studied the seasonal fluctuation of larvae of Heterodera avenae in wheat field for three consecu tive years in Victoria, Australia and found highest larval population during late autumn and winter. He attributed the increase to changes in soil moisture and temperature that

favoured hatching. Banyer and Fisher (1971) observed that the rate of hatching of new season's eggs of H. avenae in South Australia changed only to a small extent over summer when soil temperatures were high (>20°C) but, in each of ttoo years, a sharp increase in the rate coincided with onset of low soil temperatures in late autumn-winter. They found no evidence of an inherent seasonal cycle of hatching. Greco (1981), on the other hand, observed that high summer temperature almost inhibited hatching of larvae of H. avenae and H. carotae Jones, 1950 which, however, was regained in autumn.

Winslow (1956) studied seasonal variation in the hatching responses of G_. rostochiensis and certain species of Heterodera and reported winter dormancy in the hatchability which can be shortened by storing infested soil at certain temperatures, but the cessation of dormancy in spring is not necessarily associated with rise in soil temperature.

Evans (1969) found changes in G_. rostochiensis popula tion through the growing season of potato. Hatching and invasion of potato roots occurred early in the season when plants were very young and temperature were below those considered necessary for hatching. Males were abundant during June and July and many new cysts appeared during late June and early July. In May/June, there were many larvae in the roots of young plants but later, there were few; a slight increase during August probably indicated a small second generation.

Studies on the population fluctuation of maize cyst nematode, Heterodera zeae under field conditions with maize.

cowpea, wheat rotation revealed one high peak coinciding with crop maturity, indicating with host specificity (Srivastava and Sethi, 1986).

MORPHOLOGY AND MORPHOMETRICS

The type of variability most commonly met within nematodes are absolute size, relative body proportions, numbers of certain external features such as papillae, annules,longitudinal striations or relative position of structures such as excretory pore or the oesophageal gland. Godfrey (1929) observed for the first time, intraspecific variations in the shape of tail in Pratylenchus brachyurus where it ranged from round to square tail terminus in naturally occurring populations. He, however, failed to realize and point out the significance of such type of variations in nematode taxonomy.

Variability may also be physiological, which is usually seen in the ability of certain populations to feed and multiply on some plants and not on others. Physiological differences alone are not good criteria for species diagnosis, but the study pf physiologically different races may lead to the discovery of morphological differences and the setting up of separate species as had happened in the genus Meloidogyne (Franklin, 1970). Chitwood (1957) found considerable variations among the populations of plant parasitic nematodes. He cautioned against giving too much weightage to the nematode size and its various structures which according to him are influenced by a number of factors such as physical condition,

food supply and age etc. Thorne and Allen (1959), while discussing the problems of nematode taxonomy, highlighted the importance of study of variations in them and considered that the measurements of different characters of an individual nematodes in natural populations though may vary according to their stage of development, a deviation of 10-35 per cent of a mean might be due to genetic variation. De Coninck (1962), while discussing the problems of systematics and taxonomy in relation to various characters, such as forms of tail and lip region, the size of eggs, size of spicules, number of pre-anal or caudal papillae, pointed out that the differences may be an expression of specific diversity or the expression of intraspecific phenotypical or genetic variability or the influence of ecological and geographical factors. Loof (1970) and Coomans (1971) attributed them to the differences in the genetic constitution and or differences in the environment.

Thus, two types of variations (temporary and permanent) may occur in nematodes, the temporary variations which occur mainly due to influence of environment are known as extrinsic variations and those which are genetic and often play a role in the formation of biotype or physiological races or a new species during the evolution are known as intrinsic variations.

(A) EXTRINSIC VARIATIONS

Sher and Allen (1953) observed variations in various

body measurements in general and length in particular in the

various populations of Pratylenchus vulnus Allen & Jensen,1951

collected from different hosts and localities. Taylor and

Jenkins (1957) studied variatioins within nematode genus Pratylenchus and described two new species viz.,P»subpenetrans

Taylor and Jenkins, 1957 and F_. hexincisus Taylor and Jenkins, 1957. They observed a wide range of variability in the length of nematode, shape of tail terminus and ratios 'a', 'b' and 'c' in _P. penetrans (Cobb, 1917) Filipjev&Schuurmans Stekhoven

1941; ?_. zeae Graham, 1971; ^. subpenetrans and _P. hexincisus. Ratio 'V (per cent vulva) was, however, the least variable taxonomic character in all the four species. Loof (1960) in his extensive taxonomic treatment of 20 species of the genus Pratylenchus, observed variability in the shape of tail terminus of five species. Roman and Hirschmann (1969) carried out morphological and morphometric studies on _P. penetrans,

¥_. vulnus, P^. cof feae (Zimmermann, 1898) Filipjev and Schuurmans Stekhoven, 1941; P^. scribneri Steiner, 1943; P. zeae and ^. brachyurus raised on alfalfa callus tissue at 27°C and in greenhouse plot culture on suitable hosts. Morphological and morphometric comparisons revealed a high degree of variability in most of the taxonomic characters studied. The number of annules in the lip region, the number and arrange ment of incisures in lateral field, the shape of stylet knobs and tail varied considerably within most of species while the vulva per cent and stylet length had the lowest coefficients of variability and were found to be of diagnostic value.

Webley (1970) measured larvae of pure population of

Heterodera rostochiensis (now Globodera rostochiensis) which

showed variations among the larval length, stylet length and the distance between the crescentic valves of the median bulb and the excretory pore while Mulvey (1973) on the other hand, found distinct morphological differences in the length of vulval aperture, arrangement, number and size of tubercles and terminal area in the white females and presence or absence of circumfenestral area and width of circular grooves in the cyst of six species of Heterodera/Globodera. Meagher (1974) observed differences in the measurements of H. avenae in Australia due to influence of environmental factors. Riggs et al. (1982) while comparing morphometric characters of various populations of H. glycines and species of Heterodera, Globodera and Punctodera, found a wide range of each measurement within each nematode population.

Priest and Southards (1971) studied the comparative morphology of sixteen isolates of M. incognita and observed that the larval measurements were significantly different from all other isolates in total length, tail length, tail length/ anal body width (c') and in the distance from the stylet base to the dorsal oesophageal gland orifice (DOGO) whereas spicule length and total length of the males were most variable. They also compared the measurements of M. incognita with M.javanica and M. hapla and found significant variations in length of stylet or width of the stylet knobs, DOGO, c' value and perineal patterns. Eisenback e_t al. (1980) compared characteristics of female head structures, perineal patterns and stylet. They found that head morphology of females

including shape of medial and lateral lips, expression of sensilla and head annules was distinct for each species of

Meloidogyne. There were differences between species in the shape of cone, shaft and knobs of stylet and in the distance of DOGO from the stylet knob base. Eisenback and Hirschmann (1980, 1981) observed variations in males of Meloidogyne spp. (M. arenaria, M. incognita, M. javanica, M,. hapla) with regard to head shape and stylet length, lateral field, excretory pore and tail. The expression of labial and cephalic sensilla, shape and position of labial disc, lips and markings on the head region were distinctly different for each species. Differences in stylet size, shape and relative distance of the DOGO to the base of stylet were also observed in the second stage juveniles of Meloidogyne spp. (Eisenback, 1982).

Morphological and morphometric variations were also observed in the progeny derived from single gravid females (Van Weerdt, 1958; Sanwal and Loof, 1967; Netscher, 1970; Tarjan and Frederick, 1974; Chin, 1975; Tarte and Mai, 1976; Tarjan and Frederick, 1978).

Faghihi e_t_ al. (1986) studied morphology of five geographical isolates of Heterodera glycines in Indiana. They observed that significant differences in means existed among the isolates for various comparisons of second stage juveniles beside much morphometric overlapping. The Vanderburgh County isolate (Southern Indiana) had the longest oesophagus, tail and tail terminus while the Vigo County isolate had the shortest oesophagus. The White County isolate (Northern

Indiana) had the shortest tail, tail terminus and greatest total length while the Benton County isolate was shortest.

However, their results showed that morphological similarities and differences did not appear to be co-ordinated with reproductive patterns.

(a) Effect of host plants

The host plants may also influence morphological and morphometric characters of various plant parasitic nematodes (Goodey, 1952; Wu, 1960; Bird and Mai, 1965; Miller, 1965; Cook, 1975; Grullon ejt ad., 1976; Krasnopolski, 1979; Davide, 1979, 1980; Fortuner and Queneherve, 1980; Chawla and Yadav, 1982; Pant £t _al., 1983, 1985; Pantone _e^ al., 1987; Saha and Khan, 1988).

Goodey (1952) demonstrated that host species induced variations in body length and in dorsal or ventral position of basal bulb of oesophagus in Ditylenchus destructor Thorne, 1945. These variations were more pronounced in females than in males. Wu (1960) made a comparative study of the specimens obtained from tomato, iris, and dahlia. She observed that these nematodes exhibited general characters of ^. destructor and did not reveal any significant difference in basic structures to suggest the presence of more than one species. However, due to host influence, there has been some variations in total length, width, number and arrangement of the sex cells, length of oesophagus, length of stylet and tail shape. Nematodes from potato were successfully transferred to dahlia

31 and carrot from iri s and dahlia to potato. Also, specimens from potato interbred freely with specimens from iris and dahlia which led her to conclude that they all belong to the same species. Barraclough and Blackith (1962) studied morphometric relationship in the genus Ditylenchus living in different host plants and observed that differences of shape can not, however, be paralleled by the difference between the forms of ^. dipsaci and £. myceliophagus Goodey, 1958.

Fisher (1965) did not find much differences in various measurements of Paratylenchus nanus Cobb, 1923 grown on apricot and on apple seedlings. However, he observed that males isolated from apricot seedlings were larger in size.

Trudgill e_t_ a_l^. (1970) reported that host plants often decreased the mean body length and stylet length in Globodera rostochiensis. Koliopanos and TriantaphyLlou (1971) studied host specificity and morphometries of 4 populations of H. glycines developed on five resistant soybean cultivars, mungbean and lespedeza. Differences were observed in body length, tail length and tail terminus and length of second stage juveniles.

Husaini and Seshadri (1976) observed marked adverse

effect of resistant host on the size of the females of h. incognita.

Pant e_t al. (1983) reported that different hosts influenced the female dimensions to a varied degree and observed that large robust females were produced on highly susceptible plants like Trigonella foenumgraecum,Pisum sativum

and Coriandrum sativum while smaller on plants like Lycopersi- con esculentum cv. Pelicum, L_. pimpinellifolium (red fruit). Lopez and Dickson (1984) compared morphometric characters of M. incognita host races 1, 2 and 3 collected from Florida and showed that race 1 had shorter DOGO in females, males, and larvae and a greater 'c' ratio in larvae than other two races. The perineal patterns of the three host races had shown no significant differences. Osman e_t _al. (1985), on the other hand, compared two populations each of race 1 and 2 of M. arenaria (Neal, 1889) Chitwood, 1949 obtained from tobacco, peanut and soybean collected from different localities of Florida but observed no significant differences. The stylet length in each population and in each life stage was the least variable character.

Miller (1988) compared cyst cone structures of Heterodera schachtii and H. glycines cultured on 'US75' sugarbeet and 'Lee' soybean cultivar respectively. They observed that the dimensions were significantly different for all characters studied by him.

Subramanian and Sivakumar (1988) revealed that the stylet length, V percentage and 'M' values had the least variation while total body length, a, b, b', c, 0, tail length, number of tail annules, excretory pore, position and length of the post-uterine sac showed greater variability and c' and length of oesophagus were found to be most variable

characters in F_. delatteri Luc, 1958 collected from rhizosphere of three different hosts viz., Crossandra undulaefolia,

Zea mays and L_. esculentum from four different localities in

Tamil Nadu. Morphological and morphometric characters of various plant parasitic nematodes have been found influenced by the nutritional requirements or the physiological status of the host plants (Ruhm, 1962; Sanwal, 1965; Bird and Mai, 1967; El-Sherif, 1972; Ismail and Saxena, 1977). Tyler (1933) observed relationship between nutrition and the development of root-knot nematode in root culture, and noted that the number of eggs laid, size and vigour of larvae were affected by the nutritional status of the host. Sanwal (1965) observed that the nutrition of host plant influenced size of ovary in species of Aphelenchoides Fisher, 1894. Ismail and Saxena (1977) observed that higher potassium levels favoured growth of M. incognita at all stages of development while Oteifa (1953), on the other hand, observed no changes in the size of female of M. incognita when host plants were supplied with differernt concentrations of potassium.

(b) Effect of soil moisture

Both too high and too low soil moistures have been found detrimental to plant parasitic nematodes, probably because in the high soil moisture soil pores are filled with water resulting in anaerobiosis and in too low soil moisture, water is practically not available to the nematodes. Godfrey (1926) observed that optimum soil moistures for the develop ment of root-knot nematode galls ranged between 50-80 per cent

of the field capacity while root-knot nematode infestation was considerably reduced in the rice field when soil was flooded

(Thomas, 1952). Rao and Israel (1971) observed that in M. javanica soil moisture range of 20-30 per cent was most suitable for larval invasion and its development in the host and egg mass production. Soil moisture, on the other hand, also influenced the hatching of larvae and their viability (Linford, 1941). Grandison (1973) observed that optimum soil moisture for hatching in nematode is the field capacity. Upadhyaya e_t ad. (1974) observed that in the presence of cereal seedlings stylet bearing nematode populations increased at moisture level from 14-20 per cent but not above.

Griffin (1977) reported that greater number of larvae of H. schachtii infected 14 days old sugarbeet seedlings growing in aldicarb treated soil at 20 to 30 per cent than at 80-100 per cent soil moisture levels.

The highest infestation of roots with the Meloidogyne spp. occurred in the coarse textured soil as compared to fine textured loam and clay loam soil (Sasser, 1954; Sleeth and Reynolds, 1955; Thomason and Lear, 1959; 0'Bannon and Reynolds, 1961; Abed and Taha, 1975). Soil containing 60-75 per cent sand and silt/clay in the ratio of 1:1, 2:1, 3:1 have been, by and large, found to be optimum for nematode infectivity (Elmiligy, 1960). Rao and Israel (1972), while studying the effect of soil type on the activity of M. graminicola Golden and Birchfield, 1965 found that coarse and medium (with

particles above 0.053 mm in diameter) sandy soil allowed free movement of infective larvae and invasion into roots of rice plants, clay soils were however, found to be less suitable. With an increase in sand content of test soils there was an increase in root growth, root-knot development and egg mass production by the nematode.

Upadhyaya e_t £l. (1972) observed that textured composition and other soil factors have determinant influence on the fate of inoculated nematode. Baines (1974) found low percentage of infection of Tylenchulus semipenetrans in coarse sand probably due to restriction of larval migration in coarse sand.

Graham (1980) observed high population of cereal cyst nematode in light sandy soil. Mukhopadhyaya and Haque (1980) observed maximum reproduction of Rotylenchulus reniformis Linford and Oliveira, 1940; in the soil having clay sand ratios of 3:4 and 4:3.

Das and Mukhopadhyaya (1987) studied the influence of different soil types on the morphometries of T_. semipenetrans and growth of Citrus paradisi. They found significant differences in the morphometric characters as well as in plant yields. Body length and width, stylet and neck length, width of median bulb, shoot and root weights and populations of T_. semipenetrans were found maximum in sandy and red gravelly soil. Laterite and clay soil behaving as intermediates.

Shahab and Saxena (1988) observed high values of measurements for dorsal arch, ventral arch, and number of

36 lines on left and right sides of the pattern in those, grown in sandy soil as compared to those grown in clay soil. Out of different mixtures of clay/sand, studied by them, in the ratio of 3:8 supported the highest values of various characters of females. However, vulval width, vulva anus distance and B/A ratio remained unaffected.

(B) INTRINSIC VARIATIONS

In plant parasitic nematodes intrinsic variations are of permanent nature which pass on from one generation to the other. These variations often occur in sexually reproducing populations of nematodes and are not uncommon in parthenogenetic forms. Riggs and Winstead (1959), however, reported that the mechanism of inheritance of such variations in parthenogenetically reproducing species is not clearly known. Ritzema-Boss (1888) probably, was the first who described a physiological race in Ditylenchus dipsaci. Since then, occurrence of races of different nematode species has been reported by different workers. Hastings e_t_ al^. (1952) and Smart and Darling (1963) reported occurrence of races in ^. destructor. Seinhorst (1957) considered that there were atleast eleven distinct races of B_. dipsaci in Europe, it is now known that some of the races can interbred (Webster, 1964; Ladygina, 1976). Southey (1957) found that in England the race infesting tulips will also infect narcissus whereas another race commonly found in narcissus does not readily infest tulip. Hesling (1966), Sturhan (1969) and Viglierchio

(1971) showed that ^. dipsaci is a complex mixture of races

and the parthenogenetic potential of populations is influenced by host and genetic factors. Jones e_t_ aj^. (1970), Canto Saenz and De Scurrah (1977), Kort (1974) and Kort and Barker (1980) reported occurrence of races in G^. rostochiensis; Neubert (1967), Brown (1969), Cook and Williams (1972), Mathur et al. (1974), Swarup ^ al. (1979) and Jacobsen (1980) in H. avenae; Raski (1952) and Griffin (1981) in H. schachtii; Ross (1962), Miller (1965, 1967), Epps and Golden (1967) and Riggs et_ al. (1981) in H. glycines; Daulton and Nusbaum (1962), Dropkin (1959), Triantaphyllou and Sasser (1960), Southard and Priest (1971, 1973), Michell £t al. (1973), Netscher (1970, 1978), Ogbuji (1981), Lopez and Dickson (1984) in M. incognita; Sasser (1963, 1966) and Osman e_t al. (1985) in M. arenaria; Goplen e_t_ _al. (1959) in M. hapla; Birchfield and Bolster (1952) and Dasgupta and Seshadri (1971) in R. reniformis; Baines £t_ al. (1969, 1974) in T. semipenetrans; Olthof (1968) in P^. penetrans; Riggs(1982) in the populations of Heterodera, Globodera and Punctodera species.

Trudgill e_t aj^. (1970) studied variations in the males and larvae of G_. rostochiensis and observed differences in the stylet size and distance between the median bulb to excretory pore of different populations. Similarly, differences in the physiological characters within populations led to the identification of races/biotypes in H. avenae, G.rostochiensis and H. glycines by Jones and Pawelska (1963), Kort (1966) and Miller (1966) respectively.

Sasser and Carter (1982) recognized atleast 4 physiological races in M. incognita and two in M. arenaria. Lopez and Dickson (1984) studied comparative morphometric characters of three races of M. incognita and reported that all these races showed variation in DOGO in females, second stage juveniles and males. On the other hand, Hirschmann (1984) reported two races of M. incognita on the basis of chromosome number (2n = 37-46). These variations however, remained unchanged.

HOST RANGE CONFINED TO CYST NEMATODES OCCURRING IN INDIA

Although there is a voluminous literature on the host range of heteroderid nematode species at International level (Jones, 1950; Lownsbery, 1952; Raski, 1952; Winslow, 1954; Holdeman and Watson, 1977; Maqbool, 1981; Maqbool and Hashmi, 1984; Radice £t_ ll- 1985; Ringer £t_ al., 1987, and Shahina and Maqbool (1990). However, in India the outstanding work on host-range of different Heterodera species has been carried out by Gill and Swarup (1971), Dhawan and Kaushal (1987) of H. avenae, Bhatti and Gupta (1978) of H. cajani; Husain e_t al. (1978) of H. mothi; Bhargava and Yadav (1979) of H. zeae; Charles and Venkitesan (1984) of H. oryzicola and Srivastava and Sethi (1987) of H. sorghi.

Winslow (1954) listed some provisional host plants of

Heterodera species (i.e. H. schachtii, H. cruciferae Franklin,

1945; H. trifolii; H. galeopsidis, H. goettingiana Liebscher,

1892; G. rostochiensis). Nearly all the members of the

family Cruciferae and some belonging to the families Amaranthaceae, Caryophyllaceae, Labiatae, Phytolaccaceae,

Polygonaceae, Scrophulariaceae and Tropaeolaceae have been found to be parasitized by H. schachtii, while H. cruciferae attacked mainly the members of the family Cruciferae and a few of the species of Labiatae. Hosts of H. galeopsidis and H. trifolii were found amongst the families Caryophyllaceae, Labiatae, Leguminosae, Polygonaceae and Scrophulariaceae.

Potato cyst nematode, G_. rostochiensis parasitized mainly species of Lycopersicum and Solanum while the carrot eelworm, H. carotae attacked only Daucus species and hop eelworm, H. humuli parasitized species of Urtica dioica and IJ. urens (members of the family Urticaceae), Cannabis sativa and Humulus lupulus (members of the family Cannabinaceae). Pea eelworm, H. goettingiana was found parasitizing species of Lathyrus, Lens, Pisum and Vicia (members of the family Leguminosae) whereas oat eelworm, H. avenae selectively parasitized the members of the family Graminae.

Sen (1963) recorded H. trifolii from Bihar around the

rhizosphere of Cucumis sativus, Cucurbita maxima and C_. pepo whereas Swarup e^ ^. (1964) recorded the presence of H. trifolii on Cajanus cajan but Koshy (1967) carried out a detailed study on this nematode and named as H. cajani. Later, Koshy and Swarup (1972) studied host range of H. cajani and recorded that this nematode also reproduced on Cicer arietinum, Dolichos lablab, D. biflorus, Glycine max, Phaseolus acontifolius, P^. acutifolius, P^. aureus, _P. atropurpurens, F^. calcaratus, _P. lathyroides, _P. lunatus.

?_. mungo, F_. vulgaris, Pisum sativum, Vicia narborensis, V. sativa and Sesamum indicum. Bhatti and Gupta (1973) added

Cyamopsis tetragonoloba as a new host of H. cajani. Sharma and Swarup (1984) inoculated larvae of H. cajani on Chionachne species, Echinochloa colona, Paspalum scorbiculatum, Setaria italica, Trilobachne species and Zea mexicana but no cysts were produced on these plants.

Kumar (1964) recorded H.cacti from roots of Echinopsis species grown in Horticultural and private gardens especially as rockery plants at Banglore, Karnataka.

Heterodera mothi Khan and Husain (1965) was found to attack Cyperus rotundus when originally described from Aligarh, India. Sharma and Swarup (1984) observed larval penetration of H. mothi in the roots of Coix lachryma, Chionachne sp., Paspalum scorbiculatum, Sorghum vulgare and Trilobachne sp. but no cysts were formed. This species is therefore, highly host specific (Husain e_t_ al., 1978). However, Maqbool and Hashmi (1984) reported it to occur on Solanum melongena in Pakistan which appear highly improbable.

Koshy e_t al. (1971) originally described H. zeae from the roots of Zea mays. Srivastava and Swarup (1975) reported Hordeum vulgare, Echinochloa colona, Panicum species, Setaria italica and Triticum aestivum as its other hosts. Bhargava

and Yadav (1979) inoculated '!_. aestivum, H. vulgare, Avena sativa, Zea mays, Sorghum vulgare, Pennisetum typhoides and Eleucine coracana each with 15 cysts of H. zeae per plant (an average of 165 eggs and larvae per cyst). They observed that

only Zea mays and H. vulgare were hosts of this nematode.

Differences in varietal reaction to maize cyst nematode have also been recorded. Out of thirty varieties, eighteen (K-356- 78, K-263-78, K-A-12-19, K-227, DL-31, DL-96, DL-217, DL-218, RD-102, RD-213, P-348, 3552, IP-133, BHL-87, BP-227, BP-264, RL-78 and PT-10) exhibited tolerance. Minimum number of eggs and larvae per plant were observed on variety RD-102. Rest were found either susceptible or highly susceptible. Srivastava and Swarup (1975) reported that the host range of H. zeae is mainly confined to Graminae viz., H. vulgare, E. colona, Panicum sp., S^. italica and T_. aestivum under pot conditions. Maqbool (1981) has recorded sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum), gram (Cicer arietinum), Citrus species, pear (Pyrus communis), garlic (Allium sativum) as new hosts of H. zeae. Lai and Mathur (1982) found heavy infestation of H. zeae on Vetiveria zizanioides commonly known as 'Khus'. Their results indicated that H. zeae beside multiplying on already known host plants viz., A. sativa, H. vulgare, S^. italica, S_. vulgare, T^. aestivum and Zea mays also multiplied on Cynodon dactylon, Cyperus rotundus, Desmostachya bipinnata, Beta vulgaris, C_. cajan, d_. carrota, Glycine max, 0_. sativa, Phaseolus vulgaris, Raphanus sativus and Vigna radiata. Under pot experiments, H. zeae was found to reproduce on Coix lachryma, E. colona cv. Bageshwar local, E. colona VHL-51A2, Eleusine coracana, S_. italica STA-326, Zea mays cv. Basi, £. sativa cv. Ratna, Secale cereale. Sorghum vulgare IS-1054 and Zea mexicana (Sharma and Swarup, 1984). Maqbool and

Hashmi (1984) added Chilli (Capsicum annuum), Jute (Corchorus capsularis) and Radish (Raphanus sativus) as its other hosts.

Shahzad & Gaffar (1986) observed attachment of cysts on the roots of Lycopersicon esculentum, a new host of the nematode identified as H. zeae from Pakistan.

Stynes (1971) reported a new cyst forming nematode species, H. graminis from the roots of Cynodon dactylon under field conditions while under pot conditions, Sharma and Swarup (1984) reported that this nematode reproduced on ^. italica, S. cereale and Zea mays. Larval penetration was recorded on Coix lachryma, H. vulgare, _S. vulgare CSV-6,Triticale DTS-908,

T^. aestivum WL-711, T_. durum HD-4502 and Zea mexicana but cysts were not produced. They observed high multiplication on £. dactylon than on other three hosts. Khan e_t al^. (1989) reported the occurrence of H. graminis from Manipur state, for the first time, and also added a grass Themeda anathera as a new host of the nematode.

H. oryzicola was originally reported to parasitize 0_. sativa but Charles and Venkitesan (1984) found this nematode parasitizing banana in Kerala, India. They also examined two weeds £. dactylon and Brachiaria sp. growing near the banana plants and reported as new host of H. oryzicola whereas Koshy et al. (1987) also recorded the occurrence of this nematode on banana in Goa while Taylor (1978), on the other hand, reported the parasitism of H. oryzae on banana in Senegal. Sharma and Swarup (1984) observed penetration of larvae of H. oryzicola

in the roots of Coix lachryma, E_. colona Bageshwar Local-2 and

Syali-6-1, Panicum miliare cv. GPmr-99, _S. italica Arjuna,

S_. vulgare CSH-6 and IS-1054 and Zea mays.

Jairajpuri et_ al. (1979) described new cyst nematode, H. delvii from roots of ragi plants, Eleusine coracana growing at Banglore. Krishnaprasad ejt al. (1980) tested some cereal seeds for host range studies and recorded _E. coracana IE-927, PR-202, _S. vulgare CSH-1, Echinochloa species, maize, pearl millet and finger millet and S^. italica as good hosts. They have also reported its reproduction on wheat var. California and Panicum miliaceum PM-158.

Krishnaprasad and Krishnappa (1982) observed males and larvae of H. gambiensis in 'Kharif season during their routine survey for plant parasitic nematodes. They observed

white females on roots of E. coracana and Dactyloctenium aegyptium.

H. sorghi was first recorded and described on the roots of ^. vulgare under field conditions from Ghaziabad and Allahabad districts of U.P., India by Jain e_t_ a_l. (1982). Later, Sharma and Swarup (198A) reported its reproduction on

E. colona Syali 6-1, Eleusine coracana, ^. italica GK-20, Paspalum scorbiculatum, Zea mays Hi-starch, £. rotundus, _P. typhoides and _S. vulgare CSH-6, CSV-6, IS-1054. Larval penetration was recorded in Cynodon dactylon, H. vulgare, £.

sativa cv. Ratna, _S_. italica Arjuna, T_. turgidum and Zea mexicana but cysts were not formed. Srivastava and Sethi (1987) tested host status of H. vulgare cv. Rajasthan, Zea mays cv. Ganga-5, Hi-starch and Shakti; Avena sativa cv. Kent,

Z- typhoides cvs. BD-763, BJ-lOA, HB-3 and NHB-3, 0_. sativa

CVS. Basmati, IR-8, Ratna, Saket-4 and Sona, and T_. aestivum CVS. C-306, WL-711 and reported that Zea mays cv. Ganga-5 and 0_. sativa cv. Ratna were highly preferred hosts. Barley was found to be new host while ?_. typhoides and T_. aestivum were poor hosts for H. sorghi.

The host range of H. avenae was observed by Winslow (1954) and reported that this nematode selectively parasitized members of the family Graminae such as Agrostis,Arrhenatherum, Avena, Brachypodium, Bromus, Festuca, Hordeum, Lolium, Phalaris, Poa, Secale, Triticum and Vulpia. Gill and Swarup (1971) reported Echinochloa frumantacea, Phalaris canariensis, P. paradoxa, Polypogon monospeliensis (Graminae) and Senebiera pinnatifida (Cruciferae) as new host of II. avenae beside wheat, barley, oat and sorghum. They observed that larvae of this nematode penetrated sorghum roots but cysts were not formed. Yadav and Verma (1971) reported Zea mays as a new host of cereal cyst nematode. Holdeman and Watson (1977) recorded Agropyron repens, Agrostis canina, A. exarata var. monolopsis, A. spica-venti, A. stolonifera, Alopecurus pratensis, Ammophila arenaria, Anisentha madritensis, A.rigida Arrhenatherum elatus,Avena abyssinica, A.fatua, A.ludoviciana, A. strigosa, Brachypodium sylvaticum, Bromus arvensis, ^.

inermis, ^. mollis, B_. rubens, B_. secalinus, B.sterilis, Deschampsia caespitosa, Echinochloa crusgali var. frumantacea,

Festuca arundinacea, F_. elatior, ?_. longifolia, £. ovina, F_. rubra, F^. trachyphylla, Hordeum distincham, H. leprinum, H.

marinum, Lolium rigidum, L,. temulentum, Phalaris arundinacea,

P. minor, Poa annua , ^. nemoralls, ?_. palustris, P_. pratensis,

?_. trivialis, Secale ancestrale, _S. kupri janovii, _S. mantum,

S^. segetale, Setaria viridis, Stipa sp., Trisetum flavescens,

T_. durum, T_. monococcum, T_. polanicum, T. spelta, Sorghum vulgare as host of H. avenae. Bajaj and Gupta (1982) found Polypogon monospellensis a common weed of rabi season heavily infested with cereal cyst nematode. Sharma and Swarup (1984) observed that the cyst nematode, H. avenae reproduced on A. sativa, E. colona, H. vulgare, S_. cereale, S_. vulgare, Triticale, Triticum species and Zea mays. Dhawan and Kaushal (1987) examined root samples of four commonly occurring weeds, namely, C_. dactylon, C_. rotundus, Asphodelus tenuifolius and A. fatua, collected from H. avenae infested wheat field of Najafgarh Block, Delhi and observed 1-12 white females per root system of only A. fatua. Shahina and Maqbool (1990) tested twenty eight gramineous and 10 non-gramineous plants against H. zeae and H. avenae. With both cyst nematodes, mostly the gramineous plants were found susceptible whereas plants belonging to the families Malvaceae, Solanaceae, Compositae, Cruciferae and Cucurbitaceae were observed as non- susceptible.

Swarup and Dasgupta (1986) reported that host range of

Globodera spp. (£. rostochiensis and £. pallida) is confined

to the family Solanaceae. Potato, tomato and brinjal are the

preferred hosts. However, Franklin (1951) observed round

golden cysts on the roots of Antirrhinum majus (a member of

the family Scrophulariaceae).

BIOTYPES

Proper identification of biotypes of plant parasitic nematodes is necessary and highly useful for studies on the relationship between host and parasite and for plant programmes to introduce disease resistant/tolerant cultivars. According to host specificity, each population shows genetic variations. The results obtained with one population of a species should, therefore, be cautiously attributed to the other populations of the same species. Certain morphologically undifferentiable populations of a species often produce different host reactions, which create great problem for taxonomists and plant breeders in identifying the species and introducing the resistant cultivars. Thus, the occurrence of variation among individuals of the same population or among the populations of the same species

(i.e. intraspecific/physiological variation) is a challenge to control plant parasitic nematodes through the resistant cultivars as well as by crop rotation.

Many biotypes in various heteroderid nematodes have been identified by several worKers such as FranKlin (1940), RasKi (1952) and Shephered

(1959) suggested the existence of biotypes in H_. schachtu; Ross (1962),

Epps and Golden (1967), Miller (1970), Riggs e^ aL (1988) in ti. glycines;

Walia and Bajaj (1986 & 1988) in H_. cajani; Jones and PawelsKa (1963),

Ellenby and Smith (1968), ZucKcrman et_ aL (1971), Howard (1972) in

G_. rostochiensis and Stone (1972), Kort (1974) and Kort e^ aL (1977) in G. rostochiensis and G. pallida.

Resistance to cereal cyst nematode, B_. avenae has been found in wheat, barley and oat. Nilsson-Ehle (1920) for the first time described resistance to cereal cyst nematode in barley. He found that this nematode failed to develop on the roots of barley cultivars viz., Abed Rex, Brage,

Primus, Suanhals and Chevalier. Later on, Andersen (1959) found additional sources of resistance in oat on the basis of which he identified two pathotypes in U_. avenae. He showed that Hordeum pallidum var. 191 was resistant to atleast two Danish populations of E_. avenae • Drost and other varieties were resistant to a biotype designated race 1, while these varieties were susceptible to another population which was designated as biotype-2. Gair et_ ^L (1962) showed that Proctor and 12 other barley varieties tested by them were susceptible to U_. avenae and Danish var.

Kron was partially resistant. Gotten (1963) tested 4 varieties of oat and 5 of barley for resistance to cereal cyst nematode in infested soil obtained from various parts of Britain. He observed that three oat

varieties viz., Gc 4660 (tetraploid), Cc 4659 (diploid) and Gc 4658 (hexaploid)

showed resistance against this nematode collected from six separate

sites while barley cultivars (Gb 824 and Cb 916) were resistant to 7

different populations. Two varieties Gb 917 and Gb 918, clearly demons

trated that differences in pathogenicity exist between British populations

of the cereal cyst nematode. According to Fiddian and Kimber (1964),

barley cvs. Proctor and Drost, oat and Avena sterilis were susceptible

to all populations of H_. avenae they tested but H_. pallidum var. 191

was resistant to E. avenae. Thus, they recognized two biotypes of

H. avenae in England & Wales. Gotten (1967), on the othchand, reported

three pathotypes in England and Wales while Brown (1969) tested ten

populations of H_. avenae for biotypes on various cereals in Victoria,

Australia. Only one biotype was found which was different from the previously reported biotypes from Europe.

Stoen (1971) reported that U. avenae populations in Norway differed from race 1 & race 2 in DenmarK and Sweden. COOK and Williams

(1972) reviewed the occurrence of pathotypes of H. avenae in Britain,

DenmarK, the Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, East and West Germany and Australia as demonstrated by their ability to reproduce on resistant and susceptible varieties of barley and oat and reported that atleast seven pathotypes are Known in U_. avenae.

Brown (1974) observed that A_. sterilis (Cc 4658) and barley cultivars.

Morocco C13902, Morocaine 079, CI 8334 and Martin 403-2 were resistant to all the seven populations of R. avenae collected from the Mallee and Wimmera districts of Victoria (Australia) while all the other cereals tested susceptible. The three wheat cultivars Loros (Aus 11577), Psathias

(AUS 881) and spring- wheat (AUS 10894) supported fewer cysts than the susceptible standard. He also confirmed the presence of only one biotype of H_- avenae in Victoria and it was unliKe any of the five European biotypes. O'Brien and Fisher (1974) tested resistance of 800 wheat,

83 oat and 36 barley cultivars against R. avenae in South Australia.

They recorded resistance m two wheat cultivars. Spring wheat (AUS

10894) showed moderate resistance in all tests while Loros (AUS 90248),

although recorded as susceptible in one test, showed moderate resistance

in other tests with a different population of the nematode. Mathur

et al. (1974) studied the existence of variability in the cereal cyst nematode

in India and identified five biotypes designated as 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 using assortment of cereals and grasses. They reported that these biotypes are not identical to those reported in DenmarK, the Netherlands, Britain,

Germany and Australia.

LucKe (1976) found that the i^athotypes A and E were very frequent,

C less frequent and B & D only sporadic in Germany. During 1971-1974,

24 populations of E. avenae from France, Belgium and Switzerland were tested against a range of cereals and four separate races (Fri, Fr2,

Fr3, Fr4) were designated (Rivoal, 1977). Ellis and Brown (1976), on the other hand, suggested that the populations of R. avenae may be composed of more than a single pathotype in Australia. The variety of barley Morocaine 079 and Sabarilis were classified as resistant to all isolates so far tested but, 191 was susceptible to a portion of the same population. O'Brien and Fisher (1977) observed resistance to a

South Australian population of H. avenae in five cultivars of barley viz., Athinais, Morocco, Nile, Orge, Martin 839 and CI 8147 and one wheat cv. AUS 10894, while wheat cv. Halbred was found susceptible.

O'Brien and Fisher (1979) reported that two wheat cultivars (AUS 10894

& AUS 90248) and one barley cv. Morocco, were resistant to 20 populations of ¥L avenae from Southern Australia. No variations occurred in the reactions of 22 cultivars from an International Test Range, to four diverse populations of R. avenae in South Australia. Except for one wheat cultivar Psathias which was more susceptible than resistant wheat

(AUS 10894). The reactions were similar to those reported with Victorian populations. Therefore, only one biotype seems liKely for South Australia and it is the same as Victorian biotype. Swarup et al. (1979) however,

recorded two biotypes in ji. avenae populations from India. On tlie basis of reactions on International differential varieties, they observed that the populations from Jaipur. Udaipur, and Narnaul appeared to be one pathotype which was similar to pathotype B of the Netherlands and the populations from Hoshiarpur and Ludhiana formed another pathotype which differs from other pathotypes recorded elsewhere.

Howard and Gotten (1982) divided populations of E. avenae into three types. Those to which a number of west European cultivars; including Fero, Drost and Alfa are,resistant have been designated pathotype

1 (the Netherlands A). Populations able to breaK the resistance of

Fero, Drost and Alfa, but unable to reproduce on barley 191, were desig

nated as Pathotype 2 (the Netherlands C). Barley number 14CI 8334

and CI 3902 also have resistance to British pathotype 2. According

to Andersen and Andersen (1982), the nematode populations controlled

by resistance genes Rha 1, Rha 2 and Rha 3 were classified in three

pathotype groups, Hal, Ha2, Ha3. Each pathotype group may include

variants (individual pathotypes) identified by a second number added

in front of the group number such as Hall, Ha21, Ha31, etc. for group

Hal. Under this scheme, the important pathotype A (Dutch system)

which is common and in pure form in populations of Scandinavia and

Germany, was renamed pathotype Hall and also the major pathotype

G which predominates in Britain was renamed pathotype Ha12.

Osipova (1986) reported two pathotypes of E. avenae in USSR,

one of which, he identified as pathotype Ha33 found in Western Europe

while the other one was different from all Known pathotypes of H.

avenae. Sanchez and Zancada (1987) tested populations of E. avenae collected from 12 infested sites from different geographical areas of continental Spain usin^ international assortments for resistance to ^l- avenae and considered that these 12 populations can be grouped into three new pathotypes (Ha22, population from Teruel; Ha71, population from Toledo and Ha81 from SeviUa) from Spain which are different

from all the ten previously reported pathotypes in different countries.

In the German Democratic Republic, Hamann and DecKcr (1988)

reported the occurrence of pathotypes A through D, with pathotype

C predominent, followed by pathotype A. Pathotype D and B v;ere

found only sporadically. Sabova et^ ^. (1990) studied populations of

H. avenae from 15 localities in cereal growing areas of CzeehoslovaKia.

Tests with the international assortments showed pathotype Ha12 (c)

to be psresent in CzechosiovaKia. Some differences between the

pathotypes occurring in CzechosiovaKia and that elsewhere are indicated.

NON CHEMICAL CONTROL :

Linford et_ aL (1938) for the first time, observed the suppressing

effect of decomposing organic matter on root-Knot nematode populations

when they incorporated chopped leaves of pineapple at the rate of 50-200

tons per acre. Vander Laan (1956) in his studies on G. rostochiensis,

observed an increase in resistance in susceptible potato plants as a

result of physiological changes induced by organic manuring. Duddington

and Duthoit (1960) reported that the population of H. avenae was decreased

when chopped leaves of cabbage were incorporated into the infested soil.

Chopped leaves of various plant species have been found to reduce the infection of root-Knot nematode (ManKau, 1962). Patel and Desai

(1964) grew five green manure crops namely, sweet clover (Melilotus alba var. annua), sudan grass (Sorghum vulgare var. Sudanese), jowar

(S. vulgare), bajra (Pennisetum typhoides) and sunhemp (Crotalaria juncea) in potted soil infested with root-Knot and other nematodes. When one foot high, the plants were chopped, and mixed with soil and left to decompose. They observed that there were fewer galls on tomato roots in soil after sweet clover and jowar than after other plants or no crop. Other nematodes were more numerous after sunhemp. They suggested that sweet clover and jowar are promising as green manure crops in root-Knot infested soil. Singh and Sitaramaiah (1967) showed that addition of green leaves of Azadirachta indica, Melia azedarach,

Cassia fistula, C^. oceidentalis, Crotalaria juncea, Sesbania aculeata and saw dust to soil infested with M. javanica significantly reduced the

incidence of root-Knot in OKra and tomato. Hameed (1970) found that

the addition of chopped leaves of Chrysanthemum coronarium, Melia

azedarach, Tagetes patula. Datura fastuosa and Nerium indicum generally

reduced the incidence of Meloidogyne spp. The addition of C^. coronarium,

M. azedarach and T^. patula was particularly beneficial for reducing

nematodes and increasing plant growth. Yuhara (1971) reported that

the nematode population decreased when the chopped plant material

of Crotalaria or marigold was supplied to the soil infested with M. hapla

on sugarbeets. Kumar and Nair (1976), under field conditions, observed

that the green leaves of Eupatorium sp., Cymbopogon citratus, Mangifera indica. Anacardium occidentale and Calotropis sp. each at 5000 Kg/hectare, when applied in soil 21 days prior to sowing gave effective control of root-Knot nematodes infesting oKra.

Lai et_ ^. (1977) observed significant reduction in the population of R.. reniformis when chopped leaves of eight plant species or dry raw sewage sludge were added to the soil in pots at the rate of 5%

(leaves) or 10% (sewage sludge) by weight 20 days before transplanting seedlings of Solanum melongena. The greatest reduction in the population of R.. reniformis occurred in pots amended with A., indica followed by sewage sludge and M. azedarach. Haseeb et^ aL (1978) observed effect of chopped leaves of 35 different plants on the population of Hoplolaimus

indicus, Tylenchorhynchus brassicae, Tylenchus filiformis and Aphelenchoides absari and on the growth of S^. melongena. The greatest reduction in

the number of nematodes was found with Calotropis procera whereas

no decrease was found with Lycopersicon lycopersicum.

Bhatti and Dhawan (1980) in pot experiment, mixed crushed seeds

of carrot and coriander in soil naturally infested with U. avenae @. 1,

2 and 4% two weeKS before sowing. They observed that even though

addition of crushed seeds of carrot had significantly lower height, number

of tillers and grain yield per pot was significantly more in all levels

of coriander and carrot; exception was only of carrot 1% where grain

yield was at par with control. Carrot at all levels and coriander at

4% resulted in reduction of cyst population. Coriander at lower doses

had caused an increase in cyst population. Hoestra and Harrhagen (1981) reported that pine or spruce bark, mixed with soil as a miolch or a

combination of both in a pot experiment, reduced number of newly formed

cysts of G^. rostochiensis upto 60 per cent.

Nandal and Bhatti (1983) studied the effect of chopped and

finely ground leaves of C_. procera, Datura stramonium, Ricinus communis

and Xanthium strumariijm on penetration, and gall formation by M. javanica

on brinjal. They reported that with all the 4 plant leaves, at all doses

viz., 10, 20, 40 and 80 g leaves per kg of river sand, juvenile penetra

tion occurred from 0-2.9 per cent as compared to 19.9 per cent in

untreated plants. This inhibitory effect lasted \ipto six weeks. Higher

doses (40 and 80 g leaves/kg river sand) of all treatments completely

prevented juvenile entry upto 6 weeks. ^. stramonium, at all doses,

caused lower number of galls upto 60 days whereas other three plant leaves

were effective upto 30 days only. Sharma e_t aJL. (1985) recorded increase

in length and weight of the plants and reduction in root galling in soil

amended with the leaves of different plants viz., ^. metel. Cassia

fistula, Azadirachta indica, Ricinus commxmis, Tagetes patula, Calotropis

procera, Xanthium strumariim, Verbesina encelipidesand Artemisia scoparia.

The lowest nematode population was found in soil treated with Tagetes and

Xanthium leaf powders followed by Verbesina and Artemisia.

Dutt and Bhatti (1986) observed that chopped leaves of castor

were more effective when applied into the soil infested with M. javanica,

one or two weeks before transplanting of tomato. Alam (1986) observed

reduction in the population build-up of M_. incognita: and Tylenchorhynchus brassicae on ^. melongena cv. PP 2 v^^hen chopped shoots of some weed plants were applied to soil. The greatest reduction was noticed in soil treated with ^. xanthocarpum followed by C. procera, D. metel, Croton

bonplandianus and Argemone mexicana. These treatments also inhibited

root galling. Chopped plant leaves when incorporated into the naturally

infested soil, effectively suppressed populations of plant parasitic nematodes

and improved the growth of tomato cv. marglobe, except in few cases

where phytotoxicity was noted (Alam, 1987). Paruthi ^ ^. (1987) reported

that the application of Leucaena leucocephale leaves at the rate of

40 g per Kg soil, degraded for 4 wecKS, reduced galling and improved

the growth of OKra.

Siddiqui e^ aL (1987) reported that the incorporation of chopped

shoots of latex bearing plants significantly suppressed the population

build-up of R.. reniformis and T_. brassicae and reduced the root-Knot

development caused by M. incognita. Chopped shoots of Ficus elastica

showed greatest reduction in nematode population and root-Knot development.

These amendments also showed significant improvement in plant growth,

highest being in the treatment with chopped shoots of ¥_. elastica.

Tiyagi et_ aL (1988) reported that chopped shoot parts of the family

Compositae, effectively contained the multiplication of reniform and

root-Knot nematodes and root-Knot development, consequently the plant

improved. Jain and Bhatti (1988) observed significant improvement

in the growth of tomato and reduction in number of galls on roots when

soil was amended with the leaves of A. indica at the rate of 2.5 g and 5.0 g per Kg soil and was allowed to degrade over a period of 4-

6 weeKS.

Govindaiah et_ aL (1989) reported that mulching of green leaves of pongamia (Pongamia pinnata) and neem (A_. indica) in soil had significantly reduced the incidence of root-Knot nematode and increased the growth as well as leaf yield of mulberry (Morus alba). AKhtar and Alam (1989) found that the incorporation of chopped leaves of A_. indica, C. procera.

Clerodendron inerme, Eucalyptus citriodera, Lantana indica. M. azedarach.

R,. communis, Thuja orientalis at the rate of 50 and 100 g per Kg soil significantly suppressed the population build up of Hoplolaimus indicus.

Helicotylenchus indicus. T^. brassicae. R. reniformis, Tylenchus filiformis.

Chopped shoots of C^. procera, produced greatest reduction in nematode population followed by A. indica, R. communis, M. azedarach and L. indica.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Collection of soil samples:

Root and soil samples (about 1 Kg) from around the roots of plants were collected at a depth of about 15-20 cm with the help of a soil sampler (shovel). Several randomized samples were collected from each field in a grid pattern and mixed together to maKe a composite sample of the field and placed in a plastic bag. Plant roots were also collected and placed in the same bag. Two lables for each sample containing relevant information about the date of collection, number of sample, name of collector, host and locality etc. were prepared and one of them was placed inside the plastic bag and other tagged outside. The bag was tied with the help of rubber band. All these details of the sample were also recorded on the field booK. Samples were brought to the laboratory and stored at 8-10°C in a refrigerator till the extraction of nematode was made.

Extraction of cyst forming nematodes from soil :

Following three different methods for the extraction of cysts from the soil were evaluated for their efficiency.

I. Simple extraction technique from dried soU. :

A sample of 50 gm dried soil, from a well mixed composite sample was placed on 175/4 pore size sieve and carefully washed with water.

The residue left on the sieve was washed into a beaKer. The cysts remained floating along the wall of beaKer. The cyst float was filtered through Whatman filter paper No. 1 placed in a funnel Kept on the funnel stand. The folds of filter paper were then opened on a ^lass plate of petridish and examined under the stereoscopic microscope using overhead light. Cysts were picKcd up with the help of camel's hair brush No. 1. and transferred to a small watch glass containing small quantity of water.

n. Cysts, root debris and other particles left on the 20 cm diameter,

80 mesh sieve of 175 /j pore size as described above were left to dry

at room temperature and later transferred to a 250 ml flasK. Acetone-

carbon tetrachloride (3:1) mixture was poured into the flasK upto its

necK. FlasK was shaKen and then filled completely. Floating cysts

and debris were decanted after 1 minute through a filter paper in a

glass funnel into a volumetric flasK while rotating the original flasK.

The cysts and debris were retained on the filter paper. Filter paper

was removed from the funnel,placed in petridish and examined under

the microscope using overhead light as described above. Cysts were

collected with the help of camel's hair brush No. 1.

in. FenwicK's can method (modified) :

After filling the apparatus with water, a thoroughly mixed soil

sample (200 gm) was placed on 1 mm pore size top sieve and washed

down into the funnel by delivering a strong jet of water through a water

nozzle. The heavy soil particles sariK down at the bottom of the apparatus and coarse material was left on the top sieve. The cysts, being light in weight with floating collar into a 20 cm diameter, 175«pore size sieve Kept the overflow collar. The residue left on this sieve was washed into a beaKer. The cysts, along with debris, remained floating along the edges of the beaKer. The contents of the beaKer were poured over a Whatman filter paper Kept in a funnel on the funnel stand. The filter paper was unfolded into a petridish, examined under the stereoscope microscope and cysts collected as described above.

After several comparisons of above techniques it was found that

FenwicK's can method was the best that gave maximum catch of cyst nematodes from the soil. This method was, therefore, generally used in my studies.

Extraction of nematodes from the roots :

The roots were gently washed with tap water to remove adhering

soil particles and cut into small pieces (1-2 cms). The roots were examined

directly under the stereoscopic microscope for removing the cysts attached

to the roots with the help of dissecting needle and collecting with the

help of camel's hair brush No. 1.

Extraction of free living stages (males and 2nd stage juveniles) from the soil :

Cobb's sieving and decanting technique or OostenbrinK's elutriator

technique was used for extraction of nematodes from the soil.

Cobb's sieving and decanting technique :

The soil sample was thoroughly mixed, spread over a plastic sheat

and about 200 gm soil was taKen which was transferred to a small

plastic pan containing about 1 litre water. Suspension was thoroughly

stirred by hand, lumps of soil were broKen and stones removed. More

water was added and again stirred thoroughly. After allowing the heavy

soil particles to settle down for 10 seconds the suspension was poured

through coarse 25 mesh sieve into a plastic pan-11. A little more

water was added to the residue in pan-I, and the process was repeated.

The soil left in pan-I was discarded and the pan washed. The suspension

in pan-Il was stirred, allowed to settle for 10 seconds and poured into

cleaned pan-I through a 50 mesh sieve. This process was repeated by

using 100, 200 and 325 mesh sieves respectively. The debris left on

200 and 325 mesh sieves were collected in a 250 ml beaKcr. This suspension

was filtered by Baermann funnel technique which consisted of a funnel

(10 cm diameter) stem fitted with a rubber tube closed by clip and

placed on a funnel stand. In the funnel, there was placed a coarse

sieve (25 mesh) having supporting legs and with a double layer of tissue

paper. The nematode suspension from the beaKer was then poured on

a small watch glass Kept on the supporting sieve in order to avoid damage

of the tissue paper. The water level in the funnel was Kept such as

to touch the bottom of the sieve. The nematodes which passed through

the tissue paper and settled at the bottom of funnel stem were collected in clear water after 24 hrs, and examined under the microscope.

OostenbririK's elutriator technique :

The apparatus was filled with clear water until the outlet of the funnel. A constant water stream of 1 litre per minute was introduced from the bottom of the apparatus through a perforated pipe. A 200 gm soil sample was placed in 1 mm pore size top sieve and washed into the can via the funnel by opening the top nozzle delivering about

700 ml water per minute until 2/3 of the column was filled up. The

top nozzle was then turned off and the constant water stream coming

from the bottom was reduced to 600 ml per minute. When the apparatus

was almost filled with water the suspension was allowed to flow by

removing the rubber plug from the outlet into three sieves of 50 /u

pore size (325 mesh) Kept one above the other. The catch was immediately

washed into a beaKer and filtered, using Baermann funnel technique as

described above.

Preparation of vulval cones and cone tops :

Several moist cysts were transferred to a perspex slide and placed

on the stage of a stereomicroscope. Posterior ends of each cyst was

cut in such a way that its fenestral area was in the'centre of the cut

piece. If required, cut ends were trimmed so that it was not more

than 5-10 times of the fenestral area. Cut portions were carefullv

cleaned by removing adhering- body contents with the help of fine brush.

Bleaching for few minutes in H_0„ was also useful for cleaning the heavily pigmented species. Cleaned vulval cones were washed in distilled water, dehydrated in 50, 70, 95 and 100 per cent ethanol and allowed to clear in clove oil. Cone tops (1-3) were transferred to a drop of

Canada balsam on a clean glass slide and pushed to the bottom of the drop in such a v/ay that anterior surface of the cyst cuticle containing cone top structure faced the glass slide. Three small pieces of broKen coverslip were radially arranged around the cone top and a clean coverslip

(18 mm round) was placed so that it rested on the coverslip pieces without disturbing the cone top.

Preparation of permanent mounts of males and juveniles :

Males and juveniles extracted from the soil were first Killed and

fixed in hot double strength F.A. (4:10) as described below.

Nematode suspension in a glass beaKer was left undisturbed for

2-3 hours allowing nematodes to settle down. The suspension was later

carefully decanted to remove excess amount of water. Double strength

F.A. (4:10) was heated to 100 °C in a test tube Kept in a beaKer filled

with water over on spirit lamp. As much hot fixative was added to

the nematode suspension as was the amount of water having nematode

suspension. Thus, nematodes were Killed by heat and fixation started

immediately. The nematodes were left as such for atleast 24 hours

before processing for permanent mounting.

Nematodes from the fixation dish were transferred to a drop of plain lactophenol contained in a small cavity blocK and placed in an

incubator running at 55 °C. After 10 minutes, cavity blocK was laKcn

out to add 2-3 drops of dehydrated glycerine. The cavity blocK was

again put in tlic incubator for five minutes. Tin's process was repeated

thrice at the end of which, nematodes (1-5) were transferred to a

drop of dehydrated glycerine on a glass slide. Nematodes were pushed

to the bottom of glycerine drop and arranged in row. Small glass wool

of the thicKness of nematodes were radially arranged around the nematode

in a glycerine drop and a coverslip no. 0 (18 mm round) was placed

on the drop taKing special care that no air bubbles remain inside coverslip.

Coverslip was then sealed with glyceel at three points and left for sometime to dry. Afterwords the coverslip was sealed all round on a turntable. Two or three similar coatings of glyceel were done for complete sealing.

Identification of nematodes :

Prepared slides were examined under the low and high powers of compound microscope. Morphological characters were studied and measure ments done for proper identification.

Seasonal fluctuation

During the course of survey of Aiigarh district, several fields were found infested with the cereal cyst nematode, Heterodera avenae. From these fields optimal infestation was observed in one of the fields at

Chhcrat, Aiigarh. The total area of the field was measured as 35x30

square meter. It was divided into three approximately equal sized beds having 12 x 10 square meter area. The soil samples were regularly collected every month from these three beds for two years (September,

1988 to August, 1990). The soil samples (each weighing about 1 Kg soil) were collected randomly from a depth of 15-25 cm from each of the three beds, marKcd in the field and mixed thoroughly to maKe a composite sample out of which sub samples of 250g soil was taKen for processing to isolate larvae by employing Cobb's sieving and decanting technique and of cyst by using FenwiCK's modified can method.

Informations pertaining to cropping sequence, yield, time of sowing and harvesting was collected from the owner of the field. However, data pertaining to soil temperature, soil moisture and pH was collected by the author during the course of study.

Measurement of soil moisture:

The soil moisture has been expressed as percentage of water in the soil. The soil moisture of the samples collected from each bed was determined in the laboratory. At first, an empty small container

(crucible) was weighed on an electrical balance and its weight considered as W1. The field soil was then added to the container and weighed again. This weight was considered as W2. The container with field soil, thus, weighed was then placed in an oven running at 105°C. After

24 hours the container was taKcn out of the oven and placed in a dessi-

cator to bring the container at room temperature. After an hour the

container was weighed to obtain the weight of oven dry soil (W3). Thus, the soil moisture was calculated by usin^ the following formula:

W1 = Weight of empty container

W2 = Weight of container with field soil

W3 = Weight of container with oven dry soil

Moisture percent = _ x 100

Preparation and sterilization of soU mixture:

Sandy loam soil collected from a fallow field of Aligarh Muslim

University Farm was sieved through 16 mesh sieve and mixed with sieved river sand and organic manure in the ratio of 3:1:1 respectively. Through

out the course of these studies, unless stated otherwise, 6 inches pots

were filled with above soil mixture at the rate of 1 Kg soil per pot.

About 50 ml water was poured in each pot to moisten the soil prior

to autoclaving them. Autoclaved pots were allowed to cool at room

temperature prior to use in different experiments.

Raising and maintenance of pure culture of nematodes:

The pure culture of Heterodera avenae was raised and maintained

on wheat plants in the microplots by inoculating freshly hand picKed

unhatched cysts collected from infested fields localised at Aligarh and

Ghaziabad districts.

Preparation of nematode inoculum:

Freshly collected cysts from microplots were immersed in root

exudates, obtained from 2-3 weaK old seedlings of wheat. The larvae,

thus, hatched were used as a source of inoculum in all the subsequent

studies. The inoculum as such was not used. The number of larvae

present in the suspension were counted under stereomicroscope.

The volume of water in the nematode suspension was so adjusted

that each ml may contain 100 nematodes, it was done by adding required

amount of water or decanting the excess, so that the 10 ml of this

suspension was poured in each pot to provide required inoculum level

i.e. 1000 larvae per Kg soil.

Morphometries

(a) Effect of hosts

For studying the effect of oat, wheat and barley on morphometries of the two populations, five seeds of each host plant were sown in

6 inches earthen pots containing about 1 Hg autoclaved soil. Thinning was done after 15 days of sowing M • such a manner that each pot contained one seedling. Seedlings were inoculated in the manner described

04 Q-bcv-fi-. There were six replicates for each treatment.

(b) Soil moisture:

To study the effect of soil moisture on the morphometries, the weight of each of the fifty glass beaKers of 500 ml capacity was adjusted to 150g by putting coarse sand at the bottom. Later, each beaKcr was filled with 250g of the autoclaved dry soil, the moisture content of each set of 10 beaKers was adjusted to 10, 20, 30, 40 and 50 percent moisture levels by adding the Known quantity of water to the soil.

The seeds of wheat cv. RR-21 were sown in each beaKer, thinning was done, after 15 days of sowing, leaving one seedling per beaKer.

Two weeK old seedlings were then inoculated with freshly hatched larvae of each Aligarh and Ghaziabad population of Heterodera avenae separately

maintaining five replicates for each moisture level and population. After inoculation the soil surface was covered with lOg coarse sand to avoid evaporation. The beaKers were also covered with the glazed paper to avoid algal growth. They were then placed in the randomized fashion on the glass house bench. The soil moisture in the beaKers was maintained

at aforesaid levels by weighing the beaKers twice a day and adding

required quantity of water. The soil moisture was checKed at regular

intervals.

Clay lumps were powdered by a soil grinding machine and sieved

through 60 mesh sieve. The powdered clay passed through 60 mesh

sieve. It was mixed with silver sand to obtain the following clay and

sand mixture.

S.No. Clay Sand

1. 100 96 0 %

2. 75 96 25 %

3. 50 % 50 % 4. 25 % 75 % 5. 0 % 100 96

Seeds of wheat cv. RR-21 were sown in earthern pots containing about

1.0 Kg' soil of each of the above mentioned combination. After 15 days of sowing one seedling per pot was maintained and inoculated with 1000 freshly hatched larvae of Heterodera avenae populations separately.

After 30 days of inoculation some of the plants of each treatments

(including a,b,c) were uprooted and shoots were cut off. The roots

were washed carefully to remove the adhering soil particles and examined

under the stereomicroscope to collect the fsmales. Simultaneously,

soil of each treatment was also processed for the collection of males

and larvae while the remaining replicates of each treatment were processed

after 60 days of inoculation to collect the cysts. For measurements

permanent slides of females, males and larvae were prepared. Cone

tops were prepared and mounted in Canada balsam while cysts and eggs

(obtained by crushing of cyst) were mounted in water. Twenty specimens

each of females, males, larvae, cone tops, cysts and eggs were measured.

Drawing and measuring nematodes:

The drawings were made with the help of camera lucida. The

measurements have been represented mostly in de Mans (1880) formula

modified by Thorne (1961).

Record of data:

Both the populations of Heterodera avenae were studied for their morphometnc and allometric variations in order to determine the range of variations within the species. The linear (measurable) characters studied were body length, body width, stylet length, distance of orifice of dorsal oesophageal gland from stylet base (DOGO), oesophagus length, length of oesophagus from anterior end to oesophago-intestinal valve, median bulb location, median bulb height and width across, length from anterior end to excretory pore, vulva anus distance, length of spicule and gubernaculum, width of lateral field at mid boay, tail length, hyaline tail length, width of body at anus, fenestral length, width of semifenestrae, vulval bridge width, vulval slit length and meristic (count able) quantities were cephalic annules and incisures in the lateral field.

The ratios, (formed from two variables) including deManian ratios were also studied which included 'a' (Total body length divided by maximum body width), 'b' (Total body length divided by oesophagus length from anterior end to oesophago intestinal valve), '6' (Total body length divided

by oesophagus length from anterior end to the end of oesophageal gland),

'c' (Total body length divided by tail length), 'c' (Tail length divided

by body width at anus), 'E' (Distance of excretory pore from anterior

end divided by total length multiplied by hundred), median bulb length

(height) divided by median bulb width, hyaline tail length divided by

stylet length, body width divided by anal body width, length from anterior

end to oesophago-intestinal valve divided by length from anterior end

to excretory pore, body length divided by length from anterior end to

excretory pore, body length divided by stylet length, length from anterior end to oesophago-intestinal valve divided by stylet length.

Data were analyzed statistically, the standard deviation (SD), Standard error (SE) and coefficient of variation (CV) for each character was calculated and is given along with range and mean (X).

Host range study:

To study the host range of H_- avenae, some grasses, leguminous crops and some common weeds were used. They included Avena sativa

CV. Kent; Triticum aestivum cvs. K-68, RR-21; Hordeum vulgare (local):

Zea mays cvs. Shweta, Naveen, Type-41, Kanchan-602, ShaKti; Secale

cereale; Pennisetum typhoides; Qryza sativa cvs. Jaya, SaKet-4, Gajraj.

Basmati, Kala namaK; Phalaris mmor; Polypogon monospeliensis; Cynodon

dactylon; Setaria turnata; Dactyloctenium aeg-yptium (belonging to the

family Graminae); Trifolium alexandrium; Vigna mungo; _V. unguiculata;

Lens culineris: Cicer arietinum; Pisum sativum; Melilotus indica; Lathyrus

aphaca; L,. sativus; Cajanus cajan (belonging to the family Leguminosae);

Rumex dentatus (Polygonaceae); Carthamus oxycanthus; C. tinctorius

(Compositae); Silene conoidea; Vaccaria pyrimidata (Caryophyllaceae);

Anagalis arvensis (Primuiaceae); Chenopodium alba (Chenopodiaceae);

Amaranthus viridis (Amaranthaceae); Solanum nigrum; Capsicum annuum:

Datura sp.; Lycopersicon esculentum (Solanaceae); Convolvulus sp. (Convol-

vulaceae) and Brassica compestris (Cruciferae).

Raising plants (10 replicates) in autoclaved soil, Keeping' one seedling in each pot, the mode of inoculation, for each treatment was the same as given on page ^^ . However, in the present studies 5 inoculated plants were uprooted seven days after inoculation and remaining 60 days after inoculation. In the former case the roots after cleaning v

Study of H. a venae culture of Aligarh & Ghaziabad:

Three to five seeds of each international host differential (oat cultivars Sunll, 6HO318-4-0-2-1 (Pusa hybrid BSI), Silva, Avena sterilis;

Wheat cultivars Loros, IsKamish K2 darK, IsKamish K2 light, Clapa; Triticale

DTS-839 and barley cultivars P 31322-1, 191, Drost, Herta, Siri, iVIartin,

Morocco, La etanzuela, Emir, Varde, Ortolan, and a local variety Jyoti) were sown in small earthen pots containing about 250g sterilized soil.

Thinning was done after 15 days of sowing to maintain one seedling per pot and each pot was inoculated with freshly hatched larvae at

the rate of 1000 larvae per Kg soil per pot. Five replicates of each

cultivarwas maintained. These pots were Kept in the green house and

watered daily. Sixty days after inoculation the above ground parts

of the plants were cut off and root were carefully removed from the

pot. The roots were then placed in bucKCt containing tap water. The

roots were examined under the stereomicroscope. In this v;ay, all the

replicates were examined for the development of females/cysts on the roots. Any host differential found infested with more than three cysts was considered susceptible (Andersen, 1961).

Recording of Observations:

Plants were uprooted after 60 days of inoculation, except stated otherwise. Root system was gently washed in a bucKet filled with running- tap water. Utmost care was taKen to avoid loss of cysts from the roots as well as the injury of root system during the entire operation.

For measuring length and weight, the plants were cut off with the sharp

Knife just above the base of the root emergence. Length of shoot and roots were recorded in centimeters from the cut end to the tip of the head and longest root respectively. The excess water of plants was removed by putting them between the folds of blotting sheets for some time before weighing them separately. The weight was recorded in grams.

For measuring dry weight of shoot and roots were first Kept in an oven running at 60°C to dry for two days. The shoots and roots both were weighed. For interpretation of results, the reduction in plant growth was calculated in terms of percentage dry weight reduction.

Nematode population estimation:

For extraction of cyst nematodes, the soil from each treatment

was mixed thoroughly and a subsample of 250g soil was processed through

the FenwicKS can method.

To estimate the females/cysts population in roots, I.Og root from each replicate was cut into small pieces of 1-2 cm and macerated for

30 seconds in an electrically operated waring blender containing about

100ml water. Macerate was filtered through the coarse sieve of 25 mesh, fliterate was examined under stereomicr iscope to count the nema todes.

Statistical analysis:

The data obtained were analyzed statistically and significance cal

culated at 5 and 1 percent level of probability.

THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH - GEOGRAPHY

Uttar Pradesh covers an area of 2,94,413 sq.Km. and has a population of about 13,87,60,417 (according to 1991 census). Thus, the state is fourth in area and tops in terms of population in the Indian Union.

It is a land locKcd state, situated between 25°19' & 31°18'N and

77°10' & 89°39'E. On its north is Tibet and Nepal, Himachal Pradesh in north-west, Madhya Pradesh in south, Bihar in the east and Rajasthan,

Delhi, Haryana in the west. Nature has also provided boundaries. The

Himalayas provide the northern, Yamuna-the Western, the Ganga-the

southern and GandaK-the eastern boundary of the state.

On the basis of its physical features the state can be divided into

following broad regions:

1. Mountainous region 2. Sub-mountainous region 3. The Ganga Plain region and 4. The Trans-Yamuna region.

The mountainous region has moulded and influenced the state

in many respects. The snow clad peaKs of the Himalayas are the source

of many rivers, providing perennial supply of water for irrigation and

for generating hydroelectric power. Further, the rivers carry silt along

with them, theirby adding fertility to the soil.

UTTAR PRADESH PHYSICAL DIVISIONS

l^ I. Mountainous region S i II.Sub-mountainous region '*-? N V-J II.Gaanga plain region ' ? iV.Trans-Yamuna region / J r

FIG. 1

The sub-mountainous region also Known as Tarai-Bhabar is mostly covered with forests. Immediately below the foot hills it is characterized by damp sub-soil punctuated by marshy land, thicK jungles and tall grasses.

However, in recent years, the jungles have been cleared and land has been reclaimed. The rainfall is heavy and the streams are numerous.

The whole region IOOKS liKe a slopping plain.

The Ganga plain claims more than half of the states area, extending

from north-west to south-east. The whole plain is further divided into

five sub regions viz., The Ganga-Yamuna Doab, Ganga-Gomti Interfluve,

Gomti-Ghaghra Interfluve. Trans-Ghaghra and RohilKhand region. The

Ganga plain is the most fertile region. The land is alluvial soil which

IS traversed by large numbers of rivers, almost running parallel to one

another. Since the land is fertile and weather conditions are moderate,

it IS most suitable for agriculture. Consequently, there is a heavy pressure

of population on land.

The Trans-Yamuna region also Known as BundelKhand region is the

least fertile in the entire state. Due to deficiency of rainfall it is

most bacKward region in the entire state.

Agriculture sector in the state of U.P. employs 74.5 percent of

the total worKing population and contributes 68 percent of its net out

put. Out of total (2,51,98,103 hectare) area under cultivation, 79.66,326

hectare is double crop area in which almost all life sustaining crops

and fruit trees are grown. Although the agriculture was started by

the Aryans and established at the banKS of Ganga and Yamuna rivers

yet the agriculture started after expansion between 1200-800 B.C. on

length of rivers. The principle crops are wheat, rice, barley, maize, bajra, gram, pea, cotton, linseed, groundnut, sugarcane, sesamum, rapeseed, mustard, tobacco and vegetables. Thus, the state leads in total production of a variety of crops though in many cases yield per hectare is rather low.

Presently, the state of Uttar Pradesh consists of 63 districts but during the course of survey i.e. from 1985 to 1988 only 56 districts were included in the state. Hence, during this period a survey of heteroderid nematodes, associated with various cultivated crops and non-cultivated plants, was conducted in 56 districts (8 districts representing to Mountain -

ous, 7 to Sub-mountainous 33 to the Ganga Plain and 8 to tne Trans-

Yamuna region) of Uttar Pradesh to determine the frequencies of occur

rence of different heteroderid nematode species. The results of the

survey are presented in the following pages.

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

1. Survey of heteroderid nematodes and their identification in different districts of Uttar Pradesh:

A total of 1670 samples of soil and roots were collected from around 84 different plant species (Table-2) from four regions of Uttar

Pradesh viz., Mountainaus j Sub-mountainous. Ganga plain and Trans-

Yamuna regions.

Table-2 : List of Plants from which heteroderid were isolated and identified

1. Abelmoschus esculentus (L.) Moench. 16. Capsicum annuum L.

2. Allium cepa L. 17. Carica papaya L.

3. Amaranthus viridis L. 18. Cassia tora L.

4. Anagallis arvensis L. 19. Cicer arietinum L.

5. Anethum sowa Kurz. 20. Citru]lus vulgaris Schrad.

6. Arachis hypogea L. 21. Citrus aurantifolia (Chritm.) Swingle

7. Avena sativa L. 22. Colocasia antiquorum Schott.

8. Beta vulgaris L. 23. Coriandrum sativum L.

9. Boerhaavia diffusa h. i^lf^^*'-^^^^ I'^^^^^. Crotolaria juncea L. "> ' 10. Brassica compestrig»L. ^ ^n. Cucumis melo L. 11. Brassica oleracea I^, J "^ ,'C, ,^_ Cucumis sativus L.

12. Brassica rapa L. ^v^'^^M^UNiVtRS''^' ^'^• Cucurbita maxima Duch

13. Cactus spp. (Now Mammillaria spp.) 28. Cyamopsis tetragonoloba (L.) Taub.

14. Cajanus cajan (L.) Huth. 29. Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers.

15. Cannabis sativa L. 30. Cyprus rotundus L.

31. Dactyloctenium aegyptium (L.) 58. Phaseolus lunatus L.

32. Datura stramonium L. 59. Phaseolus mungo L.

33. Daucus carota L. 60. Phaseolus vulgaris L.

34. Digera arvensis ForsK. 61. Physalis spp. L.

35. Eclipta prostrata L. 62. Pisum sativum L.

36. Eucalyptus citriodera HOCK. 63. Psidium guajava L.

37. Foeniculum vulgare Mill. 64. Raphanus sativus L.

38. Glycine max (L.) Merr. 65. Ricinus communis L.

39. Gossypium spp. L. 66. Saccharum munja Roxb .

40. Hordeum vulgare L. 67. Saccharum officinarum L.

41. Ipomea batatas (L.) Lam. 68. Sesamum indicum L.

42. Lagenaria vulgaris Ser. 69. Sesbama aculeata Poir.

43. Lens culineris MediK 70. Sida cardifolia L.

44. Linum usitatissimum L. 71. Solanum melongena L.

45. Luffa aegyptiaca Mill. 72. Solanum nigrum L.

46. Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. 73. Solanum tuberosum L.

47. Madhuca indica J.F. Gmel. 74. Sorghum vulgare Pers.

48. Malva rotundifolia L. 75. Spinacea oleracea L.

49. Malvastrum coromandelianum (L.) GarcKe. '^6. Tagetes erecta L.

50. Mangifera indica L. 77. Tectona grandis L.

51. Mentha arvensis L. 78. Trifolium alexandnum L.

52. Momordica charantia L. 79. Triticum aestivum L.

53. Musa paradisiaca L. 80. Vigna radiatus L.

54. Nicotiana tabacum L. 81. Vigna unguiculata (L.) VValp.

55. Oryza sativa L. 82. Xanthium strumarium L.

56. Ocimum americanum L. 83. Zea mays L.

57. Pennisetum typhoides (Burm.) 84. Zingiber officinale Rose. Stapf. & HuDbard.

The heterodend nematode species encountered and identified were

Heterodera avenae, H. cajani, jl^. cyperi, H. grarninis, JH. mothi, E_. sorghi and H. zeae in different districts of Uttar Pradesh. The occurrence of R. avenae, E. cyperi and H_. graminis at several places in U.P. are reported for the first time.

2. Geographical distribution, frequency of occurrence and infestation levels of different species:

2.1 Mountainous region:

It is evident from Table-3 that a total of 177 soil and plant root

samples were collected from different districts of mountainous region

which showed 6.78 percent frequency of occurrence of heteroderid nematodes

species. The frequency of occurrence of heteroderid nematode species

in Almora, Chamoli, Dehradun, Garhwal, Nainital, Pithoragarh, Tehri

Garhwal and UttarKashi districts was 0.00, 6.67, 4.54, 11.76, 4.00, 7.14,

0.00 and 20.83 percent respectively.

H. cajani was recorded in Garhwal and UttarKashi districts with

5.88 and 4.17 percent frequency of occurrence respectively. R. graminis

was encountered in Pithoragarh district with 7.14 percent frequency

of occurrence. The frequency of occurrence of H. mothi was 5.88 and

8.33 percent in Garhwal and UttarKashi respectively. E. zeae was found

to occur in Chamoli, Dehradun, Nainital and UttarKashi with 6.67, 4.54,

4.00 and 8.33 percent frequency of occurrence.

jS 3 W a; O CO cV CD in <0 CO — CD O (C O fa O u 2 !« o •H O XJ E :20 o T- C<1 '- N o -*—C3» £ E-" o £ x: 2 a; c X} CO z. CD CO 00 0) -u K CO oL^ lO •*-» •

0) > c o n :_ '*-• O 5 o c a >) ca a • (N o o +J E H-i cCU c3 cd 3 O M cr

Q CO

The overall frequency of occurrence of Heierodera species viz..

H. cajani, _H- graminis, E. mothi and H. zeae was 1.13, 1.13. 1.69 and

2.82 percent respectively.

The number of cysts and larvae in 250g soil is presented in Table-

4. A perusal of the Table shows that cysts of ti. cajani were encountered in Garhwal and UttarKashi; H_. graminis in Pithoragarh, H_. mothi in

Garhwal and UttarKashi and E. zeae in Chamoli, Dehradun, Nainital

and UttarKashi. In E. cajani the number of cysts was 12 in Garhwal

and 2 in UttarKashi; for ^i- graminis it was 8-27 in Pithoragarh; for

H. mothi 5 in Garhwal and 2-4 in UttarKashi; for E. zeae it ranged

from 3-8 per 250g soil with the highest in Nainital district. It is interest

ing to note that the number of larvae of R. cajani was 170 in Garhwal

and only 10 in UttarKashi. the number of larvae of E. graminis ranged

from 21-38 per 250^ soil in Pitnoragarh. In Garhwal and UttarKashi,

the cysts of E. mothi were 30 and 18-35 respectively. ^l* zeae, the.

most prevalent Heterodera species though encountered in four out of

eight districts, the number of larvae ranged between 12-49 per 250g

soil with the highest in Chamoli district.

2.2 Sub-mountainous region:

It is evident from Table-5 that a total of 178 soil and plant root

samples were collected from different districts of sub-mountainous

region of Uttar Pradesh which showed 23.59 percent frequency of occur

rence of heteroderid nematodes. The frequency of occurrence of heteroderid

Table-4 : Number of (Cysts and Larvae/250g soil) of heteroderid nematode species in different districts of mountainous region of Uttar Pradesh.

Number of Cysts & Larvae in 250g soil Dis tricts H. ca jani H. graminis H. mothi H. zeae Cysts Larvae Cysts Larvae Cysts Larvae Cysts Larvae

1. Almora - - - _ - - -

2. Chamoli - - - _ - 6 49 3. Dehradun - - - - - 5 18

4. Garhwal 12 170 5 30 - -

5. Nainital - - - - - 8 40

6. Pithoragarh - 8-27 21-38 - - -

7. Tehri Garhwal------

8. UttarKashi 2 10 - - 2-4 18-35 3-6 12-18

>> I

Sou c CD C<1 o C=l o c o o in o o 00 CO U-5 CO o o M O fe O t- CO CO CO C

^ ^^ o S2 « CO ea (u E

'if

O ed 0) CD ^ x: -u to ^-^ CO ^-^ o ^.^ CO ^^ a O o CO lO o in CO fO CO o 00 CO '5 - UO• m• CO• ^ 01 CO CO 'T o X) "5 ^ •^ '~ a ca s a 1— CO »— Irt

o OH xj CO o o eg o E 0) o 0) in o CO o c CO <— in o a u o fO >> c!= CO o; a c 0)S 0 o V O JZ O c 0) o a F o in >^ s £ 03 a o tfl 5 O 5^ T

CD «J

£- 3 JZ CL

CO in 4-1 '5 .2 ,-4 L. L. "O CO t^ J3 m JZ t/: o c L. 0) c CO OJ o o ii: 'T;^ n 3 e m U O a v< 0^ h Q CD

nematodes in Ba'firaich, Basti, Deoria, Gonda, GoraKhpur, Kheri and Piiibhit districts was 36.00,38-46^ ii6'9i-j •5J>'!>0,13.04, 20.00 and 0.00 percent respec tively.

Heterodera cajani was found to occur in ail the districts except

Piiibhit. Its frequency of occurrence was 8.00, 11.54, 11.54, 10.00,

8.70 and 3.33 percent respectively in Bahraich, Basti, Deoria, Gonda,

GoraKhpur and Kheri districts. E. graminis was encountered in Gonda

district with 5.00 percent frequency of occurrence. Heterodera mothi

was found to occur in Bahraich, Basti, Deoria, Gonda and Kheri with

20.00, 11.54, 11.54, 5.00 and 3.33 percent frequency of occurrence respec

tively. Heterodera zeae was found to be the most widely distributed

species with 8.00, 15.38, 3.85, 15.00, 4.35 and 13.33 percent frequency

of occurrence in Bahraich, Basti, Deoria, Gonda, GoraKhpur and Kheri

districts respectively.

The overall frequency of occurrence of Heterodera species viz.,

E. cajani, E. graminis, R. mothi and E. zeae was 7.30, 0.56, 7.30 and

8.43 percent respectively.

The number of cysts and larvae in 250g soil is presented in Table-6.

A perusal of the Table shows that cysts of H_. cajani and E. zeae were

encountered in Bahraich, Basti, Deoria, Gonda, GoraKhpur and Kheri;

E. graminis in Gonda and H_- mothi in Bahraich, Basti, Gonda and Kheri.

In H_. cajani, _H. mothi and H_. zeae, the number of cyst ranged from

2-17, 2-21, and 4-115 per 250g soil respectively with the highest in

Kheri district. Only 6 cysts per 250g soil,of H.graminis were observed

Table-6 : Number of (Cysts and Larvae/250g soil) heteroderid nematode species in different districts of Sub- mountainous region of Uttar Pradesh.

Districts Number of Cysts and Larvae in 250g soil H. cajani H. graminis H. mothi H. :zea e Cysts Larvae Cysts Larvae Cysts Larvae Cysts Larvae

1. Bahraich 8-12 18-37 - 2-13 23-112 4-13 9-65

2. Basti 3-16 25-215 - 4-11 20-36 5-8 9-48

3. Deoria 7-14 15-69 - 8-13 12-85 12 38

4. Gonda 2-12 34-50 6 87 . 2 17 5-15 23-18

5. GoraKhpur 2-16 11-15 - - - 7 32

6. Kheri 17 81 - 21 67 5-115 60-113

7. Pilibhit ------

in Gonda. It is interesting to note that the number of larvae of E_. cajani ranged from 11 to 215 per 250g soil with the highest m Basti and that of E. zeae ranged from 9-113 with the highest in Khen district.

In J^. graminis it was 87 in Gonda and for H. mothi the number of larvae ranged from 12-112 per 250g soil with the highest in Bahraich district.

Data presented m Table-7 indicates that a total of 1116 soil and

plant root samples were collected from different districts of Ganga

plain region of Uttar Pradesh and showed 33.15 percent frequency of

occurrence of heteroderid nematodes. The frequency of occurrence

of heteroderid nematode species was 30.59, 40.74, 18.52, 37.14, 33.33.

45.83, 24.14, 8.33. 32.25, 21.42, 41.66, 12.00, 61.40, 51.72, 41.67, 46.15. 44-83, 21.13, 38.46, 38.46. 47,83,^50.00, 19.44, 33.33, 50.00, 43.47, 25.00. 17.85.

15.94, 25.92, 31.82, 51.22 and 20.00 percent respectively in Aligarh,

Allahabad, Azamgarh, Badaun, Ballia, BarabanKi, Bareilly, Bijnor, Bulandshahr,

Etah, Etawah, Faizabad, FarruKhabad, Fatehpur, Gaziabad, Ghazipur,

Hardoi, Jaunpur, Kanpur, LucKnow, Mainpuri, Meerut, Moradabad, Muzzaffar-

nagar, Pratapgarh, Raebareilly, Rampur, Saharanpur, Shahjahanpur, Sitapur,

Sultanpur, Unnao and Varanasi.

Heterodera avanae was found only in five districts, Aligarh, Badaun,

Balha, Bulandshahr and Ghaziabad with 1.18, 2.86, 4.17, 6.45 and 16.67

percent frequency of occurrence respectively. U. cajani was found

to be the most wide spread species with 20.00, 22.22, 7.41, 20.00, 16.67,

20.83, 17.24, 8.33, 9.68, 7.14, 25.00, 8.00, 24.56, 27.59, 8.33,

7.69, 4.23, 19.23, 26.92, 17.39, 17.24, 18,75, 13.89, 7.41, 19.23, 26.09.

a/ o V c o jn '^ '^3 ^ ro oo CO LC C^ C^ cz:oc^t-tr:cocDCDcocoO'*co in CO C<1 -^ CO o^ — oooiaioocsic: L-i C~ l_- 1— CO CO CrrrC^'X:'— 1— "^TfOOOOO^CO C~ CO LO ^ CO C^ 1— •^ (N T— 1— T— cc'— ooooc^-^ocrjcoo coL':!>-Lnin'— 1— tz; CO coi^'^'^c-cicocorr'^iOT— com CO O t O CO '^ CO CO •* C^ CO c^ ^r ^ •^^j'— T— Csicoincq

03 « E C^ -r-. UO CO CO C^ C^ O CO ocoiOLOunc^i^o OT~cocDt>-o^coo;CLnT— t-c— uO"* o tfl x: o

" _C -o

O 03 0) Z ,c -o 00 —, ^^ .—V '^ ^ C^ ,^^ c^ 00 rf ,^^^- ^ y—K ^-v ^-^.^^ o r- ^ C~ CO rf CO O O O CO ^ 05 lO D- C^ CD 00 in CO O CO in r- lO O '1^— o •^ 00 T- CO T— CO O_ .J 0-.5 -OCDOO"* r^ CO •^ "^ m OT . . . LO • . LO . . . '— t~ • CO• in• CO• • 1m— T— 1— • oT— ^ 00 I looOrTT— to''— C-C-CONT- c^ ^- CO t~ 1— tr~ •^ CO

T- LO C— c^ '5 I I I I I I I I 0) I I I I ily^lllliotjiiiii'coico CL w a; o ^-^ ..-^ CO .-^ c^ in •^^~.oo^-^^^^.—.^^ o , , , . 00 ^^ ^-^ ^-^ ^^ , ^ ,—> ^ ,—, -"•N CO o •^ CO CD 00 -^ CO otMcoommojoo in 00 o CO in c- •^ o o 05 CO o r- C<1 t- • CO CO 1— CO • M ^ ^ " CD C~ 05 CO 00 O in « JZ • r-~ r^ • »— ^- r^ <—l' o CL•l t^ • CO c^ urs • • • • • • E 00• co '- 00 T— 01 C~ CO c^ CO cCIC^C^ 'S* T— T— TP - - C<1 •^ T— CQ CO - in OS

u a 05 to >1 I/) *-) O 0) o in C '3D x: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CO o c :z a M '> CO "- o J= •a in c t/o 73 o 0} C3 cj I I I I I I I I I I I I CO I I I I I c o -4—»

OCO,—vCDC^CO^^^^^^Ô.—,CD05,-^^~,^-vCOC<105'^m05.^— C0053^^,—vC- OOCO^-v in oc^^— c:cococ-Jcooo'#coinincoo5coc-Qa5coc-ooT— CÔLOC~-OCO'— OO o c- ÔCOT— in' G * *COCOC5 C<1 C~ C^ "^•-^^c-...a5«Dc-c-ooco00O5t:~C^00C.T. — csii— CO 00 '- •^ CO in ^ •^ CO CO t- rf inincocoT—cDcsi'Tfoo'— c^coinc-'^rincoLncîintDco CO -^ TT 05 T- 00 3 -D CO a Z S

CD C- in CD IN 00 '- eg TP i CD I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I O en 00

ooc~in':f'^05'^'- '*'!Tine^O5C^C0r-CDCDC005(NCD '^•coco^ooa5t>iMa>o CO C-C<1C^COC^C<1C

oQco-^incoocooi '— cC0050'— OQCO-t'LOCDOOOOiOT-c^lCO '~'~^'~c^!M(>qcMCqog^Jc^3c^cocococo

12.50, 3.57, 8.70, 14.87, 18.18, 31.03 and 5.00 percent frequency of occurrence in Aligarh, Allahabad, Azamgarh, Badaun, Ballia, BarabanKi,

Bareilly, Bijnor, Bulandshahr, Etah, Etawah, Faizabad, FarruKhabad, Fatehpur,

Ghaziabad, Ghazipur, Hardoi, Jaunpur, Kanpur, LucKnow, Mainpuri, Meerut,

Moradabad, Muzaffarnagar, Pratapgarh, Raebareilly, Rampur, Saharanpur,

Shahjahanpur, Sitapur, Sultanpur, Unnao and Varanasi districts respectively.

H. cyperi was found only in Mainpuri district with 3.45 percent frequency

of occurrence. U. graminis was encountered in Aligarh, Hardoi and

Unnao districts with 0.59, 1.41, and 3.45 percent frequency of occurrence

respectively. Frequency of occurrence of H_. mothi was 8.23, 3.70,

11.AJ^8.33, 16.67, 9.68, 7.14, 8.33, 21.05, 17.24, 8.33, 23.08, 8.45, 11.54,

7.69, 8.70, 6.90, 12.50, 2.78, 3.70, 15.38, 4.35, 4.17, 7.14, 5.80, 3.70,

9.09, 10.34 and 5.00 percent respectively in Aligarh, Azamgarh, Badaun,

Ballia, BarabanKi, Bulandshahr, Etah, Etawah, FarruKhabad, Fatehpur,

Ghaziabad, Ghazipur, Hardoi, Jaunpur, Kanpur, LucKnow, Mainpuri, Meerut,

Moradabad, Muzaffarnagar, Pratapgarh, Raebareilly, Rampur, Saharanpur,

Shahjahanpur, Sitapur, Sultanpur, Unnao and Varanasi. H^. sorghi was

identified only from Bulandshahr, Ghaziabad, Meerut and Muzaffarnagar

with 6.45, 8.33, 3.12 and 3,70 percent frequency of occurrence respectively.

H. zeae was found in all the districts of Ganga plain except Bijnor,

BulandshaharJJ Ghaziabad. Its frequency of occurrence was 0.59, 18.52,

7,41, 2.86, 4.17, 8,33, 6.90, 7.14, 8.33, 4.00, 15.79, 6.90, 15.38,^7.69,

3.85, 21.74, 17.24, 15.62, 2.78,^15.38, 13.04, 8.33, 7.14, 1.45, 7.41, 4.55,

6.90 and 10.00 percent respectively in Aligarh, Allahabad, Azamgarh,

Badaun, Ballia, BarabanKi, Bareilly, Etah, Etawah, Faizabad, FarruKhabad,

Fatehpur, Ghazipur, Hardoi, Jaunpur, Kanpur, LucKnow. Mainpuri. Meerut,

Moradabad, Muzaffarnagar, Pratapgarh, Raebareilly, Rampur, Saharanpur,

Shahjahanpur, Sitapur, Sultanpur, Unnao and Varanasi.

The overall frequency of occurrence of Heterodera species viz.,

H. avenae, H. cajani, H. cyperi, R. graminis, ^i- nnothi, ji. sorghi, and

H_. zeae was 0.72, 15.95, 0.09, 0.27, 8.51, 0.36 and 7.26 percent respectively.

The number of cysts and larvae in 250 g soil is presented in Table-8.

A perusal of the table shows that cysts of H_- avenae were encountered in Aligarh, Badaun, Ballia, Bulandshahr and Ghaziabad: E. cajani in all

the districts of the region; _H. cyperi in Mainpuri; ji. graminis in Aligarh,

Hardoi and Unnao; ^i- mothi in Aligarh, Azamgarh, Badaun, Ballia,

BarabanKi, Bulandshahr, Etah, Etawah, FarruKhabad, Fatehpur, Ghaziabad,

Ghazipur, Hardoi, Jaunpur, Kanpur, LucKnov/, Mainpuri, Meerut, IVIoradabad,

Muzaffarnagar, Pratapgarh, Raebareilly, Saharanpur, Shahjahanpur, Sitapur,

sultanpur, Unnao and Varanasi; Ji. sorghi in Bulandshahr, Ghaziabad,

Meerut, and Muzaffarnagar and U_. zeae in all the districts of this region

except BijnoiyBulandshahr and Ghaziabad districts.

It is interesting to note that the number of cysts per 250g soil

of R. avenae ranged form 2-166 with the highest in Aligarh and only

2 in Ballia. In ji. cajani it ranged from 3-258; in H. mothi from 2-

57 and in ji^. zeae from 2-117 cysts per 250g soil with the highest in

Aligarh, Aligarh and Allahabad respectively. Five cysts of ji. cyperi

in 250g soil was recorded from Mainpuri. The number of cysts in H.

graminis and ji. sorghi ranged from 7-42 and 5-113 per 250g soil with

the highest in Aligarh and Bulandshahr respectively.

C2 C^ G> O C^ CO CM '— CC CC LO CSl CM LC C I^- CM :3 CO C<1 t- 00 tX) CO CD ^ 1— r- cc CO -^ CO C~ "^ '— LO CM ' - I ,1 III III I I I I I I 1-T C-Q "* t^- c- in T— LT: CO CMCOLOOCTJCSIC^CMC-; t~ 00 UO — C3 C- CM 1— ^ 1— T- T- CD T— C<1 »— "^ CM '— CM CO CD UO c- io CO CM ^^^ O 00 LO cyj t- -^ LO •* CO CM CD CC CM CM T— c 00 CD CO ^ CO CO C<1 <— CM CO CM T— -— 05 I I I III II I I I >> ^ o 00 CO t- •^ CO CM CO O 1^ LO 1— CM CM CD C TT CO CM 00 tr 05 C~ lO CO lO CD r— CO C<1 CO T— CO 1— T— CO 1—

I I I CO I I I I I I CO I lO I I I CM CO

I I I I I CO I I I I I l^ I I I i I c; i •^ I I I I I I

CO CM T- CM O O CO 1— o Ql— CO'— IOI>OCOCM CD CM in C- CO 00 00 CTjOl CO'— COC~Ct- CO tr- '^ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I S2\ LO C lO CO ^ CO O02O03'*000500'-r- T- CDO Ui CO t~ •^ T- a T- T- o CO •^ CM CM C<1 lO CD j^T— CDCOCO'— CO'— COCMC-CMT— CD -^ '- ^ O C^ 00 t- CM CM C^ O CM CM in CO c- o CO LO to C

03 LO I I I I I I I I I I I I I CM I I I I I I I I I I I I I LO J lO 00 c

CM I I I I I I I I I I I C~ I I I I I I I I I I I 73 CM U 'o

o I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 00 I I I I I I I I

3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I lO I I I I I I I I I I I I 2

lO 00 tr~ LO CM CM CM CD O in o cn T— c- o CM 00 o COLOCMOOOlt-'— OJ'^CDO'— in lO CM »- lO CO '- "* CM CD t>- T- CO 00 <^ COCOCO'— C-OOOOOOi— COT— 00 CO 05 00 I I I I I III I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I '— LO CO CD LO CMOOCJiLOOCMo'^ LOCMOCJ502CMCMCOt>CMCO'— 'T 00 O CM LO CM 1— CM COCM'^CMQ'— CMe^CO'^T- CMCMCMT-CMCOLO '— in CO ^ CM 00 T- CO CO CO CM CO lO LO in lO CO CMCOT—c- OjOt-m CM CTl -^ CO T- 1— D- CM -^ '— CM CM in LO CM CO T- CO ^ 00'— CMCM 00'— CO'" CM T- (M T— 1- CD CO 00 LO CM T— CO in CM J3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CM c~ Ln CO C- "i^ CO CO •^ CM CO a oocMincooo'— [>-oo'~'— T— '— T— cOCOOC-lO = •^ T— T-T-T— CMT- ,_T-CM CO '— T— CO T- E- u CO o LO CO CM [>- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CO o I I I o I I I CM 00

73 CD CD CM 1_1J '•'2 CO I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CM I I I I I I I I I CO CO

3 CO cCL 3 ^ r- n S c3 1, cC a CO X JZ -^ c >> T. CL X! a c3 a sz Cu-r O b O CL 3 CO CO • N 'r "—' CO CO '^ CO •(^- —1 —1 ^ 5 3 5 £ ? N] — o CO ~ tr. •S JZ jz a CO ^ =3 ^ o r = ^ CO a ^ ^ /~\ < ;r: CC ^ a c: CC C = ^^ ::i c=: ei ei :^ :_ 3 55 w X.

>— CMcoTincDc^oocJc;'— cvico ^inCDI>00C3OT— CMCO-TLOCDt-OOOlC r

Similarly, the number of larvae per 250g soil, in E_. avenae, H. cajani,

_H. graminis, ^i- mothi, E. sorghi and U. zeae ranged from 12-376. 52-115,

10-201, 18-94 and 8-126 with the highest in Aligarh, Fatehpur, Aligarh,

LucKnow, Bulandshahr, and Aligarh respectively, H. cyperi with 48 larvae per 250g soil was recorded from Mainpuri district.

2.4 Trans-Yamuna region

Data presented in Table-9 clearly indicates that a total of 199 soil and plant root samples were collected from different districts of

Trans Yamuna region of Uttar Pradesh. The overall frequency of occurrence

of heteroderid nematode species was found 25.12 percent. The frequency

of occurrence of heteroderid nematode species in different districts

viz ., Agra, Banda, Hamirpur, Jalaun, Jhansi, Lalitpur, Mathura and

Mirzapur was 37.04, 14.28, 20.68, 9.09, 20.83, 19.04, 41.66 and 37.50 percent

respectively.

Heterodera avenae was encountered in Jalaun, and Lalitpur with

4.55 and 4.76 percent frequency of occurrence respecvtively. E. cajani

was found to be the most wide spread species in this region. Its frequency

of occurrence was 25.93, 3.57, 17.24, 12.50, 9.52, 16,67, and 16.67 percent

respectively in Agra, Banda, Hamirpur, Jhansi, Lalitpur, Mathura and

Mirzapur districts. E. mothi was found to occur in Agra, Jhansi and

Mathura districts with 3.70, 4.17 and 12.50 percent frequency of occurrence

respectively. Heterodera zeae was recorded in all the districts of

this region viz., Agra, Banda, Hamirpur, Jalaun. Jhansi, Lalitpur, Mathura

r «- o -" o c 00 00 cr. CO o _, o o 00 o CO ::; >> fc o en O Oi 1— in t- r* w CO '— C

E^l ra o £ CTJ O o I/) 0 C X! o « c; Z x: 13 a

•(-' j:: (/J 0 0 CO <1c) ^^ o •au; CO un 00 c :> a 10 t~ •« Lw 03 • • \n ^ L^ O CO o u Irt c c o o •t-J == E m ^ >-i ^ I a; CO ,—^ TT o m > r 05 (>5 05 to C/3 C3 01 in o •u c £ 0) C 03 •-A 1/5 C~ CD CD 83 (Nl CO T" cn T- T— CO i^ ctfl 0 E- C c a; 03 O =" CO c^ n "- IN • - O E CO CS Sfl

ap P C8 , 3 N

CO t,_, ^ c_i O X3 05 0 00 a> c^ '^ 05 c^ c^ (M CM C<1 ca

CM t- CO CL 03 a cd •J u 03 01 T3 N CO t. C C •M 01) 0! OJ o < a •-U ^-5 1-3 hj 2 LO CD 00

FIG. 2

A -Cone top of H. avenae B -Cone top of H. graminis C -Cone top of H. mothi

D -Cone top of H. zeae

9 .Ife . ;

FIG.2

FIG. 3

A -Cone top of H. cajani

B,C -Cone top of H. sorghi

FI0.3

MAP OF UTTAR PRADESH "X.-.-^"" •'• • Heterodera cajani 2. f^. mothi 3. H. zeae /l 4. H. avenae 5. H. cyperi 6. H. graminls ^ 7. H. s^orghi

0 9 ^ y A P R A D e

FIG. 4

and Mirzapur with 7.41, 10.71, 3.45, 4.55, 4.17. 4.76, 12.50 and 20.83 percent frequency of occurrence respectively.

The overall frequency of occurrence of Heterodera species viz.,

E. avenae, ^l- cajani, B_. mothi and U. zeae was 1.01, 13.07, 2.51 and

8.54 percent respectively.

The number of cysts and larvae in 250g soil is presented in Table-10

A perusal of the Table shows that cysts of H. avenae were identified

from Jalaun and Lalitpur; ji. cajani from Agra, Banda, Hamirpur, Jhansi,

Lalitpur, Mathura and Mirzapur; H. mothi from Agra, Jhansi and Mathura

and E. zeae from Agra, Banda, Hamirpur, Jalaun, Jhansi, Lalitpur, and

Mirzapur. In U_. avenae, the number of cyst was 5 and 8 per 250g

soil in Jalaun and Lalitpur respectively. In E. cajani it ranged from

3-175; for R. mothi 11-32 and for E. zeae 5-51 cysts per 250g soil

with the highest in Mathura districts. Similarly, the number of larvae

per 250g soil was 18 and 11 in Jalaun and Lalitpur for E. avenae while

for E. cajani, E. mothi and E. zeae it ranged from 7-171, 31-127 and

12-145 larvae per 250g soil with the highest in Mathura, Agra and Agra

respectively.

3. Seasonal fluctuation of H. avenae population in a naturally infested fleldTl

Data pertaining to changes in populations of cysts and larvae of

E. avenae is given in Table-11. During the period of September, 1988

to August, 1989; data regarding the population of cysts in naturally

Table - 10 : Number of (Cysts and Larvae/250g- soil) heteroderid nematode species in different districts of Trans-Yamuna region of Uttar Pradesh.

Population per 250g soil Districts H. avenae H. cajani H. mothi H. zeae Cysts Larva Cysts Larvae Cysts Larvae Cysts Larvae

1. Agra 17-85 25-138 27 127 17-31 32-145

2. Banda 32 89 26-38 33-42

3. Hamirpur 15-73 21-61 10 37

4. Jalaun 18 13 36

5. Jhansi 3-82 18-61 18 105 12 27

6. Lalitpur 11 3-7 7-21 13 52

7. Mathura 21-175 31-171 11-32 31-72 32-51 35-64

8. Mirzapur 6-32 21-38 5-30 12-56

Table - 11 : Changes in the population of cysts and larvae of H. avenae in wheat field for the period Septem ber, 1988 to August, 1990.

Number i3e r Kg" soil Soil temperature Soil moisture Months pH Cysts Larvae (°C) (percent)

1. September, 1988 145 0 30.30 21.38 8.72 2. October 125 0 29.50 19.50 8.53 3. November 111 72 24.30 20.00 8.82 4. December 107 1149 17.10 16.23 7.79 5. January, 1989 217 1811 9.70 33.30 8.57 6. February 390 937 12.30 18.08 8.37 7. March 513 211 21.10 22.23 7.93 8. April 732 107 34.10 17.00 8.34 9. May 715 0 38.OU 15.15 8.82 10. June 635 0 36.20 18.23 8.49 11. July 579 0 29.20 22.56 8.78 12. August 360 0 32.00 21.75 8.42 13. September 317 0 30.20 20.01 8.04 14. October 246 60 28.00 21.50 7.82 15. November 215 200 22.20 24.70 8.56 16. December 225 1190 16.00 25.60 8.77 17. January, 1990 275 2171 10.00 27.80 8.45 18. February 464 945 15.00 23.60 8.15 19. March 580 283 22.10 20.50 8.56 20. April 827 105 33.40 17.80 8.98 21. May 812 0 35.10 13.26 8.45 22. June 790 0 36.00 9.50 8.69 23. July 639 0 29.30 9.18 8.82 24. August 503 0 33.20 18.00 7.96 Sum (X) 0.1052e+ 05 0.9241E + 04 602.80 505.30 202.80 Sum (X^) 0.5952E- 07 0.1270E + 08 0.1681E + 05 0.1101E + 05 0.1717E + 04 Mean (X) 438.40 385.00 25.12 21.05 8.45 SD 236.20 617.00 8.34 3.96 0.33

infested field revealed that prior to sowing wheat in the month of December ranged between 107 to 145 per kg soil; however, in subsequent months the population started increasing and the optimal population (732 cysts per kg soil) was recorded in the month of April, 1989. Subsequently, it started declining and was recorded 715, 635, 579 and 360 cysts per kg soil in the months of May, June, July and August respectively. A similar trend was observed for the period September, 1989 to August, 1990; the number of cysts was 317, 246 and 215 per kg soil for the months of September, October and November respectively. Due to sowing of wheat in the month of November, population of cysts started increasing and the optimal population (827 cysts per kg soil) was recorded in the month of April, 1990. Subsequently, it started declining and it was 812, 790, 639 and 503 cysts per kg soil in the months of'May, June, July and August respectively. However, the optimal number of cysts recorded was higher in 1990 than in 1989.

At the beginning of the experiment that is during September and October, 1988, larvae could not be isolated from soil. However, few larvae (72 per kg soil) were encountered in the month of November even prior to sowing of wheat. Sowing of wheat in early December resulted in several-fold increase in the population of larvae. It was 1149 and 1811 larvae per kg soil in the months of December, 1988 and January, 1989 respectively. The population again declined and it was 937, 211 and 107 larvae per kg soil in the months of February, March and April respectively. The larvae could not

FIG. 5

A -Field infested with H. avenae

shov;ing patchy growth of wheat

B -Uninfested wheat field

4#^-*

-rfiattbi^^Au B FIG. 5

FIG. 5

A -Field infested with H. avenae

shov;ing patchy growth of wheat

B -Uninfested wheat field

FIG. 6

be isolated at all from May to September, 1989. A similar

trend was noticed for the period September, 1989 to August, 1990.

The following regression equations can be used for

estimating the populations of cysts and larvae in the field :

For cysts : X = 1053.930 - 11.999 x (soil temperature) - 10.088 X (soil moisture) - 12.039 x (soil pH)

For larvae: X = 1788.042 - 59.929 (soil temperature) + 16.177 X (soil moisture) - 28.180 x (soil pH)

The soil temperature, moisture and pH was recorded by author for the entire duration of the experiment but it appears that these factors play an important role in effecting variation of population of cysts and larvae of H. avenae. The conclusions are derived based on the equations given above.

4. Studies on the morphometries of two populations of Heterodera avenae

In preliminary studies, Heterodera avenae, collected from wheat fields at Aligarh and Ghaziabad, it was observed that the two differed in some of the morphological characters. The author was not sure whether these differences were incidental or there was casual relationship. Consequently, the author decided to make in-depth studies on morphometries of larvae, males, females, cysts, eggs and cone top structures as influenced by host, soil type and soil moisture which are recorded in Appendix 1-9. However, in Tables 12-23, only some

of the important characters have been taken into consideration which contribute according to taxonomists working on the genus

Heterodera, in differentiating different species. However, lip annules and lateral incisures remained constant. 4.1(a) Effect of host on larvae

It is clear from Table 12 and Appendix 1 that when oat, wheat and barley seedlings were inocxilated with Aligarh population, significant increase in the body length, width and stylet length was observed on barley and oat, while with Ghaziabad population on oat and wheat. Variations in the length from stylet base to dorsal oesophageal gland opening and lateral field were non-significant.

Length from anterior end to excretory pore increased significantly on wheat and barley with Aligarh population whereas with Ghaziabad population on oat only. However, significant decrease was observed on wheat and barley with Ghaziabad population.

Significant increase in tail length was observed on barley and decrease on oat with Aligarh population; whereas with Ghaziabad population significant increase in tail length was observed on oat and wheat. Hyaline tail length increase significantly on barley with Aligarh population and on oat and wheat with Ghaziabad population.

Non-significant variation was observed in 'a' ratio on

oat, wheat and barley in both the populations. Significant

increase in 'b' ratio was observed only on barley with Aligarh

population whereas non-significant variations were observed on

Table-12 : Changes in 11 different ciiaracters of larvae when oat, wheat and barley seedlings were inoculated with Aligarh and Ghaziabad population of U. avenae.

Variation in Microns Character Treatments Aligarh Ghaziabad population population

1. Body Length F 500.75 508.45 Oat 532.75 564.25 Wheat 519.25 544.00 Barley 536.00 506.75 L.S.D. at 5% 25.026 33.156 17o 33.284 44.097

2. Body width F 22.75 20.75 Oat 24.20 23.90 Wheat 22.95 21.75 Barley 24.25 20.85 L.S.D. at 5 % 1.018 0.946 17c 1.359 1.258

3. Stylet Length F 24.70 24.65 Oat 25.85 27.60 Wheat 25.15 26.60 Barley 26.65 24.50 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.944 0.912 1 7o 1.255 1.213

4. DOGO F 5.75 6.17 Oat 5.95 6.10 Wheat 5.35 5.92 Barley 5.65 5.85 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.388 0.442 1 1 0.516 0.588

100

6. AE-EXP 98.90 102.95

Oat 97.00 112.60 Ivheat 02.30 94.55 Barley 09.45 100.10 L.S.D. .a t 5 % 3.182 2.348 1 1 4.232 3.123

7. LFW F 5.95 5.30 Oat 6.15 5.70 Wheat 5.75 5.45 Barley 6.00 5.65 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.412 0.376 1 t 0.548 0.500

8. Tail length F 62.65 57.25 Oat 58.05 63.25 Wheat 62.25 60.70 Barley 69.05 57.95 L^iD. at 5 % 2.766 2-224 1 7o 3.705 2.958

9. Hyaline tail lengtli F 37.20 36.45 Oat 38.50 41.10 Wheat 38.85 39.50 Barley 39.50 36.35 L.S.D. at 5 % 1.952 2.556 1 1 2.596 3.399

10. 'a' F 22.00 24.50 Oat 22.19 23.68 Wheat 21.72 25.77 Barley 22.14 22.24 L.S.D. at 5 % 1.092 1.282 1 7o 1.452 1.705

101

11.. '6' F 2.92 2.97 Oat 2.91 3.17 Wheat 3.03 3.08 Barley 3.08 2.96 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.140 0.194 1 7o 0.186 0.258

12. 'C F 8.00 8.38 Oat 9.14 8.92 Wheat 8.24 8.95 Barley 7.76 8.78 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.418 0.536 1 1 0.556 0.713

Each value is mean of 20 specimens F = Field population.

102

oat, wheat and barley with Ghaziabad population. Ratio 'c' increased significantly on oat with Aligarh while non significant variation on all the test plants with Ghaziabad population.

4.1(b) Effect of host on males

It is clear from Table 13 and Appendix 2 that when oat, wheat and barley seedlings were inoculated with Aligarh population, significant increase in the body length of males was observed on wheat, barley whereas with Ghaziabad popula tion, significant decrease was observed on wheat. Body width increased significantly on barley with Aligarh population whereas with Ghaziabad popultion on oat and barley.

Significant increase in the stylet length was observed on all the three hosts with Aligarh population while Ghaziabad population failed to cause any variation. Non-significant variations were observed in the distance between stylet base to dorsal oesophageal gland opening and lateral field width with Aligarh and Ghaziabad populations.

Length from anterior end to excretory pore increased significantly on barley with Aligarh population while with Ghaziabad population on all the three hosts.

Significant increase in the length of spicule was observed on oat, barley with Aligarh and on oat with Ghaziabad population.

103

Table-13 : Changes in 10 different characters of male when oat, wheat barley seedlings were inoculated v.'ith Aligarh and Ghaziabad population of YL avenae.

Variation in Microns Character Treatments Aligarh Ghaziabad Population Population

1. Body length F 1362.00 1412.75 Oat 1415.00 1427.90 Wheat 1422.75 1326.50 Barley 1429.00 1400.00 L.S.D. at 5 % 52.884 44.462 1 7o 70.336 59-134

2. Body width F 33.70 31.45 Oat 34.25 35.50 Wheat 33.90 30.15 Barley 35.25 35.35 L.S.D. at 5 % 1.128 1.038 1 1 1.500 1-380

3. Stylet length F 27.55 28.90 Oat 28.80 30.00 Wheat 28.85 29.00 Barley 29.05 29.20 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.868 1.188 1 I 1.544 1.580

4. DOGO F 6.00 6.10 Oat 6.20 6.50 Wheat 6.10 5.75 Barley 6.35 6.05 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.492 0.396 1 1 0.654 0.527

104

5. AE-EXP F 168.05 163.65 Oat 172.00 190.70 Wheat 166.25 174.50 Barley 176.75 182.75 L.S.D. at 5 % 6.528 4.152 1 % 8.682 5.522

6. LFW F 6.65 6.75 Oat 6.35 6.95 Wheat 6.60 6.80 Barley 6.95 6.65 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.382 0.382 1 % 0.508 0.508

7. Spicule length F 32.60 34.35 Oat 34.80 36.40 Wheat 32.10 31.75 Barley 36.20 35.40 L.S.D. at 5 % 1.312 1.102 1 % 1.745 1.466

F 40.42 44.95 Oat 41.48 40.24 Wheat 41.97 37.83 Barley 40.62 39.60 L.SJ). at 5 % 1.616 1.444 1 % 2.149 1.920

9. 'b' F 9.44 10.34 Oat 9.60 8.69 Wheat 9.83 8.52 Barley 8.99 9.60 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.366 0.220 1 % 0.487 0.293

105

10, F 5.78 5.50 Oat 5.78 5.51 Wheat 6.96 6.77 Bar] ey 5.63 6.06

L.S.D. at 57c 0.216 0.148 1% 0.287 0.197

Each value is mean of 20 specimens F = Field population.

106

Aligarh population failed to cause any variation in

'a' ratio while Ghaziabad population caused significant decrease in 'a' ratio on oat, wheat and barley. Significant increase in 'b' ratio was observed on wheat and decrease on barley with Aligarh population whereas with Ghaziabad population, decrease significantly on all hosts. Ratio 'b'' increased significantly on wheat with Aligarh population and on wheat and barley with Ghaziabad population.

4.1(c) Effect of host on females (Table 14, Appendix 3)

Significant increase in the body length of females was observed on oat and barley with Aligarh and on all the three hosts with Ghaziabad population. Body width decreased significantly on oat and wheat with Aligarh population while significant increase took place on the three hosts with Ghaziabad population.

Length of stylet significantly increased on the three hosts with both populations. Neck length was increased significantly on the three hosts with Aligarh while on oat and barley with Ghaziabad populations.

4.1(d) Effect of host- on cysts and cone top structure (Table 15, Appendix 3)

Significant increase in the cyst length was observed

on oat and barley with both Aligarh and Ghaziabad population.

However, cyst width increased significantly on oat, wheat and

barley with Aligarh and only on oat with Ghaziabad population.

107

Table-14 : Chang,es in 4 different characters of females when oat, wheat and barley seedlings were inoculated with Ali^-arh and Ghaziabad populations of H. avenae.

Variation ir1 Microns Character Treatments Aligarh Ghaziabad Population Population

1. Body length F 527.35 518.00 Oat 557.00 596.50 Wheat 548.25 567.50 Barley 562.50 589.50 L.S.D. at 5 % 27.643 35.430 1 7o 36.765 47.122

2. Body width F 396.60 299.50 Oat 262.50 341.61 Wheat 268.25 322.00 Barley 335.50 339.50 L.S.D. at 5 % 21.704 19.260 1 % 28.866 25.616

3. Stylet length F 22.05 22.35 Oat 23.50 27.45 Wheat 24.65 27.15 Barley 25.60 26.90 L.S.D. at 5 % 1.098 1.044 1 % 1.460 1.388

4. NecK length F 133.60 159.15 Oat 167.00 172.95 Wheat 159.45 165.20 Barley 166.25 170.05 L.S.D. at 5 % 12.692 6.276 1 % 16.880 8.347

Each value is mean of 20 specimens F = Field population

108

Table-15 : Changes in 6 different cinaracters of cysts winen oat. wiieat and barley seedlings were inoculated with Aligarh and Ghaziabad population of H. avenae

Variation in Microns Character Treatments Aligarh Ghaziabad population population

1. Cyst length F 765.35 735.75 Oat 822.50 836.25 Wheat 793.75 765.75 Barley 846.25 826.75 L.S.D. at 5 % 42.246 47.458 1 % 56.187 63.119

2. Cyst Width F 458.50 498.75 Oat 534.00 558.00 Wheat 531.00 516.75 Barley 568.00 502.75 L.S.D. at 5 % 39.792 40.921 1 % 52.923 54.425

3. Fenestra! Length F 42.50 45.50 Oat 46.35 48.70 Wheat 45.30 46.20 Barley 46.60 47.00 L.S.D. at 5 % 2.928 2.428 1 % 3.894 3.229

4. Fenestral width F 21.95 22.30 Oat 20.65 24.70 Wheat 23.05 23.80 Barley 24.65 22.55 L.S.D. at 5 % T.366 1.522 1 % 1.817 2.024

109

5. Vulval bridge width F 6.50 6.45 Oat 6.60 7.25 Wheat 6.60 7.15 Barley 7.30 6.45 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.878 0.832 1 % 1.188 1.106

6. Vulval slit length F 9.95 9.35 Oat 10.09 12.15 Wheat 9.80 9.10 Barley 11.80 9.85 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.632 0.572 1 % 0.840 0.761

•Each value is mean of 20 specimens ••F = Field population

110

Significant increase in the fenestral length was observed on oat and barley with Aligarh and only on oat with Ghaziabad population. Fenestral width increased significantly on barley with Aligarh and on oat with Ghaziabad population. It was, however, non-significant on oat and wheat in case of Aligarh and wheat and barley with Ghaziabad population.

Vulval bridge width appear to be a fairly constant character. The cysts collected from the three host failed to exhibit variation in measurement. However, vulval slit length varied. It increased significantly on barley and oat with Aligarh and Ghaziabad populations respectively.

4.2(a) Effect of soil types on second stage larvae

It is evident from Table 16 and Appendix 4 that when barley seedlings grown in pure clay (STl), 75 clay:25 sand (ST2), 50 clay: 50 sand (ST3), 25 clay: 75 sand (ST4) and pure sand (ST5); inoculated with Aligarh population; significant increase in body length of larvae was observed in treatment ST3 and ST4 while with Ghaziabad population, in only ST3. Significant decrease occurred in body width in treatments STl and ST4 with Aligarh population whereas with Ghaziabad population significant increase in treatments STl, ST2, ST4 and ST5.

Stylet length increased significantly in ST2, ST3 and

ST4 treatments with Aligarh and with Ghaziabad population in

ST2, ST3, ST4 and ST5. In case of later, decrease was noted

in STl treatment. The distance between the base of stylet

111

Table-16 : Changes in 11 different characters of larvae v;hen wheat seelings, grown in different soil types, were inoculated with Aligarh and Ghaziabad population of H. avenae.

Variation in Microns Character Treatments Migarh Ghaziabad population population

1. Body length F 500.75 508.45 ST1 510.00 493.50 ST2 509.00 493.00 ST3 524.00 529.00 ST4 525.00 498.00 ST5 513.75 497.00 L.S.D. at 5 % 22.555 19.689 1 % 29.872 26.076

2. Body width F 22.75 20.75 ST1 21.50 21.85 ST2 22.10 22.20 ST3 22.55 21.57 ST4 21.35 21.80 ST5 22.00 22.05 L.S.D. at 5 % 1.054 0.870 1 % 1.396 1.152

3. Stylet length F 24.70 24.65 ST1 25.45 23.55 ST 2 26.45 26.05 ST3 25.90 27.10 ST4 26.15 26.20 ST5 25.42 25.90 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.761 0.916 1 % 1.008 1.213

112

4. DOGO F 5.75 6.17 ST1 5.50 5.70 ST2 5.85 5.65 ST3 5.80 5.80 ST4 5.95 6.00 ST5 5.95 5.68 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.426 0.564 1 % 0.564 0.747

5. AE-EXP F 98.90 102.95 ST1 100.70 94.60 ST2 104.55 94.65 ST3 104.35 100.60 ST4 102.80 105.05 ST5 102.90 100.00 L.S.D. at 5 % 2.884 3.040 1 % 3.819 4.027

6. Lateral Field Width F 5.95 5.30 ST1 5.55 5.40 ST 2 5.60 5.50 ST3 5.60 5.55 ST4 5.65 5.35 ST 5 5.55 5.50 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.361 0.329 1 % 0.478 0.436

7. Tail Length F 62.65 57.25 ST1 58.95 57.15 ST2 58.00 57.75 ST3 61.85 60.20 ST4 64.75 60.90 ST 5 60.05 59.00 L.S.D. at 5 % 2.035 1.726 1 % 2.696 2.286

113

F 37.20 36.45 8. Hyaline Tail Length ST1 36.60 35.75 ST2 36.00 36.45 ST3 36.95 37.85 ST4 39.15 38.15 ST5 37.95 37.10 L.S.D. at 5 % 1.809 1.683 1 % 2.397 2.229

9. 'a' F 22.00 24.50 ST1 23.06 22.64 ST2 23.13 22.25 ST3 23.28 24.52 ST4 24.59 22.90 ST5 23.38 22.60 L.S.D. at 5 % 1.136 1.021 1 % 1.5D4 1.352

10. '6' F 2.92 2.97 ST1 2.92 3.13 ST2 2.86 2.98 ST3 2.96 2.88 ST4 2.94 2.86 ST5 2.90 2.89 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.115 0.095 1 % 0.152 0.126

11. 'c' F 8.00 8.88 ST1 8.67 8.71 ST2 8.79 8.56 ST3 8.93 8.78 ST4 8.79 8.19 ST5 8.56 8.44 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.331 0.293 1 % 0.438 0.388

Each value is mean of 20 specimens F = Field population ST1 = Pure clay; ST2 = Clay : Sand (75 : 25); ST3 = Clav : Sand ( 50 : 50) ST4 = Clay : and (25 : 75); ST5 = Pure sand.

114

knobs to dorsal oesophageal gland opening remained uninfluenced in all the treatments in case of both the populations.

Significant increase in the length from anterior end to excretory pore was observed in treatments ST2, ST3, ST4 and ST5 with Aligarh population whereas treatments STl and ST2 showed a marked decrease with Ghaziabad population.

Lateral field width decreased significantly in treatments STl and ST5 with Aligarh population while Ghaziabad population failed to exhibit any variation at all the treatments.

Significant increase in tail length was observed in treatment ST4 and decrease in STl and ST2 with Aligarh popula tion and with Ghaziabad population, increase significantly in treatments ST3, ST4 and ST5. All the soil types failed to exhibit any significant variation in hyaline tail portion except ST4 which showed significant increase with Aligarh as well as Ghaziabad population.

Significant increase in 'a' ratio was observed in treatments STl, ST3, ST4 and ST5 with Aligarh population while with Ghaziabad population decrease in treatments STl, ST2, ST4 and ST5. Non-significant variations were noted in 'b'' ratio in all treatments with Aligarh population and with Ghaziabad population increase only in STl and decrease in ST3, ST4 and ST5. Significant increase in 'c' ratio was observed in all treatments with Aligarh population whereas with Ghaziabad population decrease in ST2, ST4 and ST5.

115

4.2(b) Effect of soil types on males (Table 17, Appendix 5)

Significant increase in body length of males was observed in treatment ST4 and decrease in STl and ST2 with both populations. Similar results were obtained for body width.

Barring increase in treatment ST5 with Aligarh and decrease in STl with Ghaziabad populations, no significant variations were observed in stylet length in the remaining treatments. Non-significant variation in measurements of the distance between stylet knob's base to dorsal oesophageal gland opening was noted with both, Aligarh and Ghaziabad populations except marked decrease in treatment STl with Aligarh population.

Significant increase in the length from anterior end to excretory pore in treatment ST4 and decrease in STl, ST2 and ST3; and increase in treatment ST3 and decrease in STl, ST2 and ST5 was recorded with Aligarh and Ghaziabad popula tions respectively.

Lateral field width decreased significantly in treatments ST3 and ST5 in Ghaziabad population.

Significant increase in spicule length was observed in treatments ST3, ST4 and ST5 with Aligarh population and in ST4 and ST5 with Ghaziabad population.

However, 'a' ratio decreased significantly in treat ments STl, ST2 and ST3 with Aligarh population and in STl,

116

Table-17 : Changes in 10 different characters of male when wheat seedlings, ^rown in different soil types, were inoculated with Aligarh and Ghaziabad population of H. avenae.

Variation in Microns Character Treatments Aligarh Ghaziabad population population

Body Length F 1362.00' 1412.75 ST1 1164.00 1121.00 ST 2 1194.25 1206.50 ST3 1357.75 1356.50 ST4 1438.25 1485.00 ST 5 1334.00 1345.25 L.S.D. at 5 % 60.681 70.827 1 % 80.363 93.804

Body width F 33.70 31.45 ST1 30.60 29.05 ST 2 31.40 31.85 ST3 33.10 31.60 ST4 35.12 33.10 ST5 34.50 32.00 L.S.D. at 5 % 1.316 1.502 1 % 1.743 1.990

Stylet length F 27.55 28.90 ST1 27.55 27.85 ST2 28.05 28.95 ST 3 28.45 28.30 ST4 28.35 28.05 ST5 29.00 28.20 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.983 0.957 1 % 1.302 1.268

117

DOGO F 6.00 6.10 ST1 5.55 6.45 ST2 5.90 6.55 ST 3 6.20 5.95 ST4 5.60 6.50 ST5 6.05 6.00 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.448 0.478 1 % 0.593 0.633

AE-EXP F 168.05 163.65 ST1 151.00 146.35 ST2 154.90 143.90 ST3 158.10 158.50 ST4 173.25 169.90 ST5 167.00 141.50 L.S.D. at 5 % 4.806 5.488 1 % 6.366 7.269

Lateral Field Width F 6.65 6.75 ST1 6.05 6.90 ST2 6.20 6.85 ST3 6.60 6.25 ST4 6.65 6.45 ST5 6.70 6.35 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.351 0.371 1 % 0.465 0.491

Spicule length F 32.80 34.35 ST1 32.50 34.05 ST2 33.05 34.70 ST3 33.95 35.25 ST4 34.40 36.90 ST5 35.00 35.85 L.S.D. at 5 % 1.056 1.316 1 % 1.399 1.743

118

F 40.42 44.95 ST1 37.96 38.53 ST2 38.00 38.00 ST3 41.02 42.94 ST4 40.92 44.86 ST5 38.62 42.04 L.S.D. at 5 % 1.488 1.815 1 % 1.970 2.404

F 9.44 10.34 ST1 9.48 9.21 ST 2 9.52 9.81 ST3 9.67 10.18 ST4 9.42 10.70 ST5 9.60 11.00 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.402 0.474 1 % 0.533 0.627

F 5.78 5.50 ST1 6.10 5.55 ST2 6.29 6.17 ST3 6.15 6.80 ST4 5.99 6.69 ST 5 6.26 6.43 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.242 0.376 1 % 0.320 0.499

Each value is mean of 20 specimens F = Field population ST1 = pure clay, ST2 = Clayrsand (75:25), ST3 = Clay:Sand (50:50), ST4 = Clay:Sand (25:75) and ST5 = pure sand.

119

ST2, ST3 and ST4 with Ghsiziabad population. With Aligarh population 'b' ratio remained constant while with Ghaziabad population it increased significantly in treatments ST5 and decrease in STl and ST2. Significant increase in 'b'' ratio was observed in treatments STl, ST2, ST3 and ST5 with Aligarh population and in treatments ST2, ST3, ST4 and ST5 with Ghaziabad population.

A.2(c) Effect of soil types on females (Table 18, Appendix 6)

Significant increase in body length of females in treatments STB, ST4 and ST5 and decrease in STl with both the populations was recorded. Body width increased significantly in ST2, ST3, ST4 and ST5 with both Aligarh and Ghaziabad populations. However, decrease in STl was recorded with only Aligarh population.

Significant increase in stylet length was observed in STl, ST2, ST3 and ST4 with Aligarh and in ST2 and ST3 with Ghaziabad populations. However, decrease in ST5 with later was noted.

Increase in neck length of the females in ST5 with Aligarh and not in Ghaziabad population in any treatment was noted. Decrease in STl, and STl and ST5 was recorded with Aligarh and Ghaziabad population respectively.

4.2(d) Effect of soil types on cysts and cone top structures (Table 19, Appendix 6)

Significant increase in cyst length in treatments ST3,

ST4 and ST5 was observed in Aligarh and Ghaziabad population

120

Table-18 : Changes m four di ffe rei It Clharac t ers : of female when wheat seedlings, g rown in different soil types were inoculated with Aligarh and Ghaziabad |oopulat i on of H_. avenae.

Variation in Microns Character Treatments Aligarh Ghaziabad population population

1. Body length F 527.35 518.50 ST1 490.75 484.50 ST2 501.25 542.25 ST3 659.50 624.75 ST4 654.50 654.25 ST 5 646.00 636.50 L.S.D. at 5 % 35.222 29.754 1 % 46.649 39.406

2. Body width F 306.60 299.50 ST1 260.50 315.60 ST2 345.25 364.25 ST3 374.50 373.25 ST4 371.75 353.00 ST5 372.25 372.25 L.S.D. at 5 % 17.882 21.021 1 % 23.683 27.841

3. Stylet length F 22.05 22.35 ST1 23.10 23.40 ST 2 23.35 24.20 ST3 23.65 23.55 ST4 23.25 22.45 ST5 22.10 21.20 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.781 1-086 1 % 1.034 1.491

121

ecK length F 133.60 159.15 ST1 121.90 132.95 ST 2 135.35 154.50 ST3 140.75 152.60 ST4 140.75 161.65 ST5 143.20 139.85 L.S.D. at 5 % 8.857 12.173 1 % 11.731 16.123

*Each value is mean of 20 specimens *ST1= Pure clay, ST2 = ClayrSand (75:25), ST3 Clav:Sand (50:50) ST4 = ClayrSand (25:75), and ST5 = Pure sand.

122

Table-19 : Changes in six different characters of cyst and conetop structures when wheat seedlings, grown in different soil types, were inoculated with Aligarh and Ghaziabad population of H. avenae.

Variation in Microns Character Treatments Aligarh Ghaziabad E>opulation population

1. Cyst length F 765.35 735.75 ST1 725.75 681.50 ST2 798.50 784.50 ST3 832.00 802.75 ST4 831.75 807.00 ST 5 863.50 864.75

L.S.D. at 5 %• 38.693 52.395 1 % 51.244 69.393

2. Cyst width F 458.50 498.75 ST1 420.75 447.50 ST2 445.50 532.75 ST3 439.00 544.50 ST4 519.00 558.75 ST5 527.25 573.75 L.S.D. at 5 % 31.284 44.492 1 % 41.433 59.031

3. Fenestral Length F 42.50 45.50 ST1 52.50 49.10 ST2 53.10 50.80 ST3 52.40 55.05 ST4 53.75 57.20 ST5 53.10 53.10 L.S.D. at 5 % 3.203 3.084 1 % 4.242 4.084

123

4. Fenestral width F 21.95 22.30 ST1 25.40 25.45 ST 2 26.10 24.65 ST 3 25.10 25.65 ST4 25.70 26.85 ST 5 23.65 26.15 L.S.D. at 5 % 2.059 1.506 1 % 2.727 1.995

5. Vulval Bridge width F 6.50 6.45 ST1 7.75 8.00 ST 2 7.75 8.20 ST3 8.20 8.50 ST4 8.35 8.60 ST 5 8.50 9.10 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.787 0.902 1 % 1.042 1.194

6. Vulval slit length F 9.95 9.35 T1 10.75 11.25 T2 11.00 11.65 T3 11.25 11.70 T4 11.55 12.15 T5 11.55 12.65 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.668 0.773 1 % 0.885 1.024

Each value is mean of 20 specimens F = Field population ST1 = Pure clay ST2 = clay : sand (75 : 25) ST3 = clay : sand (50 : 50) ST4 = clay : sand (25 : 75) ST5 = pure sand.

124

and decrease in ST l with both. Significant increase in cyst width in treatments ST4 and ST5 and in ST3, ST4 and ST5 was observed in Aligarh and Ghaziabad population respectively. There was, however, decrease in STl treatment in both the populations.

Fenestral length increased significantly in all the treatments in both the populations. Increase in fenestral width was recorded in STl, ST2, ST3 and ST4 with Aligarh and in all the treatments in case of Ghaziabad population. Significant increase in vulval bridge width and vulval slit length was observed in all soils both in Aligarh and Ghaziabad populations.

4.3(a) Effect of soil moisture on second stage larvae

It is evident from Table 20 and Appendix 7 that when barley seedlings grown in 10, 20, 30, 40 and 50 per cent of soil moisture, for convenience sake named as SMI, SM2, SM3, SM4 and SMS respectively; and later inoculated with Aligarh and Ghaziabad populations, significant increase in body length of larvae was observed in treatments SM2, SM3, SM4 and SM5 and SM3, SM4 and SMS respectively. Decrease in the larval length was recorded in SMI with both. Body width increased signi ficantly in SM5 with Aligarh and in SM4 and SM5 with Ghaziabad population, while decrease was noticed in SMI treatment with both the populations.

Significant increase in stylet length occurred in

treatments SM3 and SM4 with Aligarh and in SM2, SM3 and SM4

125

Table-20 : Changes in eleven different cnaracters of larvae when wheat seedling, grown in different soil moisture, were inoculated with Aligarh and Ghaziabad population of H. avenae.

Variation in Microns Characters Treatment Aligarh Ghaziabad population population

1. Body length F 500.75 508.45 SMI 484.75 493.80 SM2 535.50 514.75 SMS 543.25 546.50 SM4 543.50 564.50 SMS 538.50 545.50 L.S.D. at 5 % 14.440 11.616 1 % 19.128 15.385

2. Body width F 22.75 20.75 SMI 21.75 19.75 SM2 22.50 21.60 SMS 22.90 21.55 SM4 23.60 23.45 SMS 23.85 22.95 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.894 0.864 1 % 1.184 1.144

3. Stylet length F 24.70 24.65 SMI 2S.95 23.30 SM2 25.10 25.60 SMS 26.20 27.65 SM4 25.65 26.95 SMS 23.85 23.10 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.666 0.967 1 % 0.882 1.281

126

DOGO F 5.75 6.17 SMI 5.75 5.35 SM2 5.70 5.75 SMS 6.20 6.30 SM4 5.90 6.70 SMS 5.40 6.75 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.497 0.509 1 % 0.659 0.675

. AE-EXP F 98.90 102.95 SMI 95.05 96.25 SM2 95.S5 98.00 SMS 96.65 107.10 SM4 104.65 110.20 SMS 95.65 97.80 L.S.D. at 5 % 2.931 4.325 1 % 3.882 5.728

5. LFW F 5.95 5.30 SMI 5.75 5.45 SM2 5.75 5.45 SMS 5.75 5.70 SM4 5.95 5.65 SMS 5.65 5.60 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.323 0.371 1 % 0.428 0.491

7. Tail length F 62.65 57.25 SMI 60.00 57.70 SM2 60.50 58.00 SMS 64.70 60.50 SM4 59.95 58.85 SMS 58.25 59.65

L.SJD . at 51 % 2.167 2.273 1 % 2.869 3.011

127

8. Hyaline Tail length F 37.20 36.45 SMI 37.90 37.65 SM2 38.05 37.10 SMS 38.50 39.25 SM4 38.45 39.65 SMS 38.05 37.15 L.S.D. at 5 % 1.851 2.091 1 % 2.452 2.769

9. 'a' F 22.00 24.50 SMI 21.83 25.65 SM2 23.80 23.83 SMS 23.72 25.36 SM4 23.09 24.11 SM5 22.57 23.76 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.876 0.866 1 % 1.160 1.147

10. '6' F 2.92 2.97 SMI 2.93 3.03 SM2 3.06 2.90 SMS 2.93 2.79 SM4 2.82 2.71 SMS 2.90 2.72 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.081 0.111 1 % 0.108 0.147

11. F 8.00 SMI 8.08 • 8.56 SM2 9.00 8.87 SMS 8.45 9.08 SM4 9.07 9.60 SMS 9.24 9.14

L.S.D. at 5 % 0.305 0.347 1 % 0.404 0.496 Each value is mean of 20 specimens F = Field population SMI = 10 percent soil moisture SM2 = 20 percent soil moisture SMS = 30 percent soil moisture SM4 = 40 percent soil moisture

128

with Ghaziabad populations . In case of former, decrease was recorded in SMI treatment and in the later in SMI and SM5.

All the treatments failed to bring about any significant change in distance between stylet knob base to dorsal oesopha geal gland opening with Aligarh population. With Ghaziabad population increase in SMA and SM5 and decrease in SMI was recorded.

Significant increase in the length from anterior end to excretory pore was observed in treatment SM4 with Aligarh and Ghaziabad population. In both decrease was recorded in SMI and SM2 treatments.

Lateral field width remain uninfluenced in all the treatments with both the populations except SM3 with Ghaziabad population which showed significant increase.

Significant increase in tail length was observed only in treatment SM3 with Aligarh and in SM3 and SM5 with Ghaziabad population. In the former, decrease was noticed in SMI, SMA and SM5. In all the treatments, variation in hyaline tail portion was non-significant with Aligarh population and with Ghaziabad population on the other hand, it was increased in SM3 and SMA.

Ratio 'a' increased significantly in treatments SM2,

SM3 and SMA with Aligarh and only in SMI with Ghaziabad

population. Significant increase in 'b'' ratio was observed

in SM2 and SMA with Aligarh population and with Ghaziabad

population instead of increase, on the other hand, decrease

129

was noticed in SMS , SM4 and SM5. Considerable increase in 'c' ratio was noted in SM2, SM3, SM4 and SM5 with Aligarh and only in SM4 with Ghaziabad population.

A.3(b) Effect of soil moisture on males (Table 21, Appendix 8)

Significant increase in body length of male was observed in treatment SM4 and decrease in SMI, SM2 and SM5 with both Aligarh and Ghaziabad populations. Body width increased significantly in SM4,and SM3 and SM4 with Aligarh and Ghaziabad populations respectively. Significant decrease took place in SMI and SM5 with Aligarh population.

Significant increase in stylet length was noted in SM3 and SM4 with Aligarh and only in SM3 with Ghaziabad popula tion. Significant decrease was observed in SMI with Aligarh and in SMI and SM5 with Ghaziabad population. The distance between stylet knob base to dorsal oesophageal gland opening was non-significant with both the populations except SMI with Aligarh population.

Significant increase in the length from anterior end to excretory pore was observed in SM4 with both the popula tions. However, decrease in SMI, SM2 and SM5 with Aligarh and in SMI and SM5 with Ghaziabad population was noted.

All the treatments failed to show any significant

changes in lateral field width with both the populations.

Spicule length increased significantly in SM2, SM3 and

SM4 with Aligarh population whereas with Ghaziabad population

130

Table-21 : Changes in ten different characters of male when wheat seedlings, grown in different soil moisture, were inoculated with Aligarh and Ghaziabad population of H. avenae.

Variation in Microns Character Treatments Aligarh Ghaziabad population population

1. Body length F 1362.00 1412.75 SMI 1111.40 1150.00 SM2 1226.45 1259.75 SMS 1380.25 1347.00 SM4 1434.25 1482.75 SM5 1205.50 1184.00 L.S.D. at 5 % 69.820 69.146 1 % 92.471 91.578

2. Body width F 33.70 31.45 SMI 31.15 31.75 SM2 33.40 32.00 SM3 34.70 34.15 SM4 35.35 33.40 SM5 30.90 32.70 L.S.D. at 5 % 1.475 1.522 1 % 1.953 2.016

3. Stylet length F 27.55 28.9i3 SMI 26.50 27.70 SM2 27.95 29.10 SMS 29.60 29.90 SM4 29.00 29.35 SMS 26.80 27.65 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.862 0.870 1 % 1.142 1.152

131

4. DOGO F 6.00 6.10 SMI 5.50 5.95 SM2 6.30. 6.10 SMS 6.35 5.60 SM4 5.60 5.75 SM5 5.85 6.40 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.474 0.531 1 % 0.627 0.703

5. AE-EXP F 168.05 163.65 SMI 154.15 144.60 SM2 160.90 158.60 S^I3 164.25 162.50 SM4 172.25 169.85 SMS 155.35 149.20 L.S.D. at 5 % 4.293 6.089 1 % 5.686 8.064

6. LFW F 6.65 6.75 SMI 6.75 6.85 SM2' 6.50 6.45 SM3 6.60 6.70 SM4 6.40 6.40 SMS 6.50 6.40 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.402 0.523 1 % 0.533 0.693

7. Spicule length F 32.80 34.35 SMI 33.10 32.35 SM2 34.90 35.00 SMS 35.25 35.85 SM4 34.30 35.45 SMS 33.55 34.95 L.S.D.. at 5 % 1.114 1.708 1 % 1.475 2.263

132

F 40.42 44.95 SMI 35.64 36.20 blvl2 36.72 39.37 SMS 3S.77 39.49 SM4 40.57 44.39 SM5 34.54 36.25 L.S.D. at 5 % 1.243 1.643 1 % 1.646 2.168

9. 'b' F 9.44 10.34 SMI 8.69 9.53 SM2 9.53 10.30 SMS 9.96 10.09 SM4 9.75 9.75 SM5 8.84 9.18 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.464 0.519 1 % 0-614 0.688

10. F 5.78 5.50 SMI 5.19 5.15 SM2 5.41 5.98 SMS 5.89 6.25 SM4 5.49 5.54 SM5 5.47 5.55 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.285 0.275 1 % 0.378 0.365

Each value is mean of 20 specimens. F - Field population SMI = 10 percent soil moisture SM2 = 20 percent soil moisture SMS = SO percent soil moisture SM4 = 40 percent soil moisture SM5 = 50 percent soil moisture

133

in all the treatments , there was no increase, except in SMI where it was decreased.

Non-significant variatioin in 'a' ratio was observed in SMS and SM4 and in SM4 with Aligarh and Ghaziabad popula tion respectively, while marked decrease in SMI, SM2 and SM5 with Aligarh and in SMI, SM2, SMS and SM5 with Ghaziabad population. Ratio 'b' increased significantly in SMS and decrease in SMI and SM5 with Aligarh population whereas with Ghaziabad population, decrease in SMI, SMA and SM5. Significant decrease in b' ratio was occurred in treatment SMI, SM2, SM4 and SM5 with Aligarh population and in only SMI with Ghaziabad population. In the former increase was noticed in SM2 and SMS.

4.3(c) Effect of soil moisture on females (Table 22, Appendix 9)

Significant increase in body length of females were observed in SMS and SM4 with Aligarh population and in SM2, SMS and SM4 with Ghaziabad population. Decrease was noticed in SMI and SM5 with both the populations. Significant increase in body width was recorded in treatments SM4 with Aligarh and in SMS, SM4 and SM5 with Ghaziabad populations. Decrease occurred in SMI and SM5 with both the populations.

Stylet length increased significantly in treatments SMS and SM4 and decrease in SMI and SM5 with both the populations.

Significant increase in neck length observed in

treatments SM4 with Aligarh and in SMS and SM4 with Ghaziabad

134

Table-22 : Chari'^es in four different cnaracters of female when wheat seedlings, grown in different soil moisture, v>'ere inoculated with Aligarh and Ghaziabad population of K. avenae.

Variation in Microns Character Treatments Aligarh Ghaziabad population population

1. Body length F 527.S5 518.00 SMI S00.25 480.75 SM2 S5S.25 548.25 SMS 559.00 585.00 SM4 559.00 559.25 SMS 495.25 490.50 L.S.D. at 5 26.810 27.304 1 % 35.508 36.162

2. Body width F 306.60 299.50 SMI 272.50 265.50 SM2 302.25 323.25 SMS 313.75 336.00 SM4 331.75 328.25 SM5 280.25 270.00 L.S.D. at 5 % 24.852 28.396 1 % 32.915 37.608

3. Stylet length F 22.05 22.35 SMI 20.25 20.75 SM2 22.75 22.30 SMS 23.25 23.80 SM4 23.15 23.75 SMS 21.00 21.05 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.927 1.048 1 % 1.228 1.389

4. NecK length F 133.60 159.15 SMI 123.50 142.35 SM2 126.00 152.80 SMS 136.10 167.40 SM4 156.85 165.90 SMS 125.60 151.95 L.S.D. at 5 % 6.953 6.657 1 % 9.208 8.817

Each value is mean of 20 specimens F = Field population SMI, SM2, SMS, SM4 SMS = 10 20 30, 40, and SO percent soil moisture respectively.

135

populations. Decreas e was noticed in SMI, SM2 and SM5 with the former and in SMI and SM5 with the later.

4.3(d) Effect of soil moisture on cysts, cone top structures (Table 23, Appendix 9)

Significant increase in cysts length was observed in treatments SM4 with Aligarh as well as Ghaziabad population. In both the populations however, decrease was noticed in SMI and SM5. Significant increase in cyst width was also noted in treatment SM4 with Aligarh population. Decrease occurred in treatments SMI and SM5 with both the populations.

Significant increase in fenestral length and width were recorded in SM2, SM3 and SM4 and decrease in SMI and SM5 with both the populations. Vulval bridge width increased significantly in SM2, SM3 and SM4 and decreased in SMI with both Aligarh and Ghaziabad populations. Significant increase in vulval slit length was recorded in the SM2, SM3, SM4 and SM5 with both the populations. However, in Aligarh collection decrease was noticed in SMI.

5. Studies on host range of two populations of Heterodera avenae

A total of 37 plants belonging to eleven families viz., Graminae, Leguminosae, Polygonaceae, Compositae, Caryophyllaceae, Primulaceae, Chenopodiaceae, Amaranthaceae, Solanaceae, Convolvulaceae and Cruciferae were screened for their susceptibility against Aligarh and Ghaziabad populations of H. avenae collected from wheat fields (Table 24). Although

136

Table-23 : Changes in six different cnaracters of cysts and cone top structures when wheat seedlings, grov;n in different soil moisture, were inoculated with Ali^arh and Ghaziabad population of H. avenae.

Variation in Microns Characters Treatments Aligarh Ghaziabad population population

1. Cyst Length F 765.35 735.75 SMI 681.25 664.50 SM2 762.00 733.25 SM3 774.00 755.50 SM4 833.00 813.75 SM5 705.75 666.50 L.S.D. at 5 % 56.156 67.764 1 % 74.374 89.749

2. Cvst V/idth F 458.50 498.75 SMI 408.00 438.25 SM2 444.00 475.50 SM3 472.25 458.00 SM4 514.75 491.25 SM5 408.25 447.95 L.S.D. at 5 % 48.98 46.240 1 % 64.872 61.241

3. Fenestral Len^ith F 42.50 45.50 SMI 39.65 42.85 SM2 52.65 51.90 SMS 55.20 51.75 SM4 55.65 51.75 SMS 37.95 41.30 L.S.D. at 5 % 2.390 1.837 1 % 3.166 2.433

137

4. Fenestral w"idth F 21.95 22.30 SMI 20.65 20.85 SM2 24.95 25.10 SMS 25.25 24.60 SM4 2S.90 24.60 SMS 20.45 20.70 L.S.D. at 5 % 1.159 1.062 1 % 1.536 1.407

5. Vulval bridge width F 6.50 6.45 SMI 6.00 5.85 SM2 7.00 7.75 SMS 8.15 7.65 SM4 7.70 7.30 SMS 6.95 6.80 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.480 0.460 1 % 0.635 0.609

6. Vulval slit length F 9.95 9.35 SMI 9.00 9.85 SM2 11.85 11.90 SMS 12.30 11.95 SM4 12.20 11.90 SMS 12.35 12.40 L.S.D. at 5 % 0.658 0.521 1 % 0.871 0.690

Each value is average of 20 specimens F =: Field population SMI. SM2, SMS, SM4 SMS = 10 20.30,40 and 50 percent soil moisture respectively.

138

c _o 4-1

0) r— C 1.2 _0 > 03 t^ E 0) o 0) c 0) ca .2 a3

c CO

CO 00 c CO CO 0) 1 T- O 1 •'—1 CO (M >^ -••-' CO •4—» I 0) 1 -^ o E CD c > CO ^^ •r—> yi 1—^ CL > CO >1 "^ CO CO CO ^rJ V a; I t/3 CO v; 0) io O CQ CO CD o CJ •-3 > CD CO CO E CO > o r \^ 'o > o| o c O Z Cfi COI C3 > CO ^ en OJ r- ac o CO C/5 ^ > CO Q; 3 5 > 33 > —' o • —H c 03 E •t-J > > c/} +-» 0) CO 0) D 4J CO t/5 o in o E E E CO 0) =fl 5 o :3 3 0 c/: E 2 0) £ CO C N ^>j 1- ed o •D "a c o "p CO o c >> -4—< 2 0) tj CD > r * 5 o o > o CO < — i/1 N 7D Cu n C/2 Q C-i O u

CO c

CO E O

139

c c/l u c/1 _^ ar- c r; _o -, ^ zz t/D 5 o 3 Q) a aV :3 Oa! iD a .^ •" a ^ JZ -*—1 E ^3 5 O 32 o •*-* C/5 c % = 1 « a, 3 CJ en 3 o o a u V a U1< x4^: E a '•5 ^ C/a3 o 5 > C3 O >^ >>! "a o 5 u CC V '5 id !^ E; > Ti) 33 3 a -4-» Vi ^ id J3 B c a c CC c U o i- >l > O < a:. n. U

a; 0) CC CO CC (U CC o a; 0) 0) C3 O CC o CJ 0 CC CO CO CO CC O o 0 o +-' ^-^j '3 o •o5 _J ? ^ c/; CC CL c > p 0 O o CO '~^ o L. "o '"^ _>. E £-^ 3 CC > 'o "o o CC :_ f— £ c a. CJ n^ o ^ o < ;/j CJ CJ ro CC C~ 00 ~

140

cereal cyst nematode, H. avenae is restricted to Avena sativa,

Triticum aestivum, Hordeum vulgare, Secale cereale etc., however, there are reports that it also infects maize, sorghum amongst monocots and Senebeira pinnatifida amongst dicots (Gill and Swarup, 1971; Sharma and Swarup, 1984). Therefore, dicots have also been included in the host range studies which usually grown in wheat, oat and barley fields.

For Aligarh population, larval penetration and cyst formation was observed on the roots of Avena sativa cv. Kent; Triticum aestivum cv. K-68, RR-21; Hordeum vulgare cv. Jyoti; Zea mays cv. Shakti; Secale cereale; Phalaris minor; Polypogon monospeliensis(Graminae) and Silene conoidea(Caryophyllaceae). In the above respect, the response of the above plants to Ghaziabad population have been the same as for Aligarh population except that on Silene conoidea cysts fail to develop (Table 24).

Data presented in Table 25 clearly show that the percentage larval penetration of H.avenae (Aligarh population) was higher in the roots of Triticum aestivum cv. K-68 (31-40%)

followed by T_. aestivum cv. RR-21 and E^^iniaoM. cv. Jyoti (21-30%), Phalaris minor, Secale cereale, Triticale (11-20%) and Avena sativa, Polypogon monospeliensls, Silene conoidea and Zea mays (1-10%). Highest number of cysts developed on the roots of wheat (67) and lowest on that of Silene conoidea (3). The highest mean number of eggs per cyst was observed in cysts collected from the roots of H. vulgare (332 eggs/cyst).

Reproduction factor on A. sativa, H. vulgare, ?_. minor,

141

r-H rn C o r^ LO (Nl Csl vO CNJ in LO m r^ r-^ c}- m

o •,-1 1 4-1 CO vO -^ O 00

, 1 CO X) 4J c O C QJ C/3 •H CQca CO >. 00 (>J vX) ^ vO Ln - O 00 CO CN O ^ r^ CM O c V-i c/) V- TH CO r-l ^ CM CM CO CO 0 II 0) ao CO •1-1 )-• iJ > 00^ 0) ra 14-1 < cu a ^- CL, jj cu c cu C O a •H B-5 4-1 en ^O CO >^ 1 —1 013 O TH 0 0) O CM (N in CO

o c c CO O u o I •r-l 0) •H T-l U •U u o CM CO QJM-I CO O 1—1 >-i c CO I—1 T4 + + -1- to 4-1 o 0 + + -1- -H -1- + > QJ ^ o II + -1- -1- +-1- U C — CO 0 + >-i CO 0) f^ 0) c •H O J a- 3 •r-l CL, 4-1 E O O CO CO > CM Lu CU •H '-'I cu r- co) -^ tJ • 4J A CO c t/5 CO •r-l a U) O > •H c CU 0 en CU •H El 0) V- c CO •w 4-1 C •H cu 0 0) 4J -1- CJ CO u 4-1 cn o u u ,—1 E cn(^ D cn c O •r-l oq Qj CO CTN P 00 TH >4 CO •o c 0) 0 V- o a cu O CO O vO CM rale '^ o CO CO CO a U5 •H 00 •H 1 r—1 E|CO C c -a r—\ HO CO 4J 4J i^ 1 T—1 CO c o •H CO •H ral • 1 CJ > o O o >-i 1—1 V- > Oi 111 > TH Oi 4-) x; CL CL, cu CO H H o pc5 N|0 < El o II II CM co -3- m \o r^ 00 C7^ + oi

142

?_. monospeliensis, ^. cereale, Silene conoidea, Triticale,

T_. aestivum cvs., K-68, RR-21 and Zea mays was recorded 4.51, 34.53, 6.30, 1.70, 12.77, 0.45, 13.02, 43.42, 33.26 and 1.12 respectively.

The highest percentage penetration of Ghaziabad population larvae (Table 26) was observed in the roots of H. vulgare and T. aestivum cv. RR-21 (31.40%) followed by T. aestivum cv. K-68 (21-30%), A. sativa, £. minor, S_. cereale, Triticale (11-20%) and £. nonospeliensis, Silene conoidea, Zea mays (1-10%). The highest number of cysts was observed on the roots of ^. aestivum cv. RR-21 (60) and the lowest on the roots of Zea mays (4). The highest mean number of eggs per

cyst was obtained in the cysts collected from the roots of T^. aestivum cv. K-68 (336 eggs/cyst). The nematode reproduction factor on A. sativa, H. vulgare, P^. minor, _P. monospeliensis,

^. cereale, S^. conoidea, Triticale, T_. aestivum cvs. K-68, 1-14-, RR-21 and Zea mays was recorded 6.38, 38.19, 6.14,^14.50, 0.00, 15.40, 34.27, 37.56 and 0.84 respectively. Except in S^. conoidea the initial larval penetration

was directly correlated with the final cyst production on the

roots of test plants but in S_. conoidea though initial

penetration occurred, the cysts were not encountered on the

roots. Thus, on the basis of cyst production, the good hosts

of H. avenae (Aligarh population) were A. sativa, H. vulgare,

_P. minor, ^. monosoeliensis, S_. cereale, Triticale DTS-839 and

2- aestivum cvs. K-68, RR-21, while Silene conoidea and Zea

mavs cv. Shakti were the poor hosts. For Ghaziabad Dooulaticn

143

0-1 CU 00 CJN

g •H 4-1 CO CM vD 00 O O o vO o o C7^ C^ vO t-^ LPi o CO CO CM '-' d <-l O O in CM r^ .—1 r-^ -u cu S-I en CM CO CO o O vO CO in c CO GO CO >^ u~i O in CM CO T-U O o CO rH O r-l CO CM Csl CO CO r-\ •H CO 4-J •H N CO CO < CO a s-l £ 4-1 QJ c 0) en QJ (0 4-1 a c en '-^ >^ O > o x) o CM C3^ LA ^ o o CO cu \r\ (M \0 CNl CM CO ^ cn + 0 4-1 + C c CO •H QJ CO • •^ c o c 00 6^ •H (U •H o cw > TH O •H 4-1 en QJ CO CM 4J CO CO CO iH 4-1 u 0\ H 1 0c > (U cn Q 3 •H a c o S-I QJ CO I-H 0 o 4-1 0) CO C H QJ Ci o CO o CO ^3 II 0 o QJ •H en > a o•;i CO 4-1 > U u a iH en 4J QJ c + iH c o CO 0 CO cu CO cn O CJ cn + CO •H en CO 4-1 S-J H •H • «^ C OJ o CO 6^ •H •H SU o & >i5 CO o CO O iH S-l 1—1 iH < CU QJ •H H QJ II II XI x Cu CO in ISl II CO CHI-H cw H Cs] CO \o r-- CO CTv + cu CU a

144

on the other hand, A. sativa, H. vulgare, _P. minor, S.cereale,

Triticale cv. DTS-839, T_. aestivum were the good hosts and ?_. monospeliensis and Zea mays were the poor hosts.

6. Screening of the populations of H. avencie for determining its biotypes

Intensive survey of wheat, barley and oat fields was made in 56 districts of U.P. for H. avenae. Cysts of this nematode were encountered in only seven districts.. They are Aligarh , Badaun, Ballia, Bulandshahr, Ghaziabad, Jalaun and Lalitpur. Barring Aligarh and Ghaziabad, the level of infestation of H. avenae and manifestation of symptoms on the host in the remaining districts was poor, as if this nematode had been recently introduced in these districts. Consequently, the studies carried out by the author had been restricted on the Aligarh and Ghaziabad populations of H. avenae.

The inoculum of the two populations was raised by inoculating on wheat cultivar RR-21 grown in microplots for subsequent studies. The inoculum, thus, raised the differen tials viz., oat cultivars Sun II, Pusa hybrid, Silva and Avena sterilis; wheat cultivars Loros, IK2 dark, IK2> light and Clapa, Triticale sp. cv. DTS-839; barley cultivars P31322-1, 191, Drost, Herta, Siri, Martin, Morocco, Laetanzuela, Emir, Varde, Ortolan, Jyoti were inoculated in pots, the way as

indicated on Page <^^ (Materials and Methods). The parameters employed to determine the host reaction were the same as employed by Andersen (1961).

145

It is evident from the data presented in Table 27 that

Avena sativa cultivars, Sun II, A. sterilis are susceptible, while Pusa hybrid BSI and Silva resistant to Aligarh popula tion whereas all the oat cultivars as well as A_. sterilis resistant to Ghaziabad population. All the wheat cultivars and Triticale DTS-839 are susceptible to the two populations to a varying degree. Out of barley cultivars tested, P31322-1, 191, Herta, Siri, Emir, Varde and Jyoti are susceptible to varying degree and the remaining highly resistant to Aligarh population. To Ghaziabad population, on the other hand, P31322-1, 191, Herta, Emir, Varde and Jyoti are susceptible and the remaining resistant. It is interesting to note that the response of International differentials used for differen tiating biotypes against the two populations of H. avenae vary but also in their degree of susceptibility as if the two differed also in their virulence.

It is concluded that the populations of H. avenae collected from Aligarh and Ghaziabad districts were distinctly different in their host preference which can be differentiated from each other by their reactions on International host differentials as follows :

Aligarh population : Cysts are produced on Oat cv. Sun II,

A. sterilis and barley cv. Siri.

Ghaziabad population : Cysts are not produced on Sun II,

A. sterilis and Siri.

From the above, it is clear that the two populations

can be safely placed in group-1 of biotypes of H. avenae as

146

Table 27. Number of cysts per plant and reaction of Aligarh and Ghaziabad populations

Host differential Aligarh population Ghiaziaba d pcipulatio n Cysts/plant" Reaction Cy;sts/plant * Reaction

Oat cultivars : Sun II 10 S 0 R 640318-40-2-1 (Pusa hybrid BSI) 0 R 0 R Silva 0 R 0 R Avena sterilis 5 S 0 R

Wheat cultivars : Loros 12 S 5 S IK2 dark 10 s 7 S IK2 light 7 s 11 S Clapa 5 s 13 S Triticale sp. cv.DTS-839 7 s 13 S

Barley cultivars : P31322-1 9 s 5 S 191 8 s 9 S Drost 0 R 0 R Herta 18 S 20 S Siri 8 S 0 R Martin 0 R 0 R Morocco 0 R 0 R La Etanzuela 0 R 0 R Emir 14 S 9 S Varde 23 S 19 S Ortolan 0 R 0 R Jyoti 16 S 15 S

*Average of five replicates; S = Susceptible; R = Resistant,

147 c CO cx: ci Ci Di I I I I I

o tu -a CO CO CO CO ( I I I I CO > u •H CO CO CO CO I i I I I

c CO •ui CO ci ci CO Cd I I I I I CO QJ •H CO 3 T3 HJ SI C o o o S o C2i « Pi Pi pi OS Di ce; Di S-l O o u s c •H 0 u en Pi Pi CO I i I I I •H CO V-l 4-1 •H 0 CO c CU CU 5-1 CO eel Cd CO I I I I I S-l CD ^ CU M 4-1 o I 05 03 CU •H CNJ U i-( en CO CO ci CO (till .—I >. c^ 4-> 4J CO 0 CJ CO c CO ;z; CU a Q > CO CO CO CO CO I I I I I II tH CO O 1 0 CO •a C u CO CO CO CO I i I I I • •* 0 Xl Pi Pi iJ •H c 4J o c^ ^ CO ^1 CO CO CO CO I I I I I a CJ CO 4.} CO a) to CU a; CO •H u K > 01 i-H Ci I I I I « eci oi CU (U •H 4-1 CO CO « ^ o •H 4J rH II m CO •H c C C VJ K 0 o CU dJ CO ci 1 1 1 CO ccj « cii > J-> •H < CO >^ 4-1 • •> H U (1) C CO r-l 0 QJ r-l 43 CO cs; 1 1 fij OS ce; Di Di •H H • • 4-J CO CO •H CO CO a C •X ^ CU 4-1 CO c (J o T3 0 4-1 I—1 CM 4-1 i-< CM rn J3 4-1 0) CU (U CU CU 0) CU p u CU U CO CO CO CI W CO Q) CO —1 •H rH && 3 &&&&& M D N 3 4-1 iJ iJ 4-1 4-1 4-1 4J CH o •H D, CO OH 2CO 0 0 ^4-1 00000 II (•w CO •H 4: 0 > •H •H to •H -H -H -H -H •H H P3 ^a 0 a CO CQ m s pq eq pq pq pq CO 4P

E 148 o S-l .cc c •r- (vi &i ei ci CO CO CO CO CO K en c:: x: •H C 4-i c 0) 1-1 S-l CO t3 Q) 0) CO « CO 2i CO CO CO CO CO ^W •H § t+H •H •H 4-! c T3 o CO K « cj crf oi CO Pi CO o Oi CO s: 4J

C Pi « Di Pi Pi CO CO CO I o ,C0 ro cu CM oi CO CO CO I a Pi lii Di Ci >. jj o •H m CO I CO CO 1 J2 m CO CO Pi CO •*N CO CO 30 CO cu CM CO CO Pi CO CO I CO CO I c 1-1 > »\ o CO CO x: 13 CO CO CO CU I—I CO CO Pi ci Pi CO CO I U a

^ N CO oi Pi « Pi I oi CO I tW 0) CO O^ o 5 CO Pi Pi Pi I I I I I I O Ui •H "-; >^ CHO aj)j ci Pi Pi Pi Pi I Pi CO I CUt^ ^ CO

0013 C CU Pi III I I I I I •H -H :s iw O -H £ 13 m o CM Pi Pi Pi I Oi 1 I CO I S AJ ^"^ 5

2 CO CO Pi Pi Pi Oi I CO CO f, O " $^ X5 0) CO > •H t3 •u C CO CO S-l CO H CO CO •H CO CO Cu-H AJ CO $-1 eT3 m 1 •H CO c u CM 13 rH o c CD CO 1 -H •H •>H U M V^ CO CTv CU > O U S-l J-i on •H 1 rQ CD 0! CO M-l 4J -3 ^ x: r^ 1 • •H i-{ 1 x: CO G CO CO (Tv M CX3 CO -H U H -o u M rH CO JJ (N CO CO CO TJ >H CO -H C 4-1 m CO C CO CO > O D< 4-! c CU iH CU S-l CM CM (0 -H • (D CO p •H q b^ Jixi rH V^ > .H a O CO vD v^ <^ CO § U-! M M CJ HO ^ • • • • • CO rH O (N m <}- E-^ W 2 i^ '-o r^ 00 CT^

149 CO CC •i-J en CO « c/: ci Di en en en Ni c (-• CO 8 S-J &0 !/l CO Cii Di en en Pi en cr; c/: en C CO 3 CO a; Pi CO Pi en en Pi CO a c •H I CO 1-1 CO Pi Pi en en en Pi :§ ' 03 I—I •" 00 eg CO ffi Pi oi en c=H en en en

en CO CO en « en en en CO c3 CNT en iH CM iH m 0) en en cd en en en p.ro |cO I s-l o •r o 4-) Cei en en en CO en eg 2 CL, K 0) Q Q? ^ r-l ccj Pi Pi en en en o CO C 13 CO C S-l CO fan iH 60 03 en OS CO en Pi CO ' a I—I CO X CO

T3 CO cd en en Pi c3 -u CO iH CO --^ 3

Pi Pi en en Pi g <^ I I XI CO •H i-H 1-4 4-> CM CO a 0) O CD CJ --I CO CO CO CO s-l CO -H s-l ^ >J-) u 'a CO I 0) c > OJ •H CO en H u 4J TH •H 0) cu ^ s-l 4.) ^ s-l eg c cw u r-H N3 o •H 1 o c c o T3 >N CNl c o CO CO 4J 0) CM J-) CO •H o 4-1 0) TH •H CO 0^ 4-1 rH CO CO 4-> •H 4J 4-) (N o w u X) 0 a ^ •H t;: V^ <-< r-* o u u s-l u (-1 4-1 o CO ^ CO S-l Si •H u

150

the two are avirulent to Ortolan and virulent to barley 191 as suggested by Andersen and Andersen (1982). A further scrutiny reveals that Aligarh population produces cysts on Sun II, A. sterilis and barley cultivar Siri whereas the Ghaziabad population fails to produce cysts on these cultivars, consequently these two differ from one another, though both come in group-1.

Thus, it is obvious that the reactions of Aligarh and Ghaziabad populations of H. avenae, on the basis of host reaction on differentials oat Sun II, A. sterilis and barley cv. Siri, were different from earlier reported biotypes from India (Table 28) as well as differentials used by scientist from abroad (Table 29), be named as biotype Ha91 and HalOl respectively.

7. Studies on the non-chemical control of Heterodera avenae

7.1 Effect of chopped leaves on growth of wheat

It is clear from Table 30 that growth of wheat cv. RR-21 reduced by 28.A6 per cent when they were inoculated with 1000 juveniles of H. avenae as against plant grown in unamended and uninoculated soil.

Increase in growth of inoculated plants, on the other

hand, in pots amended with 10 g chopped leaves of Calotropis

procera, Nerium indicum, Bougainvillia spectabilis, Ricinus

communis, Cannabis sativa and Eucalyptus citriodera was 20.33,

15.45, 33.33, 35.77, 17.89 and 20.33 per cent

151

QJ c 0 CD •H I—1 CO CM CM 1—1 \£3 0 CO 0 > 4-) ,-t CM a~i vD r~~ vD t—1 s ' 0! CO \«ro^ 0 ^_CO^ un r^q •vO 0 *.r^^ a CmO LTi CM CM •^ ^1 >^ 0 m ^ eu 60 CO CN] ra 0) X /• UPi c^ m C^ > ra OJ

<4-l O jj O .H o CO u u CO CO 0 CO 0 • CM CM CO 1—1 CM CO CO o D-i -H T3 O 1 c x) •H 0) > CO CO CO CO r-l CM r^ CO c CO LA CO ^ CO U 00'^ H M o ^- Q 5= ra I M ai CO in Ln O CM CJ^ o CO M/-^ CM OJ -H OO vO CC3 • 0^ CO ON

> M C •H

ra •H ra 4-1 ^ CO I—1 0 0 c LA CO o dJv. CO a O

o 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60

O a O O O O O O O O CM CM CM CM u •H 0 iH o a c CO •H CO 13 0 ra •H e C T) CO a iH 4J ra Qj 73 •H •H 4-1 C T3 CO ra Xl o ra TU ra ra CU •H u •H 0) C ra CU TH 4-1 a CD •H CJ > H XI ;3 TJ ra 0 CJ •H c Xi o CO C u (U iH 1-1 o X! •H ra 0) 0 T) 13 4-1 u C 4-> CU C g c C cj 0 •H 6q o •H ra -H CU 0 rH S-I CU CO CJ ra ra CU o CM H 0 •. •'-' 5B o PQ CO P3 Si Oil

152

c •oH CXl CO C7^ iJ \0 O LP. 03 en o >-J CO CO r-~ >X) CO CO ^ O --0 U DH

u (U CO CM a CN] o 00 en * a

T3 vO O CO r-i CO 0) jii' CX5 CM o 00

^H CM o en 03 o tn M V4 00 CO o CM -cr o 0) CU ^ TH CN en en en O O 6 ^ 3 -H :z; iJ

O U 4-> 4-) 0) QJ c C CO CO o (U CO CO o o 0^ O Ln en en CsI O OJ QJ CO CM CM en O 1-1 S-l in • • u • • in • 0(2 • • S-J O O aj C7^ O CM en CM (U C (U > CM D-i -H XJ o 1

in 00 in in en CO in t—1 CO in CM en in en CO >^•H M r-l I—1 1—1 TH 1—1 1—1 1—1 1—1 o o QJ V-l CUv^ iH CO >

ON 0^ 4J (TN CO o en CM CTN in CM CM CT^ 0) in r-l in O en t-l CO M/-N (U -H ao LA vO r^ CO vC vO CO CO I—1 1-1 O to J-l CU ^-' 4-1 (U CO 4J C CO to tj U -H 1^ •U rH o a r^ r^ o 00 a\ 1-* vO (0 -H M-l to Ml 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 CD <4-l O O O O O O O O CO cO cu a; CO CNl CM CN x: 3 CO i-> e C 4-i c •H C (0 JJ ni CO u c f= U CO CO o 4-1 0) in 1—1 cCX- (Hu u CO CO ^3 •H 3 Q) O 4J rH o W CO •H CO CO to CO CO H •H (-1 tu > CO 4-1 S-l Q) CO •H 5 x: nH 4-1 CJ 60 O ^ •H CO CO CO CO c H C| U U CO XI Wl Q X

153

respectively. The corresponding values in growth of plants when amended with 20 g chopped leaves were 30.89, 25.20, 52.03, 48.78, 25.20 and 26.02 per cent respectively. There was on the other hand, non-significant decrease in growth pattern in plants grown in soil amended with 10 g chopped leaves of Datura stramonium.

There was a significant increase in the number of tillers, earhead length and yield per plant excepting 10 g

chopped leaves in case of C_. procera, number of tillers and earhead length in case of N. indicum. Pots receiving 10 g and 20 g chopped leaves of £. stramonium and X. strumariumi did not show significant improvement in tillers, earhead length and yield per plant.

The cyst population in pots amended with 10 g chopped

leaves of C_. procera, N. indicum, B_. spectabilis, R. communis, £. stramonium, C_. sativa, X. strumarium and E. citriodera was 53, 58, 32, 30, 78, 56, 73 and 52 respectively. The corresponding values for 20 g chopped leaves were 40, 45, 26, 27, 66, 44, 67 and 44 respectively. All the treatments showed significant reduction in the cyst production except than when 10 g chopped leaves of ^. stramonium and X. strumarium applied to the pots.

7.2 Effect of chopped leaves on growth of barley

Data presented in Table 31 revealed that the growth of

barley cv. Jyoti reduced by 31.72 per cent when they were

inoculated with 1000 juveniles of H. avenae as against plant

154

0) c c o 0) •H CTN r-l vO r^ Ln 0 r-~ r-- CM T—1 > <}- r^ LA vArf ro 0 0 .—1 r-^ U >. o CJ^

G. 1—1 0 m 0 CM •H CM u^ c ^ S • • • • • • CO CJ^ CX3 C7^ CO M U ^ 0)

O vO CNl in CO 0) C Q) > CM CM in CL, •HT) o I '^ a; (7N CM cn CM O m to CO CO \o (3^ CM CJN en CM CM H bO •^ o ^- 0) ^ •H -3 ^»

4-) CN I—1 0 CT^ I—l r-l CM 1—1 vO c:^ 0 H QJv-- ^o

CU r^ \0 CM • CO 4_> (10 CM CO CM o 00 CO I—l c in CO CO o QJ V o O 4-> O 60 60 a O O O o O O O O O CM CM CM CM S-l u CO o a XJ O C CO •H CO •H 4-) CO d H T3 d -d CO o U •H X3 U CO •H QJ c o CJ iH S-i O c CO QJ E QJ O TJ d 4-1 U C •H 4-) 1^ § 0 E C o •H oq CJ c4 •H P CJ CO -H § r-i a d Q) CO CJ p CO C C CO H o DJ •H 0 • CJ 6\ m CO «1 K CJ «

155

_v< c •oH r^ CTN o CO ^ X) en r^ •^ =J V ' s ^ '—^ V •' V ' ^—^ v,.^ V / • • w a, r-~ r-- r-i O m rn vO r^ un 3 ;>> o r~- -o rO t^ ^ in

$-1 OJ p. LPi O vO CM tr\ O 00 r-- O TJ •!-> M f^ CO o(Ts CNJ r-- a^ O r^ CM .-n r-i Cw • • • • • • • • • • QJ CO CSl CSl t^ CM CSl fn ro •H iH -i a

TJ in CO v^ qw r-l CO 0) I—1 W rH

U-t o r~ in CO O r- V^ S-l 00 O CM CM CNI 1) (U o • • ^ iH CO O O S "-1 3 -H a -u i-H O 5-1 ^^ JJ W QJ QJ c C 02 W o QJ CO CO O O C7\ U Q) 0) o in so U U u • • u o a QJ o CM CM CM CU -H TJ o I I

in 00 0^ in m in CO o CM o CO r^ CO CM CM o o CO &o QJ , 0) • =3 iH CO > O CO 00 O o in CO O CM r-l r^ 0) 0^ CO 00 CO in \o CO M^-N o • • • 0) -H (10 \D CO (3^ CO o CO o o M-l QJ CO 4J CO CcO ^4 •uH CO r-l 4J iH CH U-l CO 0) <+-l (50 60 (30 O ao «0) O O o O O O O X -d CM o CM CM XJ cCO QJ Q) d CO C jj CO f= VJ •cH CO JJ 0c) (0 CO CL,-H c E S-( 4-1 •H QJ in rH o 01 C Q) o c •H QJ r) 3 o o 4-1 4J iH t—l U •1H OQ •H CO CO H ^ •H CO CO m C c3 S-l CO J3 4-1 QJ CO •H 4-1 > QJ 1-1 op 4-u) U CO > CO s: •H f— >H 3 y CO C H CO 4-1 • • ja 4J VJ 4-1 u gj c CO CO •H CO (0 CO 4-) • CO CO (c0 H CO Q CO • U^ tJ c u u X XI W wl •X

156

grown in unamended and uninoculated soil.

Increase in growth of inoculated plants on the other hand, in pots amended with 10 g chopped leaves of C_. procera,

N. indicum, B_. spectabilis, R_. communis, C_. sativa and E_. citriodera was 25.52, 13.10, 32.41, 35.17, 29.66 and 17.93 per cent respectively. The corresponding values in growth of plants when amended with 20 g chopped leaves were 26.21, 19.31, 54.48, 58.62, 40.69, and 24.14 per cent respectively. On the other hand, non-significant decrease was observed in growth pattern of barley plants grown in soil amended with 10 g chopped leaves of ^. stramonium and 10 and

20 g of X_. strumarium.

There was an increase in the number of tillers, earhead length and yield per plant in all the treatments except than when 10 g chopped leaves in case of N. indicum and 10 g and 20 g in case of ^. stramonium and X. strumarium applied to the pots.

The cyst population in pots amended with 10 g chopped leaves of £. procera, N. indicum, ^. spectabilis, R^. communis,

]D. stramonium, C^. sativa, X. strumarium and E. citriodera was 45, 62, 36, 31, 77, 41, 75 and 56 respectively. The corresponding values for 20 g chopped leaves were 43, 54, 20, 17, 67, 30, 63 and 47 respectively. All the treatments showed significant reduction in the cyst population except than when 10 g chopped leaves of jD* stramonium and X. strumarium applied to the pots.

157

7.3 Effect of chopped leaves on growth of oat

It is clear from Table 32 that the growth of oat cv. Kent reduced by 31.16 per cent when they were inoculated with 1000 juveniles of H. avenae as against plant grown in unamended and uninoculated soil.

Increase in growth of inoculated plants on the other hand, in pots amended with 10 g chopped leaves of C_. procera, N. indicum, ^. spectabilis, R.. communis, C_. sativa and _E. citriodera was 24.64, 12.32, 34.06, 32.61, 24.64 and 15.22 per cent respectively. The corresponding values in growth of oat plants when amended with 20 g chopped leaves were 31.16, 18.12, 52.90, 56.52, 30.43 and 23.91 per cent respectively. However, non-significant reduction was observed in the plants grown in pots amended with 10 g chopped leaves of Xanthium strumarium.

There was an increase in the number of tillers, earhead length and yield per plant in all the treatments except than when 10 g and 20 g chopped leaves of ^. stramonium and X. strumarium applied to the pots.

The cyst population in pots amended with 10 g chopped

leaves of £. procera, N. indicum, B_. spectabilis, R_. communis,

D. stramonium, £. sativa, X. strumarium and E_. citriodera was 45, 64, 30, 34, 76, 46, 78 and 59 respectively. The corres

ponding values for 20 g chopped leaves were 39, 55, 26, 22,

70, 41, 68 and 50 respectively. All the treatments showed

significant reduction in the cyst population except than when

10 g chopped leaves of D. stramonium and X. strumarium applied

to the pots.

158 u a o •H rn T-l • \X3 vC CO r^ i/^ in ITi >^ o CO CM t~- 4-1 V-l X) J-' M C 01 T3 QJ CO t—•1 m• m• cs•i m• CO• CO• cn• m• o i-> QJ •H tH u a OJ a o

o " T3 CO QJ £ /-s en O CO CJN CM o CO «= a:: -u e C3•^ r^• o CO CM

CO QJ

> CO o CO CO CO O ^ o CO CO CO CO in CO CM -H 'O o I iH ;H :3 -H CJ O CS5 CM LA CO CO o m CO in CO CO r-l C oi CM 0) M ^- 0) •

Q; CO

4J 00 in CT^ un o r^ CO 00 :3 en tO--^ • • r-l Cj Wl 4-) '^ CNl CO 00 CO iJ c \D CO CO CO CM CO c r^ CT\ CO C XI CO CO T) p T-H •H •H T3 CO CO QJ •H 5-1 ^ QJ C -H rH CO CO G 1—1 4_) U QJ •H 3 •H S-l u > 4-) CO s H T; 3 T3 CO o CO CJ •H ^ O CO •H H c u QJ rH 1-1 U 0 g X) •H CO QJ CJ o TJ 3 4-1 QJ S-l P c :n 4-> a s § 0 s c C O o O (11 •H •H i' CJ CO •H H ij CO -H CJ C rH O S-l fl) CJ p CO E C CO U 0) • n 0 •H o H r§B < -H U • CO • t^ o s 2: = «l Pi u ^

159

Ho (Nl r^ CO O en i/> CO r-^ J-) 1^ m r^ . o r-^ r-^ X) LTl Ln I—1 I—l u IX

u 0) (X ON -l a

Tl \o in CO CO

tw O CM CM CO S-l U o CM CM CO Cs) \D O o I—1 1—1 0) cu • • * • • • • • • • rQ -H en en •

O Ln o en (N o C7\ •

CT\ CJ^ 00 m o en r^ 0) x: x: CTN CO • CO M/^ r^ i^ c^ 00 CT\ O O 1 CO CU -H ClO 4oH aj S-l CU ^^ CO 4.) c CO CO U •oH CM C7^ u rH 00 O a r^ in CO •H (« CO 0) CO •H 4J QJ CO rH •H J: CO 3 x: c a aC u to •H CO CO o H CO o| s ol X 5 wl •X

160

DISCUSSION

Survey in 56 districts of Uttar Pradesh has been undertaken to monitor the distribution and spread of heteroderid nematodes indicates that seven species of

Heterodera viz., _H. ayenae, H^. cajani, ti. cyperi, H. graminis, H_. mothi, H. sorghi and H. zeae exist in the state.

Out of them H. cajani, \\_. mothi and ti. zeae are not

only wide spread but also their frequency of _ occurrence

is high in the state. H_. graminis has been common in

mountainous, submountainous and Gangetic plains. Heterodera

avenae is encountered only in the Ganga and trans-Yamuna

plains, whereas H. cyperi and H. sorghi are confined to the

Gangetic plains. It is interesting to note that the frequency

of occurrence of these heteroderid species differs not only

in different regions but also in different localities of

different region (Tables 3,5,7,9). It is concluded that

spatiotemporal factor profoundly influences the distribution,

frequency and infestation level of heteroderid nematodes.

It is clear from Tables 4,6,8,10 that out of seven

species encountered, H_. cajani is most prevalent since it has

been encountered in 48 out of 56 districts. The number of

cysts and larvae has been found high in Agra, Aligarh,

Badaun, Barabanki, Etawah, Farrukhabad, Fatehpur, Hamirpur,

Jhansi, Kanpur, Lucknow, Mainpuri,Mathura, Meerut, Moradabad,

Raebareilly, Rampur, Shahjahanpur , Sitapur and Unnao but

poor in Allahabad, Azamgarh, Bahraich, Ballia, Bareilly,

Basti, Bijnor, Bulandshahr, Deoria, Etah, Faizabad, Garhwal, Ghaziabad, Ghazipur, Gonda, Gorakhpur, Hardoi, Jaunpur, Kheri, Lalitpur, Mirzapur, Muzaffarnagar, Pratapgarh, Saharanpur, Uttarkashi, and Varanasi. Next most prevalent species encountered has been 14. zeae which has also been present in 48 districts. The number of cysts and larvae in H. zeae are high in Agra, Allahabad, Azamgarh, Banda, Barabanki, Etawah, Farrukhabad, Fatehpur, Lucknow, Mainpuri, Mathura, Raebareilly and Sitapur districts. Similarly, H_. mothi has been encountered in 38 districts and high number of cysts and larvae has been recorded in Aligarh, Etawah, Fatehpur, Lucknow, Mainpuri, Meerut and Sultanpur. Heterodera graminls has been encountered in five;H. sorghi in four and H_. cyperi only in Mainpuri out of 56 districts. In Etawah, Fatehpur, Lucknow, Mainpuri districts all the three common Heterodera spp. (H_. cajani, H. mothi and H. zeae) have high populations. The population of H_. ca iani, H_. mothi and H^. graminis is high in Aligarh district. Fi. avenae, on the other hand, has been restricted to Aligarh, Ballia, Budaun, Bulandshahr, Ghaziabad, Jalaun and Lalitpur. It is worth

noting that the population of H. avenae has been high only in districts which are geographically contiguous to Rajasthan where this nematode has been reported for the first time in India by Vasudeva (1958) and where it has been a bane in wheat and barley production for several decades.

162

It is difficult to draw conclusion from the diverse distribution of different heteroderid species in different

regions as it approximates in a way the crop grown in that

region* It is also probably governed by the availability of

some other susceptible hosts and the environmental

conditions. Consequently the distribution map given ^>cj&a»» page

9i^jdo not convey about the specialized habitat of different

species. It however, reflects some idea regarding the

geographical distribution of heteroderid nematode species.

According to Oostenbrink (1966), the seasonal

fluctuation curves of nematode populations are useful tools

in the study of plant-nematode relationship. Fluctuation in

nematode populations is governed by nematode species, host,

soil characteristics and environmental conditions as reported

by Nusbaum and Barker (1971).

The author studied changes in population in the

wheat field at Aligarh infested with H_. avenae in which

initial population of cyst has been 145 in September, 1988.

Following the cultivation of wheat cv. RR-21 in the field as

a rabi crop the population rose to 732 in April, 1989.

Population declined during Kharif season when bajra was sown

in the field. Again in November wheat cv. RR-21 was sown the

population of cyst has increased upto 827 in April, 1990.

The data presented in Table 11 clearly demonstrate

that optimal larval emergence occurs both in 1989 and

163

1990 in January and cyst formation in April. Although cyst have been detected in the field even during the summer months. Despite best efforts all attempts to isolate larvae have failed during the period May to September. High temperature and non-availability of susceptible host have in all probability been responsible for non-emergence of larvae during the summer months. These findings are in agreement with those reported by Meagher (1970).

During the course of the present study, growth of wheat plants appeared in patches in the entire field (Fig. ^. The patches with plants showing stunted growth harboured higher population of cysts and larvae than unpatchy areas of the field. Plants, in the same field or in adjoining field having few cysts in the soil or cyst free soil exhibited

luxurient growth (Fig. S )• Similar observations have been reported by Swarup and Gokte (1986) while working on nematode.

The author while making the preliminary studies on the Aligarh and Ghaziabad collections of H_. avenae observed some differences in the morphological characters. It was not clear that wheather these differences have been incidental or causal. The author therefore decided to study the role of different susceptible hosts (wheat, barley and oat) soil types (five types) and soil moisture (five levels) on different morphometric characters. Barring lip annules and lateral incisures the remaining characters studied have been

164

found to be unstable. The data pertaining to the aspect of the work is given in Tables 12-23 and Appendices 1-9.

Data presented in Tables 12-15 and Appendices 1-3

revealed that in Aligarh population of U. avenae, the measurements of body length and width, stylet length of larvae; body width, length from anterior end to excretory pore and spicule length of male; body length of female; cyst length and width; length of fenestra and vulvul slit have tended to be on lovj side on wheat as compared to barley or oat isolates. Whereas length from anterior end to excretory pore, tail and ratio 'b' of larvae; length of body and stylet of male; body width and stylet length of female has been lower in case of oat as compared to wheat and barley isolates. In Ghaziabad population on the other hand, body length, width, length of stylet and tail, 'b' of larvae; stylet length of female; cysts width has been observed lower in barley than wheat and oat while length from anterior end to excretory pore of larvae; body length, width, stylet length, length from anterior end to excretory pore, spicule length of male, body length, width, neck length of female; cyst length, fenestral length and vulvul slit length is lower in wheat than oat and barley isolates. Statistically significant differences in measurements of different characters have been recorded when the two populations have been reared on wheat, barley and oat. These results in a way supported the findings of Barabashova and Alova (1980). Dropkin (1988) attributed such differences

165

in the morphometries due to competition for feeding sites or differences in the nutritional value of the host tissues.

The perusal of Tables 16-19 and Appendices 4-6 on the effect of five different soil types on morphometries of different characters of the two populations demonstrates that in clay soil low values in measurements of larvae , iroales, females etc. have been observed as compared to sandy soil. The present finding in a way corroborate the findings of Norton

(1959), Jones £t a^. (1969); Jones and Thomason (1976); Wallace (1958).

Tables 20-23 and Appendices 7-9 provide convincing evidence that the measurements of all the characters taking into account in the present study tend to be low at extremes of soil moisture viz., 10 and 50 percent. These results in a way support the findings of Hakim (1984), Thomas (1952), Wallace (1956) and Peacock (1957).

Similar differences in the morphometric characters of 11. avenae have also been reported by Kaushal and Seshadri (1987) recently. Despite these changes in measurements due to either host or soil type or soil moisture, they regained within the range of description as given by Williams and Siddiqi (1972), Meagher (1974) and McLeod and Khair (1977).

It is clear from Tables 24,25,26 that Avena sativa cv.

Kent, T. aestivum cvs. RR-21, K-68, H. vulgare cv. Jyoti, Zea

im cv. Shakti, S. cereale, ^. minor, P. monospeliensis (all

166

the members of the grass family) have been found susceptible to both Aligarh and Ghaziabad populations. These results are in accordance with the findings reported by Winslow (1954), Gill and Swarup (1971), Yadav and Verma (1971), Bajaj and Bhatti (1982), and Shahina and Maqbool (1990). Silene conoidea (a member of Caryophyllaceae), a weed growing abundantly in wheat field, when inoculated with two populations of H. avenae, it was observed that cyst formation occurred with Aligarh and not with Ghaziabad populations (TAbles 25,26).

Yadav and Verma (1971) and Shahina and Maqbool (1990), while studying the host range of H. avenae, provided evidence that Zea mays is a good host. Winslow (1954) and Holdeman and Watson (1977) reported Sorghum vulgare as a favourable host. Gill and Swarup (1971) on the other hand,. observed that larval penetration takes place but cysts are not formed on S^. vulgare. In the present study, larval penetration as well as cysts formation have not been observed when ^. vulgare was inoculated with Aligarh and Ghaziabad populations

of H. avenae. The variability regarding susceptibility/resistance cited above, of maize and sorghum against H. avenae may be attributed to the difference in the genetic make up of the varieties used by different workers in their studies.

Ritzema-Boss (1988), for the first time^ provided evidence that popoulations of Ditylenchus dipsaci 'collected from different species of plants or localities showed host

167

preferences and variation in their pathogenicity. Such

populations have been designated as races, strains, biological races, biotypes or pathotypes by different neraatologists. The knowledge about the existence of this phenomenon has been reported in various phytoneraatodes viz., D. dipsaci, D. destructor, Aphelenchoides ritzemabossi, A. fragarae, Radopholus similis, Rotylenchulus reniformis, Tylenchulus semipenetrans and several species of the genera Meloidogyne, Heterodera, Globodera and Pratylenchus.

Andersen (1959) categorized H. avenae into two pathotypes from Denmark by using oats cv. Sun II, US 4575, Silva, Avena sterilis; barley cvs. 191, Drost, Herta, Morocco, Araeel, S-28-3> Elbo and grass Petkus spring rye as host differentials. He found that Sun II, Silva, Herta, Petkus spring rye was susceptible and US 4575, Avena sterilis, 191, Morocco and S-28-3 was resistant to both pathotypes while barley varieties Drost, Ameel and Elbo were resistant to

pathotype-1 and susceptible to pathotype-2. Kort et_ a]_. (1964) reported 4 pathotypes (A,B,C,D) of \\. avenae from the Netherlands using Sun II Silva, A. sterilis, 191, Drost, Herta, Morocco, S-28-3, Petkus spring rye, Lolium perenne and Dactylis glomerata. According to them, pathotype A attacks Sun II, Silva, Herta, Petkus spring rye; pathotype B 191, Petkus spring rye and L. perenne; pathotype C Sun II, Silva, Drost, Herta, Petkus spring rye; and pathotype D Herta, Petkus spring rye. The remaining varieties of oats, barley and grasses used

168

by the author have been found to be resistant against all the pathotypes. Fiddian and Kimber (1964) recognized two pathotypes of H. avenae in England and Wales (Britain) by using Proctor, Drost, 191 and A. sterilis which have been similar to race 1, and race 2 of F^. avenae reported from Denmark. Brown (1969) reported that only one pathotype of H. avenae is present in Australia which attacked Sun II, Silva, barley 191, Morocco, Elbo, Petkus spring rye but not A. sterilis. Cook and Williams (1972) reviewed the occurrence of pathotypes in Denmark, the Netherlands, Britain, Sweden, Norway, Germany and Australia and reported that atleast 7 pathotypes are known in ti. avenae which have been designated as A,B,C,D,E,F,G"reported by different workers till 1972.

The results given in Table 27 clearly demonstrate that Aligarh and Ghaziabad populations of [^. avenae differ in their host response when tested against differentials as indicated in Table 28.

The author, while studying the difference between Aligarh and Ghaziabad populations of H^. avenae (Table 29) used differentials for the identification of races as proposed by Andersen and Andersen (1982) and Sanchez and Zancada (1987) and naming them following double figure principle found that Aligarh population is similar to Hall, Ha21, Ha31, Ha41, Ha51, Ha61, Ha71 and Ha81 on oat cultaivars Pusa hybrid BSI, Silva, wheat cv. Clapa and barley cvs. Morocco, Enir, Varde, Ortolan. It differs from Hall on its reaction on A. sterilis,

169

Loros, Siri; from Ha21 on Sun II, A. sterilis, Loros, Siri; from Ha31 on Sun II, Siri; from Ha41 on Sun II, A. sterilis, Loros, IK2 light; from Ha51 on Sun II, A. sterilis; from Ha61 on A. sterilis, Loros, IK2 light; from Ha71 and Ha81 on IK2 light, Bajo Aragon. The reaction of Ghaziabad population of HI. avenae is similar to Hall, Ha21, Ha31, Ha41, Ha61, Ha71 and Ha81 on oat cvs. Pusa hybrid, Silva. A„ sterilis; wheat cv. Clapa and barley cvs. Morocco, Emir, Varde and Ortolan. It differs from Hall on its reaction on Sun II, Loros; from Ha21 on Loros; from Ha31 on Loros, IK2 light. Siri, from Ha41 on Siri; from Ha61 on Sun II, Loros, IK2 light, Siri; from Ha71 on Loros, P-31322-1, Martin; from HaSl on Loros, IK2 light, P-31322-1 and Martin. Thus, it is obvious that Aligarh and

Ghaziabad populations of H. avenae, on the basis of host reaction on differentials, oat cvs. Sun II, A. sterilis and barley cv. Siri are different biotypes reported from India and abroad, designated as Ha91 and HalOl respectively and both included to Group I.

Both Aligarh and Ghaizabad isolates differ markedly

with five races reported by Mathur e_t a}_. (1974) and two races reported by Swarup et^ al. (1979) presumably because the differentials used by them and the present author vary. Sanchez and Zancada (1987) have reported the existence of race Ha31 based upon the material obtained from India. They unfortunately, while studying Indian population, used only four differentials viz.. Sun II, Siri, Morocco and Ortolan and not other differentials common employed by the scientist

170

engaged in studying the phenomenon of phsyiological specialization in case of H^. avenae. The author wishes to resolve the confusion which exists abouu the races of H. avenae in India. To achieve this objective, he proposes to collect cysts from localities and hosts which have been reported by Mathur et _al. (1974) and Swarup et aj_. (1979) by using International differentials.

Nenatologist have borrowed race/pathotype concept from plant pathologists. The latter, while studying the inheritance of plant resistance not only study the genetics of host fungal relation but also the genetics of the fungus (^Stakman and

Harror, 1957). However, such attempts have thus far not being tried by nematologists. Existence of race problem becomes difficult in nematodes such as H. avenae as it undergoes

sexual reproduction and therefore the progeny after each generation would be genetically different. It is probably the

reason why that pathotypes which exists in Britain differ not

only in pathogenicity but also morphologically as reported by

Cook (1976).

In India, it is now fully established that plant

parasitic nematodes are serious constraints to crop

productivity (Van Berkum and Seshadri, 1974; and Swarup and

Seshadri, 1974). Therefore, it is necessary to manage the

losses caused by nematode. Nematode management can be defined

as a practice where phytopathogenic nematode populations are

maintained at levels that do not cause economic losses. There

171 are two broad categorie s for manage~ent practices - chenical and non-chemical. The use of chemicals to kill plant parasitic nematodes has been a major factor in increasing the productivity of modern agriculture and the capacity of world's food production systems should more or less keep pace with the demand of an ever grovjing human population. The conventional nenaticidal chemicals had an initial dramatic impact but these chemicals are broad spectrum poisons and therefore injure beneficial micro-organisms, some are toxic to crop plants, kill beneficial micro organisms, taint the flavour of food and the exorbitant cost of these chemicals as well as their non availability and conditions of farmers (small or large holding) etc. have proved a shattering blov^7 to their utility potential. Indian farmers are mostly illeterate and believe in traditional agriculture, hence do not readily accept the use of nematicidal chemicals to combat the nematode menace. Other conventional methods for nematode control are cultural, physical, biological and plant resistance but all these too have technical and operational limitations of one kind or the other. Therefore, one of the promising alternatives is the use of plants or plant parts for nematode control. The plants having nematicidal properties, involve no or low cost, their easily availability and application, produce no pollution hazards and have the capacity to improve the soil health

structurally and nutritionally.

In India, root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne spp. is

number one pest. Several scientists have observed the adverse

172

effect of this nematode which can be mitigated by adding plant parts in soil (Mankau, 1962; Patel and Desai, 1964; Sitaramaiah, 1967; Hatneed, 1970; Yuhara, 1971; Kumar and Nair, 1976; Lai et ^. , 1977; Haseeb £t aj^. , 1978; Nandal and Bhatti, 1983; Sharma et _a^. , 1985; Alam, 1986; Siddiqui et _a]^. , 1987; Tiyagi £t al. , 1988 and Akhtar and Alam, 1989). Hov^ever, information regarding the role of incorporation of plant parts, in soil, on the control of heteroderid species is meagre (Vander Laan, 1956; Duddington and Duthoit, 1960; Bhatti and Dhawan, 1980; Hoestra and Harrhagen, 1981 and Bhatti, 1988).

Out of larage number of plants found to be efficacious in managing the population of nematode, the author evaluated the efficiency of chopped leaves of Calotropis procera, Nerium indicum, Bougainvillia spectabilis, Ricinus communis, Datura stramonium, Cannabis sativa, Xanthium strumarium and Eucalyptus citriodera against cereal cyst nematode, H. avenae against Triticum aestivum cv. RR-21 (Table 30), Hordeum vulgare cv. Jyoti (Table 31) and Avena sativa cv. Kent (Table 32).

The chopped leaves of the above plants have resulted in the better plant growth of wheat, barley and oat, and decreased populations of H. avenae. £. procera, N. indicum, B. spectabilis, R. communis, C. sativa and E. citriodera has been found to be the most effective in all the three crops.

173

The growth of the crop plant receiving, higher dose i.e. 20 g chopped leaves per kg soil performed better in respect of plant height, number of tillers, earhead length and yield per plant as compared to crop plants receiving 10 g chopped leaves per kg soil as well as check. The best performance has been observed wheat receiving chopped leaves of B^. spectabilis while barley and oat receiving chopped leaves of R_. communis @ 20 g/kg soil. The cyst population has been reduced at higher dose than the lower one. Similar findings have been reported by Bhatti (1988) that the chopped leaves of Azadirachta indica, D. stramonium, Leucaena leucocephala and R. communis have been most effective against H. cajani and \. spectabilis against H. avenae.

174

SUMMARY

During the course of survey of nematodes in 56 districts of Uttar Pradesh, a total of 1670 soil/root samples had been collected from the rhizosphere of various plants which-included cereals, vegetables, pulses, oil seeds ornamentals and weeds etc. to determine the presence, distribution, frequency of occurrence and infestation levels of different species of heteroderid nematodes.

Seven Heterodera species viz. , H. avenae, H. cajani,

^- cyperi, H_. graminis, H^. mothi, H. sorghi and H.zeae were encountered. Heterodera avenae was isolated from Aligarh,

Badaun, Ballia, Bulandshahr, Ghaziabad, Jalaun and Lalitpur;

H^. graminis from Aligarh, Hardoi, Unnao and Pithoragarh and

H. cyperi from only Mainpuri district. This is the first report about the existence of H^. graminis and H^. cyperi from

Uttar Pradesh. Heterodera cajani and H^. zeae were wide

spread followed by H_. mothi. However, the frequency of occurrence and infestation level of each species varied.

The cysts and larval population of ti_. avenae was

studied in wheat field at Aligarh for two consecutive years

(1988-89 to 1989-90), which had during the course of survey

was found to be infested with this nematode. The cyst and

larval population had been high in April and January

respectively in both the years in which this study was rnade^

It is understandable as environmental conditions and host

175

ontogeny of plants favoured the development of larvae in

January and cysts in April.

Studies dealing with measurements of certain characters of larvae, males, females, cysts, eggs and conetop structures of Aligarh and Ghaziabad populations of H^. avenae when grown on oat, wheat, barley or in five different types of soil or five different soil moisture levels revealed that they underwent marked variation. Characters such as lip annules in larvae, males, females, and lateral incisures in larvae and males, on the other hand were found to be fairly stable.

Despite above changes in measurements, they remained within the range of description as proposed by different taxonomists for this nematode.

For studying the host range of H_. avenae 37 plants belonging to eleven families of Angiosperms were inoculated.

Avena sativa cv. Kent, Triticum aestivum cvs. K-68, RR-21,

Hordeum vulgare cv. Jyoti, Zea mavs cv. Shakti, Secale cereale, Phalaris minor and Polypogon monospeliensis (members of the grass family) were found susceptible to both Aligarh and Ghaziabad populations. Silene conoidea, a dicotyledonous plant of the family Caryophyllaceae, a weed growing

abundantly in wheat field, when inoculated with two isolates of H. avenae, it was noted that cyst formation occurred with

Aligarh and not with Ghaziabad isolates.

176

When international host differentials comprising oat

CVS. Sun II, Pusa hybrid BSI, Silva, Avena sterilis; wheat CVS. Loros, IK2 dark, IK2 light, Clapa; Triticale DTS-839; barley cvs- P-31322-1, 191, Drost, Herta, Siri, Martin, Morocco, La etanzuela, Emir, Varde, Ortolan, Jyoti (local) when inoculated with larvae of Aligarh and Ghaziabad populations of H_. avenae, it was observed that the two populations differed in their pathogenicity. Thus, the two populations had identical reaction on barley varieties Ortolan and 191. Therefore, it is justifiable to place both of them in Group 1 of H_. avenae as proposed by Andersen and Andersen (1982). These reaction however differed. Aligarh population of U_. avenae produces cysts on oat Sun II, A. sterilis and barley cv. Siri where as the Ghaziabad population fails to produce cysts on these cultivars. Hence, they differ from one another on the basis of host reaction on the above differentials which were different from earlier reported biotypes from India and abroad.

The studies carried out on the effect of different host, soil types, soil moisture on morphometries and host range studies on H^. avenae provide additional proof that the two populations differed from one another.

The efficiency of chopped leaves of Calotropis procera, Nerium indicum, Bougainvillia spectabilis, Ricinus communis, Datura stramonium, Cannabis sativa, Xanthium strumarium and Eucalyptus citriodera have been evaluated

177

against wheat, barley and oat to manage the cereal cyst nematode. The chopped leaves of the above plants when amended with soil, had resulted in the better plant growth of wheat, barley and oat and decreased the population of 14. avenae.

Significant increase in the growth of wheat, barley and oat have been observed when 10 g and 20 g chopped leaves of C. procera, N. indicum, B. spectabilis, R. communis, C_. sativa and E. citriodera, applied to the pots containing 1 kg autoclaved soil. Plants receiving 20 g chopped leaves per kg soil were proved superior than those in which 10 g chopped leaves were added. The best performance had been observed in the growth of wheat receiving leaves of B_. spectabilis and of barley and oat receiving leaves of R. communis @ 20 g per kg soil.

178

REFERENCES

"Abed, F.M.A.H. and A.H.Y. Taha (1975). The influence of soil texture on the infectivity of the root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne javanlca on tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum ). Ann. Agric. Sci. Moshtohor 4 : 265-270.

Ahmad, W., T.H. Khan and A.L. Bilgrami (1988). Plant parasitic nematodes associated with paddy crop in Bihar, India. Int. Nematol. Network Newsl. 5(4) : 4. Akhtar, M. and M.M. Alam (1989). Evaluation of nematicidal potential in some medicinal plants. Int. Nematol. Network Newsl. 6(1) : 8-10. Alam, M.M. (1986). Possible use of weeds as soil amendment for the management of root-knot and stunt nematodes attacking eggplant. Agric. Wastes 16 : 97-102.

Alam, M.M. (1987). Pollution free control of plant parasitic nematodes by soil amendment with plant wastes. Biological Wastes 22 : 75-79. Andersen, S. (1959). Resistance of barley to various popula tions of the cereal root eelworm (Heterodera major). Nematologica 4 : 91-98. *Andersen, S. (1961). Resistens mod havreal, Heterodera avenae. Dansk Videnskabs Forlag. Kobenhavn. Diss. 179 pp. *Andersen, S. and K. Andersen (1982). Suggestions for determination and terminology of pathotypes and genes for resistance in cyst forming nematodes, especially Heterodera avenae. EPPO Bull. 12 : 379-386. Babatola, J.O. (1981). Effect of pH, oxygen and temperature on the activity and survival of Hirschmanniella spp. Nematologica 27 : 285-291. *Baines, R.C., S.D. Van Gundy and S.A. Sher (1959). Citrus and Avacado nematodes. Calif. Agric. 13 : 16-18. Baines, R.C., T. Miyakana, J.W. Cameron and R.H. Small (1969). Infectivity of two biotypes of the citrus nematode on citrus and on some other host. J. Nematol. 1 : 150-159.

Baines, R.C., T. Miyakana, J.W. Cameron and R.K. Goost (1974). Four biotypes of Tylenchulus semipenetrans in California identified and their importance in the development of resistant citrus root stock. J. Nematol. 6 : 53-76. ~

179

Bajaj,H.K. and D.C.Gupta(1982) . Polypogon monospeliensis Desf. a natural host of Heterodera avenae Woll. Indian J_. Nematol. 12 : 388.

Banyer, R.J. and J.M. Fisher (1971). Seasonal variation in hatching of eggs of Heterodera avenae. Nematologica 17 : 225. *Barabashova, V.N. and A.B. Alova (1980). On the host related variability of the morphometric characters of the strawberry Ditylenchus. Vestn. Khar'k. Univ. 195 : 65-69. Barker, K.R., C.J. Nusbaum and L.A. Nelson (1969). Seasonal population dynamics of selected plant parasitic nematodes as measured by three extraction procedures. 1' Nematol. 1 : 232-239. Barker, K.R. and J.N. Sasser (1959). Biology and control of the stem nematode, Ditylenchus dipsaci. Phytopatho logy 49 : 664-670. Barraclough, R. and R.E. Blackith (1962). Morphometric relationships in the genus Ditylenchus. Nematologica 8 : 51-58. *Bassus, W. (1962). Die Nematoden fauna des Fichtenrohunaus unterden einfluss der kalkdurgung. Nematologica 5 : 86-91. *Behrens, E. (1975). Globodera Skarbilovich, 1959, eine selbstandige Gattung in der Unterfamilie Hetero- derinae Skarbilovich, 1947 (Nematoda:Heteroderidae). Vortragstagung zu aktuellen Problemen der Phytonematologie am 29/5/1975 in Rostock. Manuskriptdruck der vortrage. Rostock, 1975, pp. 12-26. Bharagava, S. and B.S. Yadav (1979). P[ost range study and evolution of certain barley varieties to the maize cyst nematode, Heterodera zeae. Indian J_. Nematol. 9 : 77 (Abstr.). Bhatti, D.S. (1988). Utilization of toxic plants for the control of nematode pests of economic crops. Final Technical Report : 231 pp.

Bhatti, D.S. and D.C. Gupta (1973). Guar an additional host of Heterodera cajani. Indian J_. Nematol. 3 : 160.

Bhatti, D.S. and S.C. Dhawan (1980). Effect of crushed seeds of carrot and coriander on wheat plant growth and multiplication of Heterodera avenae. Haryana Agric. Univ. J. Res. 10 : 419-421.

180

Birchfield, W. an d L.R. Bolster (1952). New host and non-host of reniform nematode. Plant Pis. Reptr. 46 683-685.

Bird, G.W. and W.F. Mai (1965). Plant species in relation to morphometric variations of the New York population of Trichodorus christiei. Nematologica 11 : 34. Bird, G.W. and W.F. Mai (1967). Morphometric and allometric variations of Trichodorus christiei. Nematologica 13 : 617-632. Brodie, B.B. and B.H. Quanttlebaum (1970). Vertical distribu tion and population fluctuations of three nematode species as correlated with soil temperature, moisture and texture. Phytopathology 60 : 1286 (Abstr.). *Brown, R.H. (1969). The occurrence of biotypes of the cereal cyst nematode (Heterodera avenae Woll.) Victoria, Australian vJ* Expt. Agric. Anim. Husb. 9 : 453-456. *Brown, R.H. (1974). Further studies on the Victorian biotype of the cereal cyst nematode (Heterodera avenae). Aust. J^. Expt. Agric. Anim. Husb^ 14 : 394-398. Brown, R.H. and J.W. Meagher (1970). Resistance in cereals to the cyst nematode (Heterodera avenae) in Victoria. Aust- J_. Expt. Agric. Anim. Husb. 10 : 360-365. Burns, N.C. (1971). Soil pH effects on nematode population associated with soybeans. vJ. Nematol. 3 : 238-245. *Cairaschi, E.A. (1954). Observations sur une maladie vermiculaire due tabac en Alsace. £. R_. Acad. Agric. £r. 40 : 75-77. Canto Saenz, M.A. and M.N.De Scurrah (1977). Races of the potato cyst nematode in the Andean region and a new system of classification. Nematologica 23 :340-349. Charles, J.S. and T.S. Venkitesan (1984). New hosts of Heterodera oryzicola Rao & Jayaprakash, 1978 in Kerala, India. Indian J_. Nematol. 14 : 181-182.

Chawla, M.L. and S.M. Yadav (1982). Extent of variation in Hoplolaimus indicus Sher, 1963. II. Morphometric characters. Indian J. Nematol. 12 : 356-359. Chin, D.A. (1975). Variation of tail shape of Cylindrocorpus curzii (Nematoda : Cylindrocorporidae). J. Nematol. 7 : 317. ~

181

Chitwood, B.G. and E.M. Buhrer (1946). Further studies on the life history of golden nematode of potato,Heterodera rostochiensis. Proc. Helminthol. Soc. Wash. 13 : 54-56. *Chitwood, M.B. (1957). Intraspecific variation in parasitic nematodes. Syst. Zool. Wash. DC 6 : 19-23. Cook, R. (1975). Observations on the relationship between morphological variation and host range in popula tions of cereal cyst nematodes. Ann . appl. Biol. 81 : 199-205. *Cook, R. (1982). Cereal and grass hosts of some gramineous cyst nematodes. EPPO Bull. 12 : 399-411. Cook, R. and T.D. Williams (1972). Pathotypes of Heterodera avenae. Ann . appl. Biol. 71 : 267-271. *Coomans, A. (1971). Morphology and nematode systematics. J. Parasitology 57(4) Sect. II, Part 2 (2nd Intern. Congr. Parasitology, Part 5), pp. 95-99. Cotten, J. (1962). Effect of temperature on hatching of cereal root eelworm. Nature Lond. 195 : 308. Cotten, J. (1963). Resistance in barley and oats to the cereal root eelworm, Heterodera avenae Woll. Nematologica 9 : 81-84.

Cotten, J. (1967). Cereal root eelworm pathotypes in England and Wales. Plant Pathology 16 : 54-59. Darekar, K.S., S.S. Shelke and N.L. Mhase (1990). Nematodes associated with fruit crops in Maharashtra State, India. Int. Nematol. Network Newsl. 7(2) : 11-12. Dasgupta, D.R. and A.R. Seshadri (1971). Races of the reniform nematode, Rotylenchulus reniformis Linford and Oliveira, 1940. Indian J. Nematol. 1 : 21-24. Das, T.K. and M.C. Mukhopadhyaya (1987). Influence of soil types on the morphometries of Tylenchulus semipenetrans and growth of Citrus paradisi. Indian J. Nematol. 17 : 95-98.

Daulton, R.A.C. and C.J. Nusbaum (1962). The effect of soil moisture and relative humidity on the root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne javanica. Nematologica 8 : 157-168. *Davide, R.G. (1979). Reactions of different crops to infec tion by Meloidogyne arenaria isolated from fig and the influence of temperature on the development of the nematode. Plant Pis. Reptr. 63 : 207-211.

182

*Davide, R.G. (1980). Influence of cultivar,age, soil texture and pH on Meloidogyne incognita and Radopholus similis on banana. Plant Diseases 64 : 571-573.

Davis, R.M. (1984). Distribution of Tylenchulus semipenetrans in a Texas grape fruit orchard. J^. Nematol. TS T 313-317. De Coninck, L. (1962). Problems of systematics and taxonomy in nematology today. Nematologica 7 : 1-7. *de Man, J.G. (1880). Die einheimischen frei in der reinen Erde und in sussen Wasser lebenden Nematoden. Vorlaufiger Bericht and descriptiv-sytematischer Theil. Tijdschr. Nederl. Dierk. Ver. 5 : 1-104.

* den Toom,A.L. (1988). Influence of temperature and soil moisture on the relation between Tylenchorhynchus dubius and Lolium perenne. Netherlands J. Plant" Pathol. 94 : 33-44. Deshmukh, R., G.C. Saxena and Y.P. Singh (1990). Nematological survey of some solanaceous vegetable crops in Guna region of Madhya Pradesh, India. Int. Nematol. Network Newsl. 7(3) : 24. Dhawan, S.C. and K.K. Kaushal (1987). Avena fatua, wild oat, a new collateral host of Heterodera avenae and parasitization by Pythium aphanidermatum. Indian J_. Nematol. 17 : 335. Dhawan, S.C., K.K. Kaushal and A.N. Srivastava (1983). Record of occurrence of Heterodera sorghi from Haryana State, India. Indian J_. Nematol. 13 : 241.

Dropkin, V.H. (1959). Varietal response of soybean to Meloidogyne a bioassay system of separating races of root-knot nematodes. Phytopathology 49 : 18-23. Dropkin, V.H. (1988). The concept of race in phytonematology. Ann. Rev. Phytopathol. 26 : 145-161. *Ducharme, E.P. (1955). Subsoil drainage as a factor in the spread of the burrowing nematode. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 68 : 29-31.

Ducharme, E.P. (1967). Annual population periodicity of Radopholus similis in Florida citrus grooves. Plant Pis. Reptr. 51 : 1031.

Duddington, C.L. and C.M.G. Duthoit (1960). Green manuring and cereal root eelworm. Plant Pathology 9 : 7-9.

183

Dutt, R. and D.S. Bhatti (1986). Determination of effective doses and time of application of nematicides and castor leaves for controlling Meloidogyne javanica in tomato. Indian J_. Nematol. TE : 8-11. Dutta, S., P.C. Trivedi and B. Tiagi (1987). Nematodes of guar and mung in some areas of Rajasthan, India. Int. Nematol. Network Newsl. 4(1) : 12-16. Eisenback, J.D. (1982). Morphological comparison of head shape and stylet morphology of second-stage juveniles of Meloidogyne sp. J^. Nematol. 14 : 339-343. Eisenback, J.D. and H. Hirschmann (1980). Morphological comparison of Meloidogyne males by scanning electron microscopy. J_. Nematol. 12 : 23-32. Eisenback, J.D., H. Hirschmann and A.C. Triantaphyllou (1980). Morphological comparison of Meloidogyne female head structures, perineal patterns and stylets. J^. Nematol. 12 : 300-313. Ellenby, C. (1946). Ecology of the eelworm cyst. Nature Lond. 157 : 451-452. Ellenby, C. and L. Smith (1968). South American origin of European pathotypes of potato root eelworm. Nematologica 14 : 597-599. Ellis, S.A. and J.A.M. Brown (1976). The reaction of resistant cultivars of barley to some Australian populations of Heterodera avenae. Nematologica 22 : 87-93. *Elmiligy, I.A. (1968). Root-knot nematode infectivity and host responses in relation to soil type. Meded. Rijkefae Londowet. Gent. 33 : 1633-1641. El-Sherif, A.G. (1972). The influence of host nutrition on the morphometries of three Aphelenchoides species (Nematoda : Aphelenchoidea). Nematologica 18 : 174-178.

Endo, B.Y. (1959). Responses of root lesion nematodes, Pratylenchus brachyurus and P. zeae to various plants and soil types. PhytopaThology 49 : 417-421.

Epps, J.M. and A.M. Golden (1967). Biological differences in populations of the soybean cyst nematode, Heterodera glycines. Nematologica 13 : 141 (Abstr.).

Evans, K. (1969). Changes in a Heterodera rostochiensis population through the growing season. Ann . appl. Biol. 64 : 31-41. —

184

Faghihi, J., J.M. Ferris and V.R. Ferris (1986). Heterodera glycines in Indiana. II. Morphology of geographical isolates. J. Nematol. 18 : 173-177'.

Fegbenle, H.H., D.I.Edwards and R.B. Malek (1987). Effects of temperature on emergence of juveniles and root invasion in two populations of Heterodera lespedezae Nematologica 33 : 328-334. Fenwick, D.W. (1951). The effect of temperature on the development of potato root eelworm, Heterodera rostochiensis. Ann . appl. Biol, 38 : 615-617. Ferris, J.M. (1957). Effect of soil temperature on the life cycle of the golden nematode in host and non-host species. Phytopathology 47 : 221.

Fiddian, W.E.H. and D.S. Kimber (1964). A study of biotypes of the cereal cyst nematode(Heterodera avenae Woll.) in England and Wales. Nematologica 10 ~ 631-636. Fisher, J.M. (1965). Studies on Paratylenchus nanus. 1. Effects of variation in environment on several morphometric characters of adults. Nematologica 11: 269-271. Fisher, J.M. (1981). Further observations on the effect of temperature on Heterodera avenae Woll. Nematologica 27 : 228-234.

Fortuner, R. and P. Queneherve (1980). Morphometrical variability in Helicotylenchus Steiner, 1945. 2. Influence of host on H. dihystera (Cobb, 1893) Sher, 1961. Revue Nematol. 3 : 291-29^. Franklin, M.T. (1940). On the identification of strain of Heterodera schachtii Schmidt. J. Helminthol 18 : 193-208. ~

*Franklin, M.T. (1951). The cyst forming species of Heterodera. Imp. Bur. Agr. Parasitol. 147 pp.

Franklin, M.T., S.A. Clark and J.A. Course (1971). Population studies of Meloidogyne naasi in the field. Nematologica 17 : 575.

Fushtey, S.G. and P.W. Johnson (1966). The biology of oat cyst nematode, Heterodera avenae in Canada. I. The effect of temperature on the hatchability of cysts and emergence of larvae. Nematologica 12 : 313-320. Gair, R, T.J.A. Price and W.E.H. Fiddian (1962). Cereal root eelworm (Heterodera avenae Woll.) and spring barley varieties. Nematologica 7 : 267-272.

185

Gill, J.S. and G. Swarup (1971). On the host range of the cereal cyst nematode, Heterodera avenae Woll. 1924, the causal organism of 'molya' disease of wheat and barley in Rajasthan, India. Indian J^. Nematol. 1 : 63-67. Gnanapragasam, N.C. (1987). Effect of soil acidity on the population levels of Pratylenchus loosi. Int. Nematol. Network Newsl. 4(2) : 23-24. Godfrey, G.H. (1926). Effect of temperature and moisture on root-knot nematode. J^. Agric. Res. (U.S.) 33 : 223-254. Godfrey, G.H. (1929). A destructive root disease of pine apples and other pints due to Tylenchus brachyurus n.sp. Phytopathology 19 : 611-6"29. Golden, A.M. (1957). Occurrence of Radopholus gracilis (Nematoda : Tylenchida) in the United States. Plant Pis. Reptr. 41 : 91. Golden, A.M. (1971). Classification of the genera and the higher categories of the order Tylenchida (Nematoda) In: Zuckerman, B.M., W.F. Mai and R.A. Rohde (eds.) Plant Parasitic Nematodes, Vol.1, pp. 191-232. Academic Press, New York.

Goodell, P.B. and H.Ferris (1989). Influence of environmental factors on the hatch and survival of Meloidogyne incognita. J_. Nematol. 21 : 328-334. Goodey, J.B. (1952). The influence of host on the dimensions of the plant parasitic nematode, Ditylenchus destructor. Ann, appl. Biol. 39 : 468-474.

Goplen, B.P., E.H. Stanford and M.W. Allen (1959). Demonstra tion of physiological races within three root-knot nematode species attacking alfalfa. Phytopathology 49 : 653-655.

Govindaiah; N. Suryanarayana, D.D. Sharma and Gargi (1989). Effect of mulching of green leaves for the control of root-knot nematode in mulberry. Indian J. Nematol. 19 : 25-28.

Graham, C.W. (1980). The effect of rainfall and soil type on the population dynamics of cereal cyst nematode on spring oat (Avena sativa). Ann. appl. Biol. 94 : 243-253. ~^

*Grandison, G.S. (1973). Soil moisture and nematode parasitism of plant (Proc. Soil and plant water symp. Palmerston, Newzealand 10-12 April, 1973). NewZealand Department of Scientific and Industrial Research. Information Series No. 96 : 115-119.

186

Greco, N. (1981) . Hatching of Heterodera carotae and H. avenae. Nematologica 27 : 366-367. Griffin, G.D. (1977). Effect of soil moisture on control of Heterodera schachtii with aldicarb. J. Nematol. 9 : 211-215. Griffin, G.D. (1981). Pathological differences in Heterodera schachtii populations. J_. Nematol. 13 : 191-195. Griffin, G.D. and H.M. Darling (1964). An ecological study of Xiphinema americanum Cobb in an ornamental spruce nursery. Nematologica 10 : 471-479. Grullon, L.A., D.W. Dickson and R.P. Esser (1976). Comparative morphological and host range studies of three isolates of Meloidogyne arenaria. J_. Nematol. 8 : 286-287 (Abstr.). Hakim, S. (1984), Studies on the environmental stresses on the variation and variability in root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne incognita. Ph.D. Thesis, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, 187 pp.

*Hamann, B. and H, Decker (1985). Untersuchungen zur Patho- typen-situation bei Heterodera avenae Woll. in ausgewahlten Erdherkunften der Bezirke Halle, Frankfurt (Oder) und Dresden. 10. Vortragstagung zu aktuellen Problemen der Phytonematologie, Rostock, 30-38. Hamblen, M.L. and D.A. Slack (1959). Factors influencing the emergence of larvae from cysts of Heterodera glycines Ichinohe. Cyst development condition and variability. Phytopathology 49 : 317. Hameed, S.F. (1970). Note on the effect of some organic additives on the incidence of root-knot nematodes in tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.). Indian J_. Agric. Sci. 40 : 207-210.

Hasan, N. (1985). Survey of plant parasitic nematodes associated with weeds commonly encountered in or around the forage crop cultivated fields. IVth Nematol. Symp., May 17-18 : 98 (Abstr.).

Haseeb, A., Birpal; A.M. Khan and S.K. 'Saxena (1978). Evaluation of nematicidal property in certain alkaloid bearing plants. Geobios 5 : 116-118. Hastings, R.J., J.E. Bosher and W. Newton (1952). Biological races. In: Zuckerman, B.M., W.F. Mai and R.A. Rohde (eds.) Plant Parasitic Nematodes, Vol.11, p.54. Academic Press, New York.

187

"Hesling, J.J. (1966) . Biological races of stem eelworm. Rep. Glass House Crops Res. Inst., 132-141.

Hirschmann, H. (1984). Morphological variability of Meloidogyne incognita revealed by light and scanning electron microscopy. First Int. Cong. Neraatol., Canada, p. 116 (Abstr.). *Hoestra, H. and H. Harrhagen (1981). Effect of soil treatment with softwood bark on Globodera rostochiensis. Med. Van Faculteit Landb. Rijk. Gent,. 703-705. Hoff, J.K. and W.F. Mai (1964). Influence of soil depth and sampling date on population levels of Trichodorus christiei. Phytopathology 54 : 246. *Holdeman, Q.L. and T.R. Watson (1977). The oat cyst nematode Heterodera avenae, a root parasite of cereal crops and other grasses. Rep. State of California, USA, Dept. Food and Agric. 82 pp. Hollis, J.P. and T. Johnson (1957). Microbiological reduc tion of nematode population in water saturated soils. Phytopathology 47 : 1-16. Howard, H.W. (1972). Fathotypes of potato cyst nematode. Ann. appl. Biol. 71 : 263-266. Howard, H.W. and J. Gotten (1976). Neraatode-resistant crop plants. In: J.F. Southey (ed.) Plant Nematology Her Majesty's Office Stationery : 313 p. Husain, S.I., A.J. Al-Zarari and H. Younis (1978). Occurrence of a cyst nematode, Heterodera mothi Khan & Husain, 1965 in Iraq. Mesopotamia J. Agric. 13 : 142-151.

Husain, S.I., H.Y. Mahmood and A.J. Al-Zarari (1981). Vertical distribution and seasonal fluctuation in population of citrus nematode in orchards of Ninevab and Diyala Provinces of Iraq. Nematol. medit. 9 : 7-19. Husaini, S.S. and A.R. Seshadri (1976). Resistance in some mungbean (Vigna radiata) varieties and breeding lines to the root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne incognita. Indian J_. Nematol. 6 : 131-137.

Ismail, W. and S.K. Saxena (1977). Effect of different levels of K on the growth of root-knot nematode,Meloidogyne incognita on tomato. Nematologica 23 : 263-264.

Jacobsen, J. (1980). Occurrence of resistance breaking pathotypes of the cereal cyst nematode, Heterodera avenae in Denmark. European Soc. Nematologists, Bari, Italy, 24-30.

188

Jain, K., C.L. Sethi , G. Swarup and A.N,. Srivastava (1982). Heterodera sorghi sp.n., a new cyst forming nematode parasitizing sorghum. Revue Nematol. 5 201-204.

Jain, R.K. and D.S. Bhatti (1988). Integrated control of root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne javanica infecting tomato. Indian J^. Nematol. 18 : 30-34. Jairajpuri, M.S., W.U. Khan, K.G.H. Setty and G.C. Govindu (1979). Heterodera delvii n.sp. (Nematode : Heteroderidae), a parasite of ragi (Eleusine coracana) in Banglore, India. Revue Nematol. 2 : 3-9. Janarthanan, R. (1972). Occurrence of the pigeonpea cyst nematode in Tamil Nadu. Indian J^. Nematol. 2 : 215. Jones, F.G.W. (1950). Observation on the beet eelworm and other cyst forming species of Heterodera. Ann. appl. Biol. 37 : 407-440. Jones, F.G.W. (1961). The potato cyst eelworm Heterodera rostochiensis Well, in India. Curr. Sci. 30 : 187. Jones, F.G.W. and A.J. Thomasson (1976). Bulk density as an indicator of pore space in soils usable by nematodes. Nematologica 22 : 133-137.

*Jones, F.G.W., D.W. Larbery and D.M. Parrot (1969). The influence of soil moisture and moisture on nematodes, especially Xiphinema, Longidorus, Trichodorus and Heterodera spp. Soil Biol. Biochem. 1 : 153-165, Jones, F.G.W., J.M. Carpenter, D.M. Parrot, A.R. Stone and D.L. Trudgill (1970). Potato cyst nematode - one species or two. Nature Lond. 227 : 83-84. Jones, F.G.W. and K. Pawelska (1963). The behaviour of populations of potato root eelworm (Heterodera rostochiensis Woll.) towards some resistant tuberous and other Solanum species. Ann. appl. Biol. 51 : 227-294.

Kampfe, L. (1960). Die raumliche verteilung des Primarbefalls von Heterodera schachtii Schmidt in den Wirtswurzeln Nematologica 5 ~: TW. Kaushal, K.K. and A.R. Seshadri (1987). Studies on the morphological variations in different populations of the cereal cyst nematode, Heterodera avenae in India. Indian J. Nematol. 17 : 193-195.

189

Kaushal, K.K. and G. Swarup (1988). Two new cyst nematode species from India. Indian J_. Nematol. 18: 299-306.

Kaushik, H.D. and H.K. Bajaj (1980). Nematodes associated with pulse crops in Haryana. Indian J_. Nematol. 10: 92-96. "Kemper, A. (1958). Kann eine weitere Ausbareitung des kartoffelnematoden verhindert werden. Ariz. Schadlingsk. 31 : 165-170. Khan, A.M. and S.I. Husain (1965). Heterodera mothi n.sp. (Tylenchida : Heteroderidae) parasitizing Cyperus rotundus L. at Aligarh, U.P., India. Nematologica 11 : 167-172. Khan, E., H.S. Gaur and Y. Lalitha (1990). Occurrence of cereal cyst nematode, Heterodera avenae at high altitude in Leh, India. Int. Nematol. Network Newsl. 7(1) : 3. Khan, E., S. Ganguly and Y. Lalitha (1989). New records on the occurrence of cyst nematodes in India. Int. Nematol. Network Newsl. 6(2) : 19-20. Kincaid, R.R. (1946). Soil factors affecting incidence of root-knot nematode. Soil Science 61 : 101-109. Koen, H. (1966). The influence of seasonal variations on the vertical distribution of Meloidogyne javanica in sandy soils. Nematologica 12 : 297.

*Kort, J. (1966). The occurrence of mixtures of pathotypes in Heterodera rostochiensis Woll. Meded Land Hogesch, Opzoekstna staat Gent. 31 : 601-608.

*Kort, J. (1974). Identification of pathotypes of the potato cyst nematode. EPPO Bull. 4 : 511-518. *Kort, J., G. Dantuma and A. Van Essen (1964). On biotypes of the cereal root eelworm (Heterodera avenae) and resistance in oats and barley. Neth. J_. Plant Pathology 70 : 9-17.

Kort, J., H. Ross, J. Rumpenhorst and A.R. Stone (1977). An international scheme for identifying and classifying pathotypes of potato cyst nematode, Globodera rostochiensis and G. pallida. Nematologica 23 T 333-339. ~

Kort, J. and J. Bakker (1980). The occurrence of mixtures of potato cyst nematode pathotypes or species. Nematologica 26 : 272-274.

190

*Kort, J. and J.J.S'Jaco b (1956). Een orienterend onderzoik near hot voorkomen van en de schade veroorzaakt door het Havercystenaaltje. T. PJ^. Ziekten 62 : 7-11.

Koshy, P.K. (1967). A new species of Heterodera from India. Indian Phytopath. 20 : 272-274. Koshy, P.K. and G. Swarup (1971). Distribution of Heterodera avenae, H. zeae, H. cajani and Anguina tritici in India. Indian J_. Nematol. 1 : 106-111. Koshy, P.K. and G. Swarup (1972). Susceptibility ,of plants to Heterodera ca jani. Indian J_. Nematol. 2 : 1-6. Koshy, P.K., G. Swarup and C.L. Sethi (1971). Heterodera zeae n.sp. (Nematoda : Heteroderidae), a cyst forming nematode on Zea mays. Nematologica 16 : 511-516. Koshy, P.K., V.K. Sosamma and J.R. Faleiro (1987). Occurrence of Heterodera oryzicola on banana in Goa. Indian J_. Nematol. 17 : 334. *Krasnopolski, N.N. (1979). Variability of morphometric and morphological characters in Tylenchorhynchus dubius (Neraatoda:Tylenchida) Nekotorya, voprossy ekolongii i morfologi i zhivotnykh kiev, U.S.S.R. *Krikpatrick, J.D., S.D. Van Gundy and W.F. Mai (1964). Inter relationships of plant nutrition, growth and parasitic nematodes. Plant Analysis and Fertilizer Problems 4 : 189. Krishnaprasad, K.S. and K. Krishnappa (1982). Occurrence of Heterodera gambiensis Merney and Netscher, 1976 from India. Indian J_. Nematol. 12 : 405.

Kumar, A.C. (1964). A note on the occurrence of Heterodera cacti (Nematoda : Heteroderidae) from Mysore. Curr. Sci. 33 : 534.

Kumar, A.C. (1980). Studies on nematodes in coffee soils of South India. 4. Occurrence of Heterodera cyperi. J. Coffee Res. 10 : 77-78.

Kumar, T.P. and M.R.G.K. Nair (1976). Effect of some green leaves and organic wastes on root-knot nematode infestation on Bhindi. Kerala J. Agric. Res. 14 : 64-67.

Kuriyan, K.J., R.U. Kumari and Hebsybai (1985). Rice cyst nematode, Heterodera oryzicola in soils of Kerala state. Indian J. Nematol. 15 : 280 (Abstr.).

191

*Ladygina, N.M. (1976) . The genetic and physiological compati bility of various forms of stem nematode. Parazicoxogia 10 : 40-47.

Lai, A., B.S. Yadav and R.P. Nandwana (1977). Effect of chopped leaves of various plants and sewage on the plant growth and reniform nematode, Rotylenchulus reniforrais. Indian J. Mycol.and Plant Pathol. 7 : 68-69. Lai, A. and V.K. Mathur (1982). Occurrence of Heterodera zeae on Vetiveria zlzanioides. Indian J. Nematol. 12 : 405. Linford, M.B. (1941). Some soil moisture relationship of the root-knot nematode. Phytopathology 31 : 862. Linford, M.B., F.Y. App and J.M. Oliveira (1938). Reduction of soil population of root-knot nematode during decomposition of organic matter. Soil Sci. 45 : 127-140. Loewenberg, J.R., T. Sullivan and M.L, Schuster (1960). The effect of pH and minerals on the hatching and survival of Meloidogyne incognita larvae. Phytopa thology 50 : 215-217. *Loof, P.A.A. (1960). Taxonomic studies on the genus Pratylenchus (Nematode). Tijdschr. PI. Ziekt. 66 : 29-90. ~ *Loof, P.A.A. (1970). Morphological variation and the species concept (Introduction to discussion). In: Sander,H. and Kozlowska (E 1). Proc. IX Intern. Nematol. Symp. Warsaw. Zeszyty Problemowe Postepownauk Rolniczvch 92 : 490-496.

Lopez, R. and D.W. Dickson (1984). Morphometries of three host races of Meloidogyne incognita from Florida. Proc. First Int. Cong. Nematol. Canada., 116 pp, (Abstr.). Lownsbery, B.F. (1950). Stimulation of golden nematode larvae by root leachings. Phytopathology 40 : 18.

Lownsbery, B.F. (1952). Host preferences of the recently discovered tobacco cyst nematode, Heterodera sp. Phytopathology 42 : 469.

*Luc, M. and H. Hoestra (1960). Les nenatodes phytoparasites des sols de cocoteraire du Togo, Essai d'interpretation du penplement. L'Agronomic Tropicale 15 • 497-512. ^

192

'Lucke, E. (1976). Pathotype studies on Heterodera avenae populations (1966-1975). Zeitschrift fur Pflanzen- krankheiten, Pflanzenpathologie und Pflanzenschutz 83 : 6A7-656. "Mai, \v.F. and M.B. Harrison (1959). The golden nematode. Cornell Ext. Bull. 870 pp. Makadia, B.M., D.K. Jogani and M.P. Mahapatra (1988). Occurrence of Heterodera zeae on maize in Gujarat. Indian _J« Nematol. 18 : 130. Mankau, R. (1962). The effect of some organic additives upon a soil nematode population and associated natural enemies. Nematologica 7 : 65-73. Maqbool, M.A. (1981). Occurrence of root-knot and cyst nematodes in Pakistan. ^J. Nematol. 13 : 448-449.

Maqbool, M.A. and S. Hashmi (1984). New host records of cyst nematodes, Heterodera zeae and H. mothi from Pakistan, ^ak. J. Nematol. 2 : 99-100. Martin, W.J. (1954). Parasitic races of Meloidogyne incognita and M. incognita var. acrita. Plant Pis. Reptr. Suppl. No. 227 : 86-89. Mathur, B.N., M.C. Arya, R.L. Mathur and D.K.Talanda (1974). The occurrence of biotypes of the cereal cyst nematode (Heterodera avenae) in the light soil of Rajasthan and Haryana, India. Nematologica 20 : 19-26.

Mc Leod, R.W. and G.T. Khair (1977). Observations on the morphology of Heterodera avenae in Australia. Nematologica 23 : 382-389. *Meagher, J.W. (1968). The distribution of cereal cyst nematode (Heterodera avenae) in Victoria and its relation to soil type. Aust. J. Expt. Agric. Anim. Husb. 8 : 637.

Meagher, J.W. (197C). Seasonal fluctuations in numbers of larvae of the cereal cyst nematode (Heterodera avenae) and of Pratylenchus minyus and Tylencho- rnvncnus rrevidens in soil. Nematologica 16 T T -• i^ ^ I W

Meaghar, J.W. (19 7-'.y. The morpholcgy of the cereal cyst nematoca, Heterodera avenae in Australia. Nematologica 20 : 1-8.

Hichell, R^R.., R.3. Kalek, D.P. Taylor and D.I.Edwards (1973;. Races oi :he barley rcoc-knot nematode, Meloidcgvne na_as_i. 1, Characterization bv host preference. J, Nemacoi. 5 : 41-44.

193

Miller, L.T. (1965). Variation in development of eleven isolates of Heterodera glycines on Glycine max. Phytopthology 55 : 1068 (Abstr.JT Miller, L.T. (1966). Variation in development of two morphologically different isolates of Heterodera glycines obtained from the same field. Phyto pathology 56 : 585 (Abstr.).

Miller, L.T. (1967). Development of eleven isolates of Heterodera glycines on six legumes. Phytopathology 57 : 647 (Abstr.). Miller, L.T. and P.L. Duke (1967). Morphological variation of eleven isolates of Heterodera elyclnes in the United States. Nematologica l3 : 1^5-146.

Miller, P.M. (1970). Failure of several non-volatile and contact nematicides to kill eggs in cysts of Heterodera tabacum. Plant Dis. Reptr. 54 : 781-783.

Minton, N.A., E.J. Cairns and A.L. Smith (I960). Effect of root-knot nematode on resistant and susceptible cotton. Phytopathology 50 : 784-787.

Misra, S.R. and K. Singh (1977). Spatial distribution of nematodes in a sugarcane field. Indian J^. Nematol. 7 : 95-96.

Morgan, G.T. and A.A. Mac Lean (1968). Influence of soil pH on an introduced population of Pratylenchus penetrans. Nematologica 14 : 311. Mukhopadhyaya,M.C. and M.S. Haque (1974). Nematode associated with field crops, fruits and fodder crops in West Bengal. Indian J^. Nematol. 4 : 104-107.

Mukhopadhyaya, M.C. and M.S. Haque (1980). Influence of soil types on Rotylenchulus reniformis on castor. Indian J. Nematol. 10 : 88-91.

Mul.voy, R.H. (1973). Morphology of termlnnl nrens of white females and cysts of the genus Heterodera (s.g. Globodera). J. Nematol. 5 : 303-3in

Nandal, S.N. and D.S. Bhatti (1983). Preliminary screening of some weeds/shrubs for their nematicidal activity against Meloldogyne javanica. Indian J. Nematol. 13 : 123-127.

*Netscher, C. (1970). Variability of the larval length in a single eggmass culture of Meloldogyne javanica. X. Int. Nematol. Symp. European Soc. Nematologists, Pescara, Sept. 8-12, pp. 35-36.

194

•Netscher, C. (1978). Morphological and physiological varia bility of species of Meloidogyne in West Africa and implications for their control. Meded Landbouw. Wageningen, Netherlands 78 : 1-6. Neubert, E. (1967). Biological races. In: Plant Parasitic Nematode, Vol.11, p. 55 (Eds. Zuckerman, B.M., W.F. Mai and R.A. Rohde), Academic Press, New York.

"Nilsson-Ehle, H. (1920). Uber Resistenz gegen Heterodera schachtii bei gewissen Gerstensorten ihre Vererbung- sweise und Bedeutung fur die Praxis. Hereditas 1 : 1-34. Norton, D.C. (1959). Relationship of nematodes to small grains and native grasses in north and central Texas. Plant Dis. Reptr. 43 : 227-235.

Norton, D.C. (1979). Relationship of physical and chemical factors to population of plant parasitic nematodes. Ann. Rev. Phytopathology 17 : 279-299.

Nusbaum, C.J. and K.R. Barker (1971). Population dynamics. In: Plant Parasitic Nematodes, Vol.1, pp. 303-323 (Eds. Zuckerman, B.M., W.F. Mai and R.A. Rohde). Academic Press, New York and London.

O'Bannon, J.H. and A.T. Tommerlin (1971). Response of citrus seedlings to Radopholus similis in two soils. J^. Nematol. 3 : 255.

O'Bannon, J.H. and H.W. Reynolds (1961). Root-knot nematode damage and cotton yields in relation to certain soil properties. Soil Sci. 92 : 384-386.

O'Brien, P.C. and J.M. Fisher (1974). Resistance within wheat, barley and oat cultivars to Heterodera avenae in South Australia. Aust. J_, Expt. Agric. Anim. Husb. 14 : 399-404. O'Brien, P.C. and J.M. Fisher (1977). Development of Heterodera avenae on resistant wheat and barley cultivars. Nematologica 23 : 390-397.

O'Brien, P.C. and J.M. Fisher (1979). Reaction of cereals to populations of Heterodera avenae in South Australia. Nematologica 25 : 261-267.

Ogbuji, R.O. (1981). Variations in infectivity among popula tion of Meloidogyne javanica on tobacco and pepper. Plant Diseases 65 : 65-66.

Olthof, TH. H.A. (1968). Races of Pratylenchus penetrans and their effect on black root-rot resistance Ui \\f\ (\f

195

•Oostenbrink, M. (1966). Major characteristics of the relation between nematodes and plants. Meded Landbouw. Wageningen, Netherlands 66 : 4.

'^Osipova, E.V. (1986). Identification of pathotypes of the oat nematode, Bidera avenae (Wolienweber, 1924), Krall et Krall, 1973 in the Volga region. Byulleten Vesoyuznogo Instituta Gelmnlologii im.K.I. Skryabina 45 : 22-26. Osman, H.A., D.W. Dickson and G.C. Smart Jr. (1985). Morpho logical comparisons of host races 1 and 2 of Meloidogyne arenaria from Florida. J_. Nematol. 17 : 279-285. Oteifa, B.A. (1953). Development of the root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne incognita as affected by potassiiim nutrition of the host. Phytopathology 43 : 171-174. Pant, v., S.P. Singh, S. Hakim and S.K. Saxena (1983). Development of root-knot nematode and morphometries of females of the nematode Meloidogyne incognita as influenced by different cucurbits. Indian J_. Nematol. 13 : 79-83.

Pant, v., S.P. Singh, S. Hakim and S.K. Saxena (1985). Reaction of different vegetables to root-knot nematode Meloidogyne incognita and their effect on the morphometries of nematode. Indian J_. Nematol. 15 : 33-35. Pantone, D.J., J.A. Griesbach and A.R. Maggenti (1987). Morphometric analysis of Anguina amsinckiae from three host species. J^. Nematol. 19 ': 158-163. Paruthi, I.J., R.K. Jain and D.C. Gupta (1987). Effect of different periods of degradation of su-babool leaves alone and in combination with nematicide on root- knot nematode incidence in okra. Indian J_. Nematol. 17 : 30-32.

Patel, R.M. and M.V. Desai (1964). A possible biological control of root-knot nematodes. Plant Pis. Reptr. 48 :167-168.

Peacock, F.C. (1957). Studies on root-knot nematodes of the genus Meloidogyne in the Gold Coast. Part II, the effect of soil moisture content on survival of the organism. Nematologica 2 : 114-122. Perry, V.G. (1958). The awl nematode, Dolichodorus heterocephalus, a devastating plant" parasite. Proc. Helminth. Soc. Wash. 20 : 21-27.

196

Petherbridge, F.R. and F.G.W. Jones (1944). Beet eelvorm (Heterodera schachtii Schmidt) in East Anglia. Ann. appl. Biol. 31 : 320-332. Prasad, S.K. and D.R. Dasgupta (1964). Plant parasitic nematodes associated with roses in Delhi. Indian J_. Ent. 26 : 120-122. Prasad, S.K., D.R. Dasgupta and M.C. Mukhopadhyaya (1964). Nematodes associated with commercial crops in northern India and host range of Meloidogyne javanica (Treub, 1885) Chitwood, 1949. Indian j7 Ent. 26 : 438-446.

Prasad, S.K. and M.L. Chawla (1965). Observations on the population fluctuations of citrus nematode, Tylenchulus semipenetrans Cobb, 1913. Indian J^. Ent. 27 : T50-454. Priest, M.F. and C.J. Southards (1971). Comparative morphology of sixteen isolates of Meloidogyne incognita. J^. Nematol. 3 : 325. Qasim, M. and S. Hashmi (1988). Capsella bursa-pastoris (L.) Medic, a new host of Heterodera schachtii Schmidt, 1871 in northern areas of Pakistan. Pak. J_, Nematol. 6 : 51. Radice, A.D., R.F. Myers and P.M. Haliksy (1985). Studies on the host range, biology and pathogenicity of Punctodera punctata infecting turf grasses. J_. Nematol. 17 : 162-165. Ramana, K.V. and C. Mohandas (1988). Occurrence of potato cyst nematode, Globodera pallida (Stone, 1973) in Kerala. Indian J^. Nematol. 18 i 141.

Rao, Y.S. and A. Jayaprakash (1978). Heterodera oryzicola n.sp. (Nematoda ; Heteroderidael i cyst nematode on rice (Oryza sativa L.) from Kerala State, India. Nematologica 25 : T41-346. *Rao, Y.S. and P. Israel (1971). Studies on nematodes of rice and rice soils. V. Influence of soil chemical properties on the activity of Meloidogyne graminicola the rice root-knot nematode. Or^^za 5 i 33-38.

Rao, Y.S. and P. Israel (1972). Influence of soil type on the activity.' of rice root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne graminicrla Golden & Birchfield. Indian J^. Agric. Sci. 42 •. lUs-Jkl,

197

Rashid, A., F.A. Khan and A.M. Khan (1973). Plant parasitic nematodes associated with vegetables, fruits, cereals and other crops in northern India. I. Uttar Pradesh. Indian J^. Nematol. 3 : 8-23. Raski, D.J. (1952). On the host range of sugarbeet nematode in California. Plant Pis. Reptr. 36 : 5-7. *Richter, E. (1969). Zur vertikalen Verteilung von Nematoden in einem Sandboden. Nematologica 15 : 44. Riggs, R.D and D.P. Schmitt (1988). Complete characterization of the race scheme for Heterodera glycines. J_. Nematol. 20 : 392-395. Riggs, R.D., L. Rakes and M.L. Hamblen (1982). Morphometric and serologic comparisons of a number of populations of cyst nematodes. J[. Nematol. 14 : 188. Riggs, R.D., M.L. Hamblen and L. Rakes (1981). Infra-species variation in reactions to host in Heterodera glycines populations. J^. Nematol. 13 : 171-179. Riggs, R.D., M.L. Hamblen and L. Rakes (1988). Resistance in commercial soybean cultivars to six races of Heterodera glycines and to Meloidogyne incognita. Ann. Appl. Nematol. 2 : 70-76. Riggs, R.D. and N.N. Winstead (1959). Studies on resistance in tomato to root-knot nematodes and on the occurrence of pathogenic biotypes. Phytopathology 49 : 716-724. Ringer, C.E., S. Sardanelli and L.R. Krusberg (1987). Investigations on the host range of the corn cyst nematode, Heterodera zeae from Maryland. Ann. Appl. Nematol. 1 : 97-106. *Ritzema Boss, J. (1888). L'Anguillule de latige (Tylenchus devastatrix Kuhn) et les maladies des plant esdues a ce nematode. Arch. Mus. Teyler 3 : 161-348. *Rivoal, R. (1977). Identification des races biologiques du nematode a kystes des cereales, Heterodera avenae Woll., en France. Ann, de Zoologie et Ecologie Animale 9 : 261-272.

Roman, J. and H. Hirschmann (1969). Morphology and morpho metries of six species of Pratylenchus. J^. Nematol. 1 : 363-386.

Ross, J.P. (1962). Physiological strains of Heterodera glycines. Plant Pis. Reptr. 46 : 766-769.

198

Ruhm, W. (1962). Zur Variabilitat der cuticular structur der unter familie Bunonematinae Sachs, 1949 sowie eine Neubeshchrei bung von Bunonema (Rhodolaimus) voulliemei n.sp. Nematologica 7 : 37-52. Sabova, M. , M. Liskova, B. Valocka and V, Vargova (1990). Pathotypes of Heterodera avenae (Nematoda : Hetero- deridae) in Czechoslovakia . Nematologica 33 : 434-439. Saha, M. and E. Khan (1988). Effect of host on morphometries of Pratylenchus zeae Graham, 1951. Indian J_. Nematol. 18 : 55-60. Sakhuja, P.K. and I. Singh (1985). A note on the occurrence of sorghum cyst nematode Heterodera sorghi in Punjab state. Indian J^. Nematol. 15 : 250. Sanchez, A. and M.C. Zancada (1987). Characterization of Heterodera avenae pathotypes from Spain. Nematologica 33 : 55-60. Sanwal, K.C. (1965). Appraisal of taxonomic characters of parietinus group of species of the genus Aphelen- choides Fisher, 1894 (Nematoda : Aphelenchoididae). Can. J. Zool. 43 : 987-995. Sanwal, K.C. and P.A.A. Loof (1967). A neotype of Aphelenchus agricola de Man, 1881 (Nematoda : Aphelenchidae). Morphological variation in the species and its taxonomic status. Nematologica 13 73-78. "Sasser, J.N. (1954). Identification and host parasite relationship of certain root-knot nematodes (Meloidogyne spp.). Univ. Mel. Agric. Exp. Sta. Bull. A-77. Sasser, J.N. (1963). Variation within and among species of Meloidogyne. Phytopathology 53 : 887-888 (Abstr.). Sasser, J.N. (1966). Behaviour of Meloidogyne spp. from various geographical locations of ten host differentials. Nematologica 12 : 97-98. *Sasser, J.N. and C.C. Carter (1982). Overview of the inter national Meloidogyne project - rational goals, implementation and progress for date. Proc. 3rd Reseach and Planning on root-knot nematodes, Meloidogyne species. Report Region II.

Saxena, S.K. and S.I. Husain (1969). Nematodes associated with vegetables in U.P. (Sivalic and Kumaon regions) First All India Nematology Symp., New Delhi, p. 10 (Abstr.).

199

Seinhorst, J.W. (1957). Some aspects of the biology and ecology of stem eelworm. Nematologica 2 (Suppl.) : 355-361. ~

Sen, A.K. (1963). Three unlisted cucurbit host plants by Heterodera trifolii. Plant Pis. Reptr. 47 : 942. Seshadri, A.R. and C.V. Sivakumar (1962). The golden nematode of potatoes (Heterodera rostochiensis Woll., 1923) a threat to potato cultivation in the Nilgiris (Madras State). Madras Agric. J. 49 : 281. Sethi, C.L. and G. Swarup (1969). Association and distribu tion frequency of plant parasitic nematode with temperate fruit trees in Himachal Pradesh. All India Nematology Symp., New Delhi, p.24 (Abstr.). Shahab, S. and S.K. Saxena (1988). Effect of soil texture on variability of perineal pattern of Meloidogyne incognita. Indian J. Nematol. 18 : 394-397. Shahina, F. and M.A. Maqbool (1990). Host range studies of Heterodera zeae and H. avenae. Pak. J_. Nematol. 8 : 79-85. Shahzad, S. and A. Ghaffar (1986). Tomato, a natural host of Heterodera zeae in Pakistan. Int. Nematol. Network Newsl. 3( ) : 38. Sharma, C., P.O. Trivedi and B. Tiagi (1985). Effect of green manuring on populations of Meloidogyne incognita on muskmelon. Int. Nematol. Network Newsl. 2(1; : 7. Sharma, N.K., Damanjeit and S.B. Sharma (1984). Incidence of maize cyst nematode, Heterodera zeae in Himachal Pradesh. Indian J^. Nematol. 15 T 198. Sharma, S.B. and G. Swarup (1983). Identification scheme for Heterodera species in India. Indian J_. Nematol. 13: 171. Sharma, S.B. and G. Swarup (1984). Cyst Forming Nematodes of India. Cosmo Publications, 152 pp. Sharma, S.B. and R. Sharma (1988). Occurrence of the sorghum cyst nematode, Heterodera sorghi in Andhra Pradesh. Indian J. Nematol. 18 : 329. Shepherd, A.M. (1959). Testing population of beet eelworm, Heterodera schachtii Schmidt for resistant breaking biotype using wild beet (Beta patellaris Moq.) as indicator. Nature Lond. 183 : 1141-1142.

200

"Sher,S.A. and M.W.Allen (1953). Revision of genus Pratylenchus (Nematoda : Tylenchidae). Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool. 57 : 4A1-470.

*Siddiqi, M.R. (1964). New records of plant and soil nematodes in India. Labdev. J_. Sci. Tech. 2 : 73. Siddiqi, M.R. (1980). The origin and phylogeny of the nematode orders Tylenchida Thorne, 1949 and Aphelenchida n.ord. Helminthol. Abstr. Ser. B, Plant Nematol. 49 : 144-170. ~ Siddiqi, M.R. (1986). Tylenchida - The parasites of plants and insects. Common. Bur. Agric. London, 633 pp. Siddiqui, M.A., A. Haseeb and M.M. Alam (1987). Evaluation of nematicidal properties in some latex bearing plants. Indian J. Nematol. 17 : 99-102. Siddiqui, M.A., M.M. Alam and S.K. Saxena (1988). Seasonal fluctuation of plant parasitic nematodes associated with certain fruit trees. Int. Nematol. Network Newsl. 5(2) : 22-23. Siddiqui, M.R. and S.I. Husain (1989). Studies on the occurrence of biotypes of Heterodera avenae in Uttar Pradesh, India. Int. Nematol. Network Newsl. 6(4) : 8-11. Siddiqui, M.R., S.I. Husain and Z.A. Siddiqui (1986a). Occurrence of certain heteroderoid .nematodes in Uttar Pradesh, India. Int. Nematol. Network Newsl. 3(2) : 8. Siddiqui, M.R., Z.A. Siddiqui and S.I. Husain (1989). A report on the occurrence of heteroderid nematodes in Madhya Pradesh state of India. Int. Nematol. Network Newsl. 6(1) : 30. Siddiqui, Z.A., M.R. Siddiqui and S.I. Husain (1986b). First report on the occurrence of Heterodera avenae Woll., 1924 in Uttar Pradesh, India. Int. Nematol. Network Newsl. 3(1) : 11. *Simon, M. (1955). L'etude du rapport entre le pH du sol et les nematodes. Publ. Inst. Beige Amelior. Better. 22 : 85-89. Singh, K. and S.R. Misra (1974). Incidence and distribution of nematodes associated with sugarcane in Uttar Pradesh. Indian J. Nematol. 4 : 182-187.

201

Singh, R.S. and K. Sitaramaiah (1967). The effect of decompo sing green leaves, saw dust and urea on the incidence of root-knot of okra and tomato. Indian Phytopath. 20 : 349-355. Slack, D.A. and M.L. Hamblen (1959). Factors influencing emergence of larvae from cysts of Heterodera glycines Ichinohe.Influence of constant temperature. Phytopathology 49 : 319-320. Sleeth, B. and H.W. Reynolds (1955). Root-knot nematode infestation as influenced by soil texture. Soil Sci. 80 : 459-461. Smart, G.C. Jr. and H.M. Darling (1963). Pathogenic variation and nutritional requirements of Ditylenchus destructor. Phytopathology 53 : 374-381. Southards, C.J. and M.P. Priest (1971). Physiological variation of 17 isolates of Meloidogyne incognita. J_. Nematol. 3 : 330.

Southards, C.J. and M.P. Priest (1973). Variation in pathogenicity of seventeen isolates of Meloidogyne incognita. J_. Nematol. 5 : 63-67. Southey, J.F. (1957). Observations on races of Ditylenchus dipsaci infecting bulbs. J^. Helminthol. 31 : 39-46. Srivastava, A.N. and C.L. Sethi (1984). Effect of soil type on reproduction of Heterodera zeae. Indian J^. Nematol. 14 : 72.

Srivastava, A.N. and C.L. Sethi (1987). Additional host records of Heterodera sorghi. Indian J. Nematol. 17 : 342. Srivastava, A.N. and G. Swarup (1975). Preliminary studies on some graminaceous plants for their susceptibility to the maize cyst nematode, Heterodera zeae Koshy _e^ aJ. , 1970. Indian J. Nematol. 5 : 257-259. Stakman, B.C. and J.G. Harror (1957). Principles of Plant Pathology. The Ronald Press Company, 581 pp.

*Starr, J.L. (1979). Plant parasitic nematodes associated with sorghum, pearl millet, groundnut, pigeonpea and chickpea at ICRISAT, Hyderabad, India, pp. 314-315. Helminthol. Abstr. Ser. B (1980) 49(4) : p. 174. Steiner, G. (1952). The soil in its relationships to plant nematodes. Proc. Soil Sci. Soc. Fla. 12 : 24-29.

20^

Stephan, Z.A., A.H. Alwan and A.H. Bandar (1977). Seasonal fluctuation on the population of citrus root nematode, Tylenchulus semipenetrans Cobb, and their effect on citrus root stocks. Year Book Plant Protection Research, p.44 (Abstr,). -'Stoen, M. (1971). Heterodera avenae, race and resistance studies. Nordisk Jordbrugsforskning 53 : 308-309. Stone, A.R. (1972). Heterodera pallida n.sp. (Nematoda : Heteroderidae), a second species of potato cyst nematode. Nematologica 18 : 591-606.

"Sturhan, D. (1969). Das Rassenproblem bei Ditylenchus dipsaci. Mitt. Biol. Bund. Anst. Ld. U. Forstw. 136 : 87-98. Stynes, B.A. (1971). Heterodera graminis n.sp. a cyst nematode from grass in Australia. Nematologica 17 : 213. Subramanian, S. and C.V. Sivakumar (1988). Morphometric and allometric variations in Pratylenchus delatteri Luc, 1957 from Tamil Nadu, India. Indian J_. Nematol. 18 : 392. Subramaniyan, S., S. Vadivelu and K. Valliammai (1990). Nematode associated with forest trees in Tamil Nadu. Int. Nematol. Network Newsl. 7(2) : 27-30. *Suit, R.E., E.P. Ducharme, H.W. Ford and T.L. Brooks (1953). Nature, causes and control of citrus decline. Florida Agric. Exp. Sta. Annual Report, 188-190. Swarup, G. and A.R. Seshadri (1974). Nematology in India - Problems and progress. In: Current Trends in Plant Pathology (Eds. S.P. Raychaudhuri and J. P. Varma). Botany Department, Lucknow University, Lucknow, India. Swarup, G., C.L. Sethi, A.R. Seshadri and K.K. Kaushal (1979). On the biotypes of Heterodera avenae the causal organism of 'molya' disease of wheat and barley in India. Indian J^. Nematol. 9 : 164-168. "1 Swarup, G. and D.R. Dasgupta (1986). Plant Parasitic Nematodes of India : Problems and Progress. lARI, New Delhi, 497 pp. Swarup, G. and N. Gokte (1986). The cyst forming nematodes. In: Plant Parasitic Nematodes of India : Problems and Progress (Eds. Swarup, G. and D.R. Dasgupta), lARI, New Delhi, 172-193.

203

Swarup, G., S.K. Prasad and D.J. Raski (1964). Some Heterodera species from India. Plant Pis. Reptr• 48 : 235.

*Tarjan, A.C. and J.J. Frederick (1974). Morphological variability of two Pratylenchus species in popula tions originating from single female. XII. Simposic International de Nematologia Grands, September 1-7, 96-97. Tarjan, A.C. and J.J. Frederick (1978). Interspecific morpho logical variation among populations of Pratylenchus brachyurus and _P. coffeae. J_. Nematol. 10 :152-160. Tarte, R. and W.F. Mai (1976). Morphological variation in Pratylenchus penetrans. J_. Nematol. 8 : 185-195. Taylor, D.P. (1978). Parasitism of banana by Heterodera oryzae. Revue Nematol. 1 : 165. Taylor, D.P. and W.R. Jenkins (1957). Variation within the nematode genus Pratylenchus with the descriptions of F^. hexincisus n.sp. and P_. subpenetrans n.sp. Nematologica 2 : 159-174. *Thomas, W.H. (1952). The benefits of flooding in the control of nematodes. Proc. Soil Sci. Fla. 76 : 77. *Thomason, I.J. and B. Lear (1959). Field and vegetable crops. Calif. Agric. 13 : 8-12. Thorne, G. (1961). Principles of Nematology. New York, Mc Graw Hill Book Company, 553 pp. *Thorne, G. and M.W. Allen (1959). Variation in nematodes. In: Plant Pathology : Problems and Progress 1908-1958 (Eds. C.S. Holton e_t a_l. ), Univ. Wis. Press, Madison 412-418. Tiyagi, S.A., M. Bano and M.M. Alam (1988). Evaluation of nematicidal potential in some plant species belonging to family Compositae. Indian J^. Nematol. 18 : 228-231. Triantaphyllou, A.A. and J.N. Sasser (1960). Variation in perineal patterns and host specificity of Meloidogyne incognita. Phytopathology 50 : 724-735. Trudgill, D.L., D.M. Parrot and A.R. Stone (1970). Morpho metries of males and larvae of ten Heterodera rostochiensis populations and the influence of resistant hosts. Nematologica 16 : 410-416. *Tyler, J. (1933). Reproduction without males in aseptic root culture of the root-knot nematode. Hilgardia 7 : 373-388.

204

Upadhyaya, R.S., A.M. Khan and S.K. Saxena (1972). iMultipli- cation of Rotylenchulus reniformis around the roots of castor in autoclaved and naturally infested soil. Indian j;. Nematol. 2 : 191-193. Upadhyaya, R.S., A.M. Khan and S.K. Saxena (1974). Influence of soil moisture on nematode population in presence and absence of host plant. Proc. 61st Sci. Cong., Nagpur (Abstr. No. 69). Upadhyaya, R.S., M. Oostenbrink and A.M. Khan (1972). The effect of different soil types on the density of nematode populations. Indian J_. Nematol. 2 : 42-53. Van Berkum, J.A. and A.R. Seshadri (1970). Some important nematode problems in India. Xth International Nematology Symp. Pascara, Italy, 136-137 (Abstr.). *Van der Laan, P.A. (1956). Oderzokingen over schimmels die parasiteren op de cysteinhoud van het aerdappel- cystenaaltje Heterodera rostochiensis (Woll.). Tijdschrift over Plantenziekten 62 : 305-331. Van Gundy, S.D. and R.L. Rackham (1961). Studies on the biology and pathogenicity of Hemicycliophora arenaria. Phytopathology 51 : 393-395. Van Weerdt, I.G. (1958). Studies on the biology of Radopholus similis (Cobb, 1893) Thorne, 1949. II. Morpho logical variation within and between progenies of single females. Nematologica 3 : 184-196. Vasudeva, R.S. (1958). Annual Report. Division of Mycology and Plant Pathology, lARI, New Delhi. Verma, A.C. and B.S. Yadav (1975). Occurrence of Heterodera cajani in Rajasthan and susceptibility of certain sesame varieties. Indian J_. Nematol. 5 : 235-237.

Verma, A.C. and B.S. Yadav (1984). Distribution and biology of the corn cyst nematode, Heterodera zeae. First Int. Cong. Nematol. Canada, p"^ 116 (Abstr.). Viglierchio, D.R. (1971). Race genesis in Ditylenchus dipsaci. Nematologica 17 : 386-392.

Walia, R.K. and H.K. Bajaj (1986). Existence of host races of pigeonpea cyst nematode, Heterodera cajani Koshy. Nematologica 32 : 117. Walia, R.K. and H.K. Bajaj (1988). Further studies on the existence of races in pigeonpea cyst nematode, Heterodera cajani. Indian J_. Nematol. 18 : 269-272.

205

Wallace, H.R. (1958). Movement of eelworms. 1. The influence of pore size and moisture content of the soil on the migration of larvae of the beet eelworm, Heterodera schachtii Schmidt. Ann, appl. Biol. A6 : 74-85. Wallace, H.R. (1958). Movement of eelworms. 2. A comparative study of the movement in soil of Heterodera schachtii Schmidt and of Ditylenchus dipsacT (Kuhn) Filipjev. Ann, appl. Biol. 4b : 86-94. Wallace, H.R. (1963). The Biology of Plant Parasitic Nematodes. Edward Arnold, VIII + 280 pp. "Wallace, H.R. (1966). Factors influencing the infectivity of plant parasitic nematodes. Proc. Rov. Soc. B. Lond. 164 : 592. Webley, D. (1970). A morphometric study of the three pathotypes of the potato cyst eelworm (Heterodera rostochiensis) recognized in Great Britain. Nematologica 16 : 107-112.

Webster, J.M. (1964). Biological races in species of plant parasitic nematodes. Parasitology 54 : 8 (Abstr.). Webster, J.M. (1972). Nematodes and biological control. In: Economic Nematology (Ed. J.M. Webster). Academic Press, New York, 469-496.

*Weischer, B. (1961). Pflanzen parasitaire nematoden in Mohrenbau. Nachr Bl dtsch. Pfl. Sch. Dienst. Beshin. 13 : 134-140.

Williams, T.D. and J. Beane (1982). Variation in cereal yield losses associated with Heterodera avenae in England and Wales. EPPO Bull. 12 : 485.

Williams, T.D. and M.R. Siddiqi (1972). Heterodera avenae. C.I.H. Description of Plant-parasitic Nematodes, Set 1, No.2.

Winslow, R.D. (1954). Provisional list of host plants of some root eelworms (Heterodera spp.). Ann, appl. Biol. 41 : 591-605.

Winslow, R.D. (1956). Seasonal variations in the hatching responses of the potato root eelworm, Heterodera rostochiensis Woll. and related species. J. Helminth. 30 : 157-164.

"Witkowski, T. (1958). Pionowe rozmieszczenie nicieni w glebie trzech roznych upraw rolnizych. Zesz. Nauk. Univ. Torun. Nauk. Mat. Przyr. Biol. 3 :Tr=T.01.

206

Wu, I.Y. (1960). Comparative study of Ditylenchus destructor Thorne, 1945 (Nematoda : Tylenc'hida) from potato, bulbous iris and dahlia, with a discussion of de Man's ratios. Can.. J. Zool. 38 : 1175-1187. Yadav, B.S. and A.C. Verma (1971). Cereal cyst eelworm and other nematodes associated with maize in Rajasthan. Indian J. Nematol. 1 : 97-98. Yadav, B.S., V. Narain, A.C. Verma and M.K. Verma (1969). Nematodes associated with fruit trees in Rajasthan. First All India Nematol. Symp., New Delhi, p.22 (Abstr.). "Yeats, G.W. (1968). The analysis of annual variation of the nematode fauna in dune sand at Himatingi Beach, NewZealand. Pedobiologia 8 : 173-207. Yuen, P.H. (1966). The nematode fauna of the regenerated woodland and grassland of broadbalk wilderness. Nematologica 12 : 195-214. Yuhara, I. (1971). Effect of soil treatment with dry organic matter powders on the population of Meloidogyne hapla attacking sugarbeets. Bull Sugarbeet Res. 13: 201-205. Zuckerman, B.M., S. Khera and A.R. Price (1964). Population dynamics of nematodes in cranberry soils. Phytopathology 54 : 654-659. Zuckerman, B.M., W.F. Mai and R.A. Rohde (1971). Plant Parasitic Nematodes, Vol. II. Academic Press, New York, 347 pp.

•Originals not seen.

•1 Swarup, G., C.L. Sethi, K.K. Kaushal and S. Nand (1982). Distribution of Heterodera avenae the causal organism of 'molya' disease of wheat and barley in India. Curr Sci. 51: 896-897.

APPENDICES

ABBREVIATIONS USED IN APPENDICES"

AE-EXP - Length from anterior end to excretory pore. AE-MB - Length from head to median bulb. BL - Body length BW - Body width BNA - Body width at anus CL - Cyst length CW - Cyst width DOGO - Dorsal Oesophageal gland opening EL - Egg length EW - Egg width PL - Fenestral length FVJ - Fenestral width GL - Gubernaculum length HTL - Hyaline tail length LEW - Lateral field width MBL - Median bulb length MBW - Median bulb width NL - Neck length OL-BL - Oesophagus length from anterior end to basal lobe OL-OV - Oesophagus length from anterior end to junction oesophago-intestinal valve

SPL - Spicule length STL - Stylet length TL - Tail length V-A - Valva to anus distance VBW - Vulval bridge width VSL - Vulval slit length

Measurements are in microns.

Appendix - 1 I Changes in iTieasurements of different characters of larvae when oat, wheat and barley seedlings were inoculated with Aligarh and Qhariabad ropulatim of H. avenae.

ALIGARH PORJLATION* GHAZIA3AD P^PJLATION* CHARACTERS/ TREATOENT * Range Mean S D 3 E C V Range KeSiTi S D S E C 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 3 9 10 11

1. BL F 470.00-560.00 500.75 28.06 6.27 5.49 454.00-575.00 5C3.45 32.74 7.32 6.44

Tl 425,00-650.00 532.75 63.19 14.13 11.88 450.00-705.00 564.25 86.16 19.27 15.27

T2 475,00-550.00 519.25 22.44 5,02 4,32 500.00-580.00 544.00 24,09 5.39 4.43

T3 480.00-620.00 536,00 41,25 9.22 7.71 450.00-560,00 506.75 45.63 10.43 9.20

LSD at 5% 25.026 33.156

LSD at 1% 33.284 44.097

2. BW F 20.00-26.00 22.75 1.68 0.38 7.39 19.00-23.00 20.75 1.71 0.38 7.21

Tl 21.00-27.00 24,20 1.73 0.39 7.57 21.00-27.00 23.90 1.29 0.29 6.19

T2 20.00-25.00 22,95 2.10 0.47 8.76 20.00-23.00 21.75 0.74 0.17 3.52

T3 22.00-25,00 24,25 1.12 0.25 4.61 18.00-24.00 20.85 1.98 0.44 8.67

LSD at 5% 1.018 0.946

LSD at 1% 1.359 1.253

3. STL F 23.00-27.00 24.70 1.66 0.37 6.45 22.00-28.00 24.55 1.78 0.40 7.24

Tl 24.00-28.^0 25.85 1,27 0.28 4.82 26.00-30.00 27.60 1.50 0.34 5.44

T2 21.00-22.00 25.15 1,78 0.40 6.96 25.00-28.JO 26.50 1.19 0.27 4.46

T3 24.00-28.00 26.65 1.23 0.27 4,74 22.00-28,00 24.50 1.05 0.23 7.73

LSD at 5% 0.944 0.912

LSD at 1% 1.255 1.213

4. DOGO F 5.00-7.00 5.75 0.72 0.16 12.46 6.00-7.00 6.17 0.76 0.17 11.59

Tl 5.00-7.00 5.95 0.69 0.15 11.53 5.00-7.00 6.10 0.79 0.18 12.92

T2 5.00-6.00 5.35 0.51 0.11 9,36 5.00-7.00 5.92 0.51 0.11 9.36

T3 5.00-7.00 5.65 0.59 0.13 10.39 5.00-6.00 5.85 0.44 0.10 7.73

LSD at 5°/. 0.388 0.442

LSD at i% 0.516 0.538

5. AE- F 67.00-86.00 75.10 5.88 1.32 7.63 65.00-78.00 72.45 4.12 0,92 5.69 MB Tl 70.00-85.00 75.95 4.90 1.10 6.46 75.00-92.00 83.25 5.33 1.19 6.40

T2 74.00-86.00 80.25 3.26 0.73 4.06 68.00-82.00 75.75 4.80 1.07 6.34

T3 72.00-86.00 79.10 4.30 0.96 5.44 72.00-86.00 79,20 4.49 1.00 5.67

LSD at 5% 3.026 3.063

LSD at 1% 4.024 4.080

MBL F 14,00-19.00 16.20 1.88 0.42 11.61 14.00-17.00 15.40 1.09 0.24 7.11

Tl 15.00-18.00 16.25 0.91 0.20 5.60 15.00-18.00 16.10 1.12 0.25 6.95 T2 15.00-18.00 1.17 16.70 0,26 7.03 15.00-17.00 15.95 0.83 0.12 T3 15.00-20.00 :.6i 16.95 0.36 9.47 14.00-18.00 15.10 1.29 0,:? LSD at S% 0.906 0.7C4 LSD at 1% 1.205 0.936 10 11

15.00 0.67 14. B-WA F 14.00,17.00 0.19 5.21 14.00-16.00 15.25 0.79 0.18 4.89 Tl 14.00-17.00 15.60 0.75 0.17 4.83 15.00-17.00 15.50 0.72 0.16 4.70

T2 14.00-18.00 15.60 1.73 0.39 10.42 14.00-16.00 15.30 0.66 0.15 4.29

T3 15.00-17.00 15.5 0 0.69 0.15 4.44 15.00-17.00 15.65 0.67 0.15 4.29 LSD at 5% 0.674 0.442

LSD at 1% 0.89 6 0.588

15. Biy F 6.12-7,25 6.67 0.34 0.07 5.15 5.96-7.43 7.02 0.45 0.10 6.93 AE-MB Tl 6.19-7.00 6.46 0.22 0.05 3.45 6.41-7.37 7.02 0.25 0.06 3.61

T2 6.10-7.84 6.76 0.48 0.11 7.15 6.00-7.65 6.69 0.40 0.09 5.91

T3 6.00-8.57 7.00 0.67 0.15 9.65 6.00-8.50 7.10 0.78 0.17 11.05

LSD at 5% 0.296 0.322

LSD at 1% 0.394 0.428

16. MBL/ F 1.11-1.83 1.46 0.15 0.03 10.14 1.17-1.67 1.33 0.12 0.03 6.83 MBW Tl 1.14-1.80 1.39 0.16 0.03 10.88 1.25-1.78 1.35 0.13 0.03 9.15

T2 1.25-1.70 1.47 0.13 0.03 9.18 1.23-1.60 1.44 0.11 0.02 7.59

T3 1.27-1.70 1.44 0.12 0.03 8.46 1.23-1.60 1.38 0.09 0.02 6.59

LSD at 5% 0.082 0.060

LSD at 1% 0.109 0.080

n. HTL/ F 1.33-1.60 1.50 0.08 0.02 5.78 1.21-1.60 1.48 0.10 0.02 7.59 STL Tl 1.25-1.68 1.53 0.11 0.02 7.39 1.30-1.81 1.50 0.13 0.03 7.74

T2 1.24-1.81 1.52 0.15 0.03 9.81 1.28-1.32 1.49 0.09 0.02 6.44

T3 1.17-1.60 1.48 0.10 0.02 6.92 1.10-1.82 1.37 0.18 0.04 12.96

LSD at 5% 0.076 0.086

LSD at 1% 0.101 0.114

18, , value F 18.65-23.20 22.00 1.01 0.23 4.54 21.37-26.71 24,50 1.53 0.34 6.67 •a' Tl 20.00-23.96 22.19 1.39 0.31 6.57 21.52-28.25 23.68 1.66 0.37 6.81

T2 17.80-26.40 21.72 2.27 0.51 10.37 21.45-27.62 25.77 2.11 0.47 8.80

T3 18.05-26.25 22.14 1.88 0.42 8.21 21.43-29.54 22.24 2.55 0.57 10.34

LSD at 5% 1.09 2 1.282

LSD at 1% 1.452 1.705

19, . value F 3.81-4.49 4.12 0.18 0.04 4.45 3.78-4.46 4.26 0.17 0.04 4.01 'b' Tl 3.64-4.62 4.25 0.24 0.05 5.92 4.00-4.73 4.22 0.23 0.05 5.35

T2 3.89-5.10 4.13 0.29 0.06 6.81 3.64-5.24 4.20 0.28 0.06 7.34

T3 3.43-5.08 4.11 0.44 0.10 10.40 3.46-5.51 3.85 0.60 0.13 13.75

LSD at 5% 0.190 0.234

LSD at 1% 0.253 0.311

20 . value F 2.36-3.47 2.92 0.30 0.07 10.20 2.80-3.17 2.97 0.12 0.03 4.00

Tl 2.61-3.33 2.91 0.20 0.05 6.74 2.50-4.27 3.17 0.52 0.11 15.62

T2 2.82-3.44 3.03 0.17 0.04 5.54 2.70-3.33 3.08 0.15 0.03 4.95

T3 2.80-3.48 3.08 0.17 0.04 5.61 2.50-3.58 2.96 0.30 0.07 10.37

LSD at 5% 0.140 0.194

LSD at 1% 0.186 0.258 i-ontd. . .Appendix 1

10 11

MBiV F 10.00-13.00 11.10 0.91 0.20 8.21 10.00-14.00 11.50 1.23 0.27 10.74 Tl 10.00-14.00 11.65 1.27 0.28 10.88 9.00-13.00 11.20 1.20 0.27 10.63

T2 10.00-14.00 11.30 1.17 0.26 10.39 9.00-12.00 11.05 0.94 0.21 8.55

T3 10.00-14.00 11.75 1.25 0.28 10.65 10.00-14.00 11.80 1.20 0,27 10.14 LSD •'a t 5°/, 0.764 0.698

LSD at 1% 1.016 0.928

8. AE-EXP F 90.00-108.00 98.90 4.93 1.10 4.77 95.00-110.00 102.95 4,27 0,96 4.15 Tl 88.00-112.00 97.00 5.32 1.19 5.49 105.00-117.00 112.60 3.62 0.81 3.21

T2 92.00-110.00 102.30 4.79 1.07 4.77 90.00-100.00 94.55 3.80 0.85 4.03 T3 98.00-116.00 109.45 4.19 0.94 3.84 95.00-106.00 100.10 3.39 0.76 3.88

LSD at 5% 3.182 2.348

LSD at 1% 4.232 3.123

9. OL-OV F 114.00-135.00 121.45 6.64 1.49 5.47 108.00-135.00 119.35 7.51 1.68 6.29 Tl 115.00-135.00 126.35 6.06 1.36 4.80 126.00-142.00 134.65 5.34 1.19 3.97

T2 118.00-135.00 125.80 5.16 1.15 4.10 120.00-136.00 129.40 4.96 1.11 3.83

T3 120.00-133.00 130.70 5.79 1.29 4.43 122.00-138.00 132.55 3.94 0.88 2.98

LSD at 5% 3.670 3.610 LSD at 1% 4.881 4.812

.-•BL F 155.00-105.00 171.05 8.57 1.92 4.87 160.00-180.00 171.00 6.59 1.47 3.86

Tl 160.00-185.00 175.45 8.93 2.00 5.20 172.00-186.00 180.10 4.08 0.91 2.26

T2 162.00-182.00 173.70 5.72 1.28 3.29 162.00-185.00 176.35 6.00 1.34 3.45

T3 170.00-190.00 178.80 5.25 1.17 2.93 150.00-178.00 171.50 6.66.68 1.49 3.89

LSD at 5% 4.538 3.268

LSD at 1% 6.035 4.453

11. LFW F 5.00-7.00 5.95 0,69 0.15 11.53 5.00-6.00 5.30 0.41 0.09 7,89 Tl 5.00-7.00 6.15 0.81 O.IB 13.21 5.00-7.00 5.70 0.73 0,16 12.85 T2 5.00-7,00 5.75 0.72 0.16 12.46 5.00-6.00 5.45 0.51 0.11 9.36 T3 5.00-7,00 6.00 0.65 0.14 10.81 5.00-7.00 5.65 0.72 0.16 12.46

LSD at S% 0.412 0.376 LSD at 1% 0.548 0.500

12. TL F 55.00-70.00 62.65 4.99 1.11 7.96 54.00-60.00 57.25 2.24 0.50 3.92

Tl 53.00-62.00 58.05 2.64 0.59 4.56 56.00-70.00 63.25 4.51 1.01 7.12

T2 55.00-72.00 62.25 5.33 1.19 8.56 54.00-70.00 60.70 4.91 1.10 8.09

T3 62.00-76.00 69.05 4.50 1,01 6.52 53.00-62.00 57,95 2,98 0.67 5.15

LSD at 5% 2.766 2.224

LSD at 1% 3.705 2.958

13. HTL F 31.00-42.00 37.20 3.21 0.72 8.23 32.00-41.00 36.45 2.86 0.64 7,83

Tl 33,00-45.00 38-50 2,31 0.52 6.15 35.00-47.00 41.10 4.08 0.91 9.92

T2 35.00-45,00 38.35 3,01 0,67 7.76 34,00-62.00 39.50 5.98 1.24 15.13

T3 34.00-46.00 39.50 3.83 0,86 9,78 32,00-40.00 36.35 2.45 0.55 6.75

LSD at 5"/. 1.952 2.556

LSD at 1% 2.596 3.399

3 4 5 6 1 2 7 8 9 10 11

21. value F 7.15-9.2S e.oo 0.62 0.15 8.11 7.69-9.83 8.88 0.62 0.14 7.14 f ^ 1 c 9.14 0.76 0.17 3.27 7.34-10,59 8.92 1.30 0.29 14.02 Tl 8.02-10.54 T2 7.38-9.62 8.24 0.65 0.14 7.89 7,50-9.67 8.95 0.65 0.14 7.35

T3 6.60-8.47 7.76 0.55 0.12 7.27 7.9B-10.27 8.78 0.45 0.10 5,10

LSD at 5% 0.418 0.536 LSD at 1% 0.556 Q.713

22. value F 3.25-4.93 4.17 0.30 0.07 7.76 3.37-4.00 3.75 0.18 0,04 4.70 1A 1 c 3.75 0.22 0.Q5 5.75 3,29-4.37 3.99 0,34 0,08 8.70 Tl 3.31-4.13 T2 3.44-4.67 3,99 0.32 0,07 7,76 3,60-4.12 3.97 0.18 0.04 4.76

T3 3.44-5.07 4.46 0,47 0.10 11.11 3,37-4.13 3.70 0,18 0.04 8.70 LSD at 5% 0.192 0.146 LSD at 1% 0.255 0.194

23. BW/BHA F 1.15-1.73 1.50 0.16 0.04 11.62 1,25-1.57 1.37 0.10 0.02 7.64

Tl 1.19-1.76 1.55 0.12 0.03 8.45 1.35-1.69 1.54 0.10 0.02 6.52

T2 1.23-1.73 1.54 0.13 0.03 8.61 1.31-1.50 1.38 0.06 0.01 4.60

T3 1.29-1.73 1.57 0.11 0.02 6.90 1.25-1.73 1.42 0.13 0.03 9.03

LSD at 5% 0.086 0.066

LSD at 1% 0.114 0.088

24. OL-OV F 1.15-1.33 1.22 0,02 0.01 3.11 1.14-1.22 1.17 0.02 0.01 1.89 AE-EXP Tl 1.19-1.38 1.29 0.05 0.01 1.65 1.22-1.43 1.21 0.07 0.01 5.08 T2 1.18-1.34 1.25 0.04 0.01 4.20 1.16-1.39 1.36 0.06 0.01 4.72

T3 1.19-1.36 1.18 0.04 0.01 3.30 1.22-1.35 1.32 0.03 0.01 2.32 LSD at 5S 0.026 0.030

LSD at 1% 0.035 0,040

25. BL/AE- F 4.57-5.34 5.08 0.22 0.05 4.52 4.43-5.14 4.94 0.17 0.04 3.53 EXP Tl 4.89-5.70 5.49 0.23 0.05 4.58 4.59-6.00 5.02 0.36 0,08 7,27 T2 4.69-6.02 5.06 0.30 0.07 5.67 4.63-7.00 5.75 0.75 0.17 13.28 T3 4.42-5.63 4.92 0.46 0.10 8.52 4.64-6.05 5.08 0.31 0.07 5.71 LSD at 5% 0.200 0.272

LSD at 1% 0.266 0.362

26. BL/STL F 17.59-22.00 20.27 1.05 0.23 5.40 17.14-23.00 20,63 1.37 0.31 7.16

Tl 19.04-22.00 20.61 0.82 0.18 3.96 18.81-22.75 20.5 3 1.08 0.24 4.89

T2 17.50-26.19 20.36 1.97 0.44 9.70 17.14-23.50 20.37 2.22 0.50 10.92

T3 17.74-23.57 20.17 2.10 0.47 10.21 17.31-21.92 19.10 1.32 0.30 6.93 LSD at S% 1.016 0.964

LSD at 1% 1.351 1'.282

27. OL-OV/ F 3.85-5.71 4.93 0.45 0.15 9.38 4.00-5.19 4.84 0.33 0.07 7.27 STL Tl 4.50-5.42 4.87 0.27 0.06 5.45 4.46-5-34 4.89 0.35 0.03 6.53

T2 4.26-5.50 4.90 0.32 0.57 6.64 4.59-5.20 4.86 0.19 0.04 3.79

TJ 4.71-5.33 4.99 0.18 0.04 3.53 4,53-5.50 5.00 0,24 0.05 5.05

LSD at 5% 0.208 0.196

LSD at 1% 0.277 0.261

Contd Appendix 1

10 11

28. EXP/ F 3,58-4,37 4,04.03 0.20 0.04 5,23 3.78-4.45 4.18 0.20 0.05 5.73 STL 3,76 0.39 4.09 0.29 0.07 6.42 Tl 3.21-4.76 3,76 0.39 0.09 10.21 3.43,4.83 4.00 0.22 3.59 0.17 0.04 4.31 T2 3.52-4.40 4.00 0.22 0.05 5.76 3.27-4.23 4,17 0.17 3.76 0.15 0.03 4.09 T3 3.90-4.56 4,17 0.17 0.04 3.94 3.53-4.12 LSD at 5% 0.170 0.133 LSD at 1% 0.226 0.183

* Each value is mean of 20 specimens. * F = Field populationj Tl = Oat, T2 = wheat; T3 = Barley.

Appendix - 2 i Changes in measurements of different characters of nvale when oat, wheat

and barley seedlings were inoculated with Aligarh & Ghaziabad population of H. avanae

ALIGARH POPULATION GHAZIABAD POPULATION CHARACTER/ TREATffiNT ^ Range Mean SD SE cv Range Mean SD SE CV

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

1. BL F. 11.5 2.00-154 0. 00 1362.00 109.07 24.39 7.95 1336.00-1470.00 1412.75 30.51 8.61 2.73

Tl 1250.00-1550 ,00 1415.00 89.10 19.92 6.34 1300.00-1500w00 1427.90 54.44 12.17 3.81

T2 1265.00-1580. .00 1422.75 89.08 19.92 6.35 1200.00-1450.00 1326.50 80.80 18.07 6.09

T3 1320.00-1510, .00 1429.00 64.02 14.32 4.48 1245.00-1565,00 1400.00 100.20 22.40 7.16

LSD at 5% 52.884 44.462

LSD at 1% 70.336 59.134

2. BH F 30.00-38.00 33.70 2.20 0.45 5.94 28.00-34.00 31.45 1.79 0.40 5.69 Tl 30.00-37.00 34.25 1.78 0.40 5.18 33.00-38.00 35.50 1.19 0.27 3.36 T2 32.00-36.00 33.90 1.77 0.40 5.08 28.00-33.00 30.15 0.89 0.20 2.53

T3 30.00-37.00 35.25 1.97 0.44 5.77 32.00-37.00 35.35 1.19 0.27 3.36

LSD at S% 1.128 1.038

LSD at 1% 1.500 1.380

3. STL F 25.00-30.00 27.55 1.70 0.38 6.17 26.00-29.00 28.90 2.84 0.64 9.84

Tl 27.00-30.00 28.80 1.28 0.29 4.45 28.00-32.00 30.00 1.34 0.34 4.45

T2 26.00-31.00 28.85 1.72 0.39 6.38 26.00-31.00 29.00 1.65 0.37 5.70

T3 27.00-31.00 29.05 1.10 0.25 3.78 28.00-30.00 29.20 0.83 0.19 2.85

LSD at 5% 0.868 1.188

LSD at 1% 1.544 1.580

4. DOGO F 5.00-7.00 6.00 0.59 0.13 10.39 5.00-7.00 6.10 0.79 0.18 12.92

Tl 5.00-7.00 6.20 0.83 0.19 13.44 6.00-7.00 6.50 0.51 0.11 7.89

T2 5.00-7.00 6.10 0.79 0.18 12.92 4.00-6.00 5.75 0.67 0.15 12.54

T3 5.00-8.00 6.35 0.87 0.20 13.78 5.00-7.00 6.05 0.69 0.15 11.34

LSD at 5% 0.492 0,396

LSD at IX 0.654 0.527

5. AE-HB F 95.00-117.00 104.75 5.44 1.22 5.19 90.00-112.00 100.25 6.46 1.44 6.32

Tl 90.00-125.00 110.10 10.39 2.32 9.44 95.00-110.00 104.20 4.74 1.06 4.55

T2 98.00-110.00 104.00 4.01 0.91 3.86 96.00-106.00 101.80 3.07 0.69 3.02

T3 100.00-125.00 115.10 6.58 1.47 5.72 99.00-108.00 104.10 3.48 0.78 3.34

LSD at 5% 4.080 2.774

LSD at 1% 5.426 3.689

6. MBL F 18.00-24.00 21.20 1.90 0.43 9.00 16,00-23.00 19.15 2.58 0.58 13.48

Tl 23,00-27.00 25.05 1,32 0.29 5,26 15.00-27.00 26.65 3.92 0.88 18.12

T2 16.00-25.00 19.60 2.23 0.51 11.63 17.00-23.00 20.65 2.08 0.47 10.09

T3 20.00-28.00 25.15 2.23 0.50 8.87 22.00-27.00 24.40 1.54 0.34 6.29

LSD at 5% 1.212 1.565

LSD at lY, 1.612 2.083 Contd....Appendix

10 11

7. MBW F 9.00-15.00 11.15 1.90 0.42 16.03 11.00-14.00 12.70 0.98 0.22 7.71

Tl 11.00-15.00 12.B5 1.04 0.23 8.09 10.00-19.00 13.85 2.66 0.59 19.21 T2 10.00-13.00 11.65 1.14 0.25 9.76 10.00-14.00 11.80 1.20 0.27 10.14

T3 11.00-15.00 13.05 1.05 0.23 8.05 12.00-16.00 13.20 1.20 0.27 9.66

LSD at 5% 0.838 0.998 LSD at 1% 1.114 1.327

8. AE-EXP F 155.00-180.00 168.05 7.93 1.77 4.72 152.00-170.00 163.65 5.34 1.19 3.26 Tl 155.00-195.00 172.00 11.48 2.57 6.68 175.00-210.00 190.70 9.34 2.09 4.90

T2 140.00-186.00 166.25 11.80 2.64 7.10 160,00-182.00 174.50 5.86 1.31 3.36

T3 160.00-187.00 176.75 7.82 1.75 4.42 170,00-190.00 182.75 6.07 1.36 3.32

. LSD at 5y. 6.528 4.152

LSD at 1% 8.682 5.522

9. OL-OV F 115.00-167.00 144.25 12.22 2.73 6.47 125.00-146.00 137.00 6.41 1.43 4.68

Tl 135.00-164.00 149.10 8.39 1.88 5.63 150.00-180.00 164.50 8.06 1.80 4.90

T2 130.00-179.00 143.75 13.89 3.11 9.66 145.00-165.00 156.15 5.68 1.27 3.64

T3 145.00-170.00 158.85 8.11 1.81 5.11 130.00-155.00 144.65 7.29 1.63 5.04

LSD at 5% 7.032 4.346

LSD at 1% 9.352 5.780

10. OL-BL F 205.00-265.00 235.45 14.43 3.33 6.13 200.00-220.00 208.80 7.34 1.64 3.51

Tl 220.00-275.00 244.25 19.21 4.30 7.89 245.00-280.00 259.95 10.17 2.27 3.91

T2 190.00-212.00 205.25 6.41 1.43 3.12 230.00-265.00 249.05 11.34 2.54 4.55

T3 235.00-265.00 254.74 9.81 2.19 3.87 206.00-240.00 232.75 10.29 2.30 4.60

LSD at 5% 8.248 5.642

LSD at 1% 10.969 7.504

11. LFW F 6.00-7.00 6.65 0.49 0.11 7.36 6.00-8.00 6.75 0.64 0.14 9.46

Tl 5.00-7.00 6.35 0.27 0.16 11.46 6.00-8.00 6.95 0.60 0.13 8.70

T2 6.00-7.00 6.60 0.50 0.11 7.62 6.00-8.00 6.80 0.62 0.14 9.05

T3 6.00-8.00 6.95 0.76 0.17 10.92 6.00-7.00 6.65 0.49 0.11 7.36

LSD at 5% 0.382 0.382

LSD at 1% 0.508 0.508

12. SPL F 28.00-36.00 32.60 2.19 0.49 6.71 32.00-36.00 34.35 1.31 0.29 3.81

Tl 30.00-37.00 34.80 1.76 0.39 5.07 35.00-38.00 36.40 1.09 0.24 3.01

T2 28.00-38.00 32.10 3.37 0.75 10.50 30.00-33.00 31.75 1.07 0.24 3.37

T3 33.00-38.00 36.20 1.79 0.40 4.96 32.00-37.00 35.40 1.60 0.34 4.53

LSD at 5% 1.312 1.102

LSD at 1% 1.745 1.466

13. GL F 11.00-13.00 12.25 0.79 0.18 6.42 10.00-12.00 11.35 0.85 0.19 7.56

Tl 10.00-13.00 11.10 1.12 0,25 10.08 10.00-13.00 11.85 1,00 0,22 8.56

T2 10.00-13.00 11.50 1.00 0.22 8.70 11.00-13.00 11.90 0.72 0.16 6.03

T3 10.00-13.00 11.90 0.91 0,20 7.66 10.00-12.00 11.25 0.79 0,18 6.99

LSD at 5% 0.576 0.520

LSD at 1% 0.766 0.692

10 11

14. Bl/AE- F 12,02-13.92 13.02 0.48 0.11 3.63 12.86-14.51 14.09 0.46 0.10 3,39 MB Tl 12,13-13.81 12.82 0.48 0.11 3.63 12.95-15.22 13.71 0.56 0,12 4.03 T2 10.80-15.56 13.68 1.10 0.25 8.59 12.75-14.76 13.04 0.60 0.13 4.37 T3 10.27-14.51 12.45 0.36 0.03 2.61 12.86-14.51 13.45 0.46 0.10 3.39

LSD at 5% 0.420 0.344

LSD at 1% 0.559 0.457

15. MBL/ F 1.50-2.00 1.87 0.11 0.02 6.17 1.25-1.92 1.52 0.19 0.04 12.19 MBW Tl 1.11-2.27 1.94 0.29 0.07 16.50 1.67-2.17 1.92 0.11 0.03 5.93

T2 1.11-2.00 1.69 0.15 0.03 7.93 1.23-2.00 1.73 0.19 0.04 11.88

T3 1.73-2.17 1.93 0.11 0.03 5.94 1.20-2.08 1.89 0.27 0.06 16.98

LSD at 554 0.116 0.122

LSD at 1°^ 0.154 0.162

16. Value F 37.71-45.76 40.42 2.33 0.52 5.57 42.29-46.15 44.95 1.03 0.23 2.55

Tl 36.84-46.09 41.48 2,95 0.66 7.07 38.50-42.69 40.24 2.48 0.55 5.51

T2 36.35-43.94 41.97 1.89 0.42 4.69 35.29-40.57 37.83 1.72 0,39 4,62

T3 37.71-45.76 40.62 2.33 0.52 5.57 38.33-42.29 39.60 1.03 0.23 2.55

LSD at 5% 1.616 1.444

LSD at 1% 2.149 1.920

17. value F 8.87-10.21 9.44 0.39 0.09 4.12 8.00-12.06 10.34 0.35 0.08 4.08 'b' 9.60 0.39 0.09 4.12 8.33-9.37 8.69 0.29 0.06 3.32 Tl 8.87-10.21 9.83 0.37 0.08 4.25 8.27-9.54 8.52 0.38 0,08 3.88 T2 8.83-10.35 8.99 0.85 0.19 8.68 9.34-10.21 9.60 0.37 0,08 3.60 T3 7.80-11.17 0.366 0.220 LSD at 5% 0.487 0.293 LSD at 154 18. value F 5.02-6.22 5.78 0.19 0,04 2.74 5,20-5.80 5.50 0.19 0.04 3.51 •6' 5.78 0.48 0.11 8.01 5,00-5.81 5.51 0.22 0,05 4,19 Tl 4.91-6.83 6.96 0.19 0.04 2.74 6.59-6.95 6,77 0.10 0.02 1.44 T2 6,63-7.32 5.63 0.28 0.06 4.99 5.68-6.52 6.06 0.34 0.07 5,38 T3 5.07-5.96 0.216 0.148 LSD at 5% 0.287 0.197 LSD at 1% 19. BL/AE- F 7.30-10.07 8.10 0.78 0.17 9.16 7.87-9.89 8.63 0.26 0.06 3.53 EXP 8.24 0.41 0.09 5.25 6.59-7.84 7.46 0.33 0.07 4.57 Tl 7.94-8.83 8.57 0.26 0.06 3.10 7.18-8.07 7.64 0.24 0.05 2.76 T2 7.95-8.76 8.09 0.78 0.17 9.16 7.24-8.17 7,66 0.42 0.09 5.23 T3 7.30-10.07 0.312 0.214 LSD at 5% 0.415 0.285 LSD at 1% 49.4 2 0.59 0.13 1.21 45.33-50.69 48.87 1,41 0.32 2.92 20. BL/STL F 48.67-50.99 49.22 0.59 0.13 1.21 35.26-55.77 47,75 4.03 0,90 8,11 Tl 48.67-50.39 49.37 2.35 0.53 4.99 41.38-48.33 45.73 2.1C 0.47 4.73 T2 48.67-50.83 49.13 4.41 0.98 8.61 44.83-50.48 48.10 1.61 0.36 3.35 T3 41.67-59.61 LSD at 5% 1.586 1.656

LSD at 1% 2.109 2.202

Contd Appendix - 2

10 11

21. OL-OV/ F 4.83-5.56 5.24 0.21i 0.05 4.09 4.64-5.34 4.75 0.20 0.05 4.13 STL 5.25 0.47 0.10 8.61 4.23-6.67 5.43 Tl 4.42-6.35 5.25 0.47 0.10 8.61 4.23-6.67 5.43 0.46 0.10 8.02 4.94 0.32 0.07 6.51 4.94-5.64 5.31 T2 4.62-5.77 4.94 0.32 0.07 6.51 4.94-5.64 5.31 0.18 0.04 3.45 5.51 0.25 0.05 4.49 4.68-5.28 4.95 T3 5.00-5.93 5.51 0.25 0.05 4.49 4.68-5.28 4.95 0.16 0.03 3.32 0.214 0.182 LSD at 5% 0.285 0.242 LSD at 1% 22. AE-EXP/ F 5.64-6.67 6.12 0.31 0.07 5.02 5.81-6.50 5.66 0.19 0.04 3.08 STL 6.06 0.60 0.13 9.91 5.13-7.78 6.36 Tl 5.17-7.15 6.06 0.60 0.13 9.91 5.13-7.78 6.36 0.49 0.11 7.43 5.74 0.20 0.05 3.52 5.80-6.50 6.10 T2 5.50-6.29 5.74 0.20 0.05 3.52 5.80-6.50 6.10 0.19 0.04 3.08 6.14 0.31 0.07 5.02 5.93-6.86 6.27 T3 5.64-6.67 6.14 0.31 0.07 5.02 5.93-6.86 6.27 0.15 0.03 2.77 0.240 0.196 LSD at 5% LSD at 1% 0.319 0.261

* Each value is mean of 20 specimena; F = Field population; Tl = Cat; 'J2 = Wheat; T3 = Barley

Appendix - 3 i Cinnyeo tn mo igu i.ei"«>n tn o£ dlECaront ch-Trnct=rB or rcm^lo, aynLoi F'j-J "n'l Uuti<'

top structures when oat whpat, & barley seedlings were inoculated with Aligarh and Ghaziabad population of H. avenae

CHARACTER/ ALIGARH POPULATION CJIAZIABAD POPULATION TREATMENT * Range Mean SD SE CV Range Mean SD SE CV 8 10 11

BL F 425.00-6T0.00 527.35 80.97 18.11 15.07 400,00-650.CO 518.00 76.34 17.07 14.74

Tl 435.00-720.00 557.00 94.54 21.14 16.97 520.00-650„OO 596.50 22.89 5.12 3.84

T2 490.00-650.00 548.25 53.59 11.98 9.77 460,00-710.00 567.50 71.57 16.00 12.61

T3 450.00-725.00 562,50 78.66 17.59 13.98 480.00-750.00 589.50 87.37 19.54 14.82

LSD at 5% 27.643 35.430

LSD at !•/. 36.765 47.122

. BW F 270.00-390.00 306.60 32.97 7.37 13.37 250.00-360.00 299.50 36.34 8.13 12.13

Tl 210.00-325,00 262.50 28.81 6,44 10.98 270.00-465.00 341.61 57.09 12.77 16.71

T2 175.00-350.00 268.25 56,25 12.58 20.98 250.00-460.00 322.00 63.89 14.29 19.84

T3 250.00-450.00 335.50 61.28 13.70 18.26 250.00-450.00 339.50 70.73 15.31 20.83

LSD at 5% 21.704 19.260

LSD at 154 28.866 25.616

3. 3TL F 20.00-24.00 22.05 1.32 0.29 5.97 21.00-24.00 22.35 1.04 0.23 4.65

Tl 21.00-27,00 23.50 2,14 0,48 9,11 25.00-30.00 27.45 1.57 0.35 5.73

T2 20.00-28.00 24.65 2,28 0.51 9.24 25.00-30.00 27.15 1.75 0.39 6.47

T3 23.00-28.00 25.60 1.35 0.30 5,29 24,00-30.00 26.90 2.02 0.45 7.52

LSD at 5% 1.098 1.044

LSD at 1% 1.460 1.388

4. DOGO F 5.00-7.00 5,80 0.77 0.17 13.24 4.00-7.00 ^.90 1.05 0.23 19.11

ffl 4.00-6.00 5.30 0.85 0.19 16.71 5.00-8.00 6.50 1.15 0.26 17.64

T2 4.00-7.00 5.55 0.94 0.21 17.02 5.00-7.00 6.15 0.81 0.18 13. 21

T3 5.00-7.00 5.95 0.76 0.17 12.76 5.00-7.00 6.00 0.79 0.18 13.24

LSD at 5% 0.508 0.598

LSD at 1% 0.676 1.590

5. AE-MB F 70.00-120.00 85.95 13.36 2.99 15,55 80.00-110.00 98.20 7.56 1.69 7.70

Tl 67.00-130.00 100.45 16,71 3.74 16.63 75.00-120.00 105.40 12.18 2.72 11.56

T2 65.00-110.00 96.15 17.40 3.89 17.72 90.00-120.00 101.10 8.99 2.01 8.89

T3 95.00-120.00 100.70 4.67 1.04 4.64 92,00-120.00 101.85 9.13 2.04 8.96

LSD at 5X 9.334 5.700

LSD at 1% 12.414 7.581

6. MBL F 27.00-37,00 33.45 3.33 0.74 9.96 27.00-36.00 31.55 3.10 0.69 9.83

Tl 30.00-38.00 33.70 2,62 0.58 7,77 32.00-38.00 35.80 1.51 0.34 4.21

T2 32.00-37.00 35.40 1,39 0,31 3.93 27.00-38.00 34.65 2.68 0.60 7.74

T3 32.00-38.00 35.80 1.79 0.40 5.01 32.00-38.00 35,25 1.86 0.42 5.28

LSD at Sy, 1.550 1.474

LSD at 1% 2,061 1.950

10 11

7. MBW F 29.00-35.00 3:.80 1.96 0.44 6.17 27.00-36.00 31.00 2.69 0.60 8.69

Tl 21.00-36,00 30.5 5 3.88 0.76 11.06 28,00-36.00 33.60 2.30 0.51 7.06 T2 27.00-36.00 31.95 2.57 0.57 6.07 24.00-35.00 30.25 2.45 0.55 8.36

T3 31.00-37.00 33.40 1.76 0.39 5.27 28.00-36.00 32.15 2.28 0.51 7.08

LSD at 5y. 1.530 1.576

LSD at 1% 2.035 2.096

8. AE-EXP F 95.00-165.00 136.95 19.26 4.31 14.06 110.00-160.00 143.20 14.01 3.13 9.78

Tl 115.00-178.00 153.45 15.56 3.48 10.14 135.00-175,00 160,30 11.03 2.47 6.88

T2 75.00-125.00 94.60 13.03 2.91 13.78 130.00-170.00 153.40 11.03 2.47 7.19

T3 142.00-168.00 156.70 7.21 1.61 4.60 115.00-165.00 149.95 11.81 2.64 7.87

LSD at 5% 9.330 7.310

LSD at 1% 13.074 9.722

9. NL F IXO.00-155.00 133.60 15.08 3.37 15.28 130.00-175.00 159.15 15.55 3.48 9.77

Tl 160.00-180.00 167.00 6.65 1.49 3.97 155.00-182.00 172.95 .7.91 1.77 4.57

T2 120.00-190.00 159.45 18.53 4.14 11.62 130.00-182.00 165.20 12.97 2.90 7.64

T3 155.00-185.00 166.25 28.10 6.28 18,56 150.00-185.00 170,05 7.55 1.69 4.40

LSD at 5% 12.692 6.276

LSD at 1% 16.880 8.347

10. V-A F 30.00-45.00 36.45 4.03 0.90 11.06 30.00-40.00 36.15 2.64 0,59 7.34

Tl 32,00-43.00 37.68 4.28 0,96 11,16 35,00-43,00 37.78 2.53 0,56 6.68

T2 32.00-40.00 35.70 2.00 0.45 5.77 33.00-40.00 36.20 1.76 0.39 4,88

T3 32.00-42.00 37.55 2.86 0,64 7.60 32,00-45.00 37.60 3.42 0.77 9,11

LSD at 5% 2.028 1.658

LSD at IX 2.697 2.205

11. MBL/ F 1.00-1.15 1,07 0.04 0.01 3.98 0.97-1.18 1.08 0.07 0.01 6.28 MBW Tl 0.87-1.43 1.10 0.11 0.02 10.15 1.00-1.24 1.10 0.15 0.03 6.44

T2 1.00-1.29 1.12 0,09 0.02 8.05 1.00-1.30 1.12 0.09 0,02 7.81

T3 1.00-1.19 1.06 0.06 0.01 5.42 1.00-1.27 1.08 0.07 0.01 6,34

LSD at 5% 0.048 0.042

LSD at 1% 0.064 0,056

12.CL F 550.00-950.00 765.35 134.25 30.02 18.51 590.00-950.00 735.75 111.72 24.98 14.40

Tl 650.00-980.00 822.50 124.84 27.92 15.18 575.00-1200.00 836.25 150.62 33.68 18.25

T2 640.00-950.00 793.75 85.45 19.11 10.77 550.00-1000.00 765.75 124.77 27.90 16.29

T3 650.00-1050.00 846.25 117.39 26.25 14.26 650.00-1050.00 826.75 124.24 27.78 15.03

LSD at 554 42.246 47.458

LSD at 1% 56.187 63.119

13. CW F 260.00-650.00 458.50 102.20 22.85 18.39 380.00-680.00 498.75 53.77 12.02 10.78

Tl 450.00-650.00 534.00 49.33 11.14 9.33 390.00-800.00 558.00 111.68 24.97 2C.3S

T2 400.00-625.00 531-00 74.51 16.66 14.03 350.00-675.00 516.75 140,39 23.34 20,20

T3 275.00-750.00 568.00 10-1.46 23.36 22.14 380.00-650.00 502.75 73.87 16.52 14.69

LSD at 5% 39.792 40.921

LSD at 1^ 52.923 54.425

12 3456 7 89 10 11

14. Cl/CW F 1.38-1.88 1.67 0.15 0.03 10.04 1.23-1.74 1.48 0.15 0.03 10.11 Tl 1.27-1.78 1.54 0.14 0.03 9.14 1.24-2.00 1.49 0.19 0.04 11.43

T2 1.13-2.20 1.49 0.24 0.05 14.88 1.21-1.84 1.55 0.17 0.04 10.92

T3 1.25-2.00 1.50 0.16 0.03 10.69 1.29-1.90 1.63 0.22 0.05 14.73 LSD at 5% 0.112 0.124 LSD at l;'. 0.149 0.165

15. EL F 125.00-135.00 129.95 3.89 0.87 2.99 120.00-135.00 127.25 5.25 1.17 4.13 Tl 110.00-130.00 123.90 4.90 1.09 3.95 100.00-130.00 117.65 6.87 1.54 5.84 T2 120.00-145.00 129.60 8.77 1.96 6.77 120.00-136.00 129.45 4.68 1.05 3.62

T3 125.00-150.00 136.25 6.46 1.44 4.74 115.00-135.00 126.75 5.91 1.32 4.66

LSD at 5y. 3.766 3.874

LSD at 1% 5.011 5.152

16. EW F 50.00-62.00 54.25 4.17 0.93 7.67 45.00-60.00 53.40 4.43 0.99 8.29 Tl 52.00-65.00 59.15 4.74 1.06 6.01 50.00-65.00 58.85 3.73 0.84 6.50 T2 50.00-70.00 56.25 5.02 1.12 8.93 40.00-55.00 51.15 3.90 0.87 7.62

T3 55.00-70.00 61.75 4.94 1.10 8.00 50.00-60.00 55.25 3.63 0.81 6.39

LSD at 5% 3.012 2.360 LSD at 1% 4.010 3.139

17. EL/EH F 1.93-2.54 2-39 0.23 0.05 9.00 2.17-2.60 2.38 0.11 0.02 4.88

Tl 1.90-2.34 2.19 0.16 0.04 7.09 1.18-2.70 2.00 0.20 0.04 8.24

T2 1.92-2.54 2.32 0.19 0.04 8.52 2.08-2.70 2.59 0.19 0.04 8.50

T3 2.00-2.46 2.21 0.13 0.03 5.90 2.13-2.75 2.31 0.15 0.03 6.44

LSD at 554 0.110 0.106

LSD at !•/. 0.146 0.144

18. FL F 38.00-52.00 42.50 3.68 0.82 8.05 38.00-50.00 45.50 4.01 0.90 8.81

Tl 40.00-52.00 46.35 3.94 0.88 8.49 44.00-55.00 48.70 2.45 0.55 5.14

T2 37.00-55.00 45.30 4.51 1.01 9.95 40.00-52.00 46.20 4,34 0.97 9.38

T3 35.00-57.00 46.60 5.25 1.17 11.26 40.00-55.00 47.00 4.27 0.95 9.08

LSD at 5% 2.928 2.428

LSD at 1% 3.894 3.229

19. FW F 18.00-25.00 21.95 1.76 0.39 8.02 20.00-25.00 22.30 1.69 0.38 7,57

Tl 17.00-25.00 20.65 2.48 0.55 11.99 21.00-31.00 24.70 2.30 0.51 9.30

T2 20.00-26.00 23.05 2.28 0.51 9.49 20.00-27.00 23.80 2.57 0.57 10.77

T3 21.00-30.00 24.65 2.11 0.47 3.56 17.00-28.00 22,55 2.84 0.63 12.58

LSD at 5% 1.366 1.522

LSD at 1% 1.817 2.024

20. VBW F 5.00-8.00 6.50 0.89 0.20 13.67 5.00-9.00 6.45 1.28 0.28 19.79 Tl 5.00-9.00 6.60 1.23 0.27 18.65 5.00-10.00 7.25 1.60 0.36 20.90

T2 5.C0-9.O0 6.60 1,43 0,32 21.65 5.00-10.00 7.15 1.63 C.36 22.31

T3 5.00-10,00 7.30 1,96 0.44 26.13 5,00-9,00 6,45 1.23 C.28 19.79 LSD at 5% 0,878 0.832

LSD at 1% 1.168 1.106

Contd.... Appendix - 3

8 9 10 11

21. VSL F 9.00-12.00 9.95 1.10 0.25 11.05 8.00-10.00 9.35 0.67 0.15 7.17

Tl 9.00-13.00 10.09 0.79 0.18 7.96 11.00-13.00 12.15 0.31 0.18 6.69

T2 8.00-12.00 9.80 0.95 0.21 9.71 8.00-11.00 9.10 0.97 0.22 10.64

T3 10.00-13.00 11.80 1.06 0.24 8.95 9.00-12.00 9.85 0.87 0.2o' 6.88 LSD ot 5% 0.632 0.572 LSD at 1% 0.840 0.761

22. FL/FW F 1.59-2.20 1.94 0.16 0.04 8.55 1.60-2.33 2.04 0.20 0.04 10.55

Tl 1.82-2,51 2.27 0.20 0,04 9.64 1.87,2.40 2.05 0.18 0.04 8.21 T2 1.53-2.40 1.99 0.20 0.04 10.39 1.68,2.29 1.98 0.17 0.04 8.69

T3 1.68-2.20 1.89 0.17 0.04 7.92 1.68-2.40 2.08 0.21 0.05 10.24

LSD at 5% 0.120 0.120

LSD at 1% 0.160 0.160

* Each value is mean of 20 specimens; * F = Field population; Tl = Oat; T2 = Wheat; T3 = Barley Appendix - 4 J Oiaiigos in inee^ureiuenLs of ditferent characters ot isrtvae coiiectea

from wheat grown in different soil types

* * CHARACTES/ ALIGHSJI POPULATION GHAZ1AB;'LD F<3K)LATI0K TREATMEtrr « • Range 1 Mean SD SE cv 1 Range j Mean SD SE i cv

1 2 1 3 4 5 6 7 1 8 9 10 ' 11

1 . BL F 470.00-560.00 500.7 5 28,06 6.27 5.49 454.00-575.00 508.45 32.74 7.32 6.44 Tl 490.00-535.00 510.00 14.60 3.26 2.86 475.00-510.00 493.50 11.01 2.46 2.23

T2 480.00-550.00 509.00 17.96 4.102 3.53 490.00-550.00 529.00 12.50 2.80 2.54

T3 490.00-550.00 524.00 17.81 3.98 5.28 465.00-555.00 510.00 22.99 5.14 4.51

T4 460.00-570.00 525.00 29.42 6.58 5.60 460.00-530.00 498,00 18.74 4.19 3.76

T5 475.00-565.00 513.75 25.38 5.68 4.94 460.00-535.00 497.00 23.14 5.17 4.65

LSD at 5% 22.555 19.689

LSD at 1% 29.872 26.076

2. BW F 20.00-26.00 22.75 1.68 0.38 7.39 19.00-23.00 20.75 1.71 0.38 7.21

Tl 19.00-24.00 21.50 1.36 0.30 6.03 20.00-24.00 21.65 1.31 0.29 5.99

T2 19.00-25.00 22.10 1.62 0.36 7.33 21.00-24.00 22.20 1.15 0.26 5.19

T3 20.00-25.00 22.55 1.19 0.27 5.28 19.00-23.00 21.57 1.36 0.30 6.18

T4 19.00-25.00 21.35 1.31 0.29 6.13 20.00-24.00 21 .80 1.15 0.26 5.28

T5 20.00-25.00 22.00 1.38 0.31 6.26 20.00-26.00 22 .05 1.36 0.30 6.15

LSD at 5% 1.054 0. 870

LSD at 1% 1.396 1. 152

3. STL F 23.00-27.00 24.70 1.66 0.37 6.45 22.00-28.00 24 .65 1.78 0.40 7.24

Tl 24.00-27.00 25.45 0.99 0.22 3.92 22.00-26.00 23 .55 1.63 0.36 6.07

T2 25.00-26.00 26.45 1.05 0.23 3.97 25.00-29.00 26 .05 1.36 0.30 5.21

T3 24.00-28.00 25.90 1.29 0.29 4.99 25.00-30.00 27.10 1.45 0.32 5.34

T4 24.00-28.00 26.15 1.18 0.26 4.52 23.00-29.00 26.20 1.58 0.35 6,02

T5 24.00-27.00 25.42 1.43 0.32 5.50 23.00-29.00 25.90 1.59 0.35 6.12

LSD at 5% 0.761 0.916

LSD at 1% 1.008 1.213

4. DOGO F 5.00-7.00 5.75 0.72 0.16 12.46 6.00-7.00 6.17 0.76 0.17 11.59

Tl 4.00-7.00 5.50 0.89 0.20 16.15 4.00-7.00 5.70 0.99 0.22 18.42

T2 5.00-7.00 5.85 0.74 0.17 12.74 5.00-7.00 5.85 0.81 0.18 14.38

T3 5.00-7.00 5.80 0.83 0.19 14.37 4.00-7.00 5.80 0.95 0.21 16.40

T4 5.00-7.00 5.95 0.83 0.18 13.87 5.00-7.00 6.00 0.79 0.18 13.24

T5 5.00-7.00 5.95 0.89 0.20 14.91 5.00-7.00 5.68 0.81 0.18 15.78

LSD at 5% 0,4 26 0.564

LSD at 1% 0.564 0.747

5. AE-M3 F 67.00-86.00 75.10 5.88 1.32 7.63 65.00-78.00 72.45 4.12 0.92 5.69

Tl 65.00-90.CO 74.05 6,21 1.39 8.39 65.00-76.00 70.10 3.29 0,74 4.69

T2 65.00-90.00 75.55 5.24 1.17 6.78 65.00-78.00 72.40 3.54 0.79 4.90

T3 73.00-95.00 80.90 6.44 1.44 7.54 65.00-85.00 75.80 5.19 1.16 6.84

T4 73.00-90.CO 80.60 5.46 1.22 6.93 65.00-90.00 75.00 6,42 1.44 B.56

T5 7C.00-85.00 74.25 4.27 0.95 5.74 63.C0-80.00 72.20 5.75 1.29 7,97

LSD at 5% 2.620 2.860

LSD at 15'. 3.470 3.788

Cotitd ,,eadlx - -1

3 10 11

? 14.00-lS.OO 16.20 1.88 0.42 11.61 14.c:-17.00 15.40 1.09 0.24 7.11 Tl 15.00-18.00 16.40 0.99 0.22 6.06 14.00-18.00 16.00 1.40 0.31 0.64 T2 15.00-18.00 16.30 1.03 0.23 6.33 IS.00-18.00 16,25 0.91 0.20 6.60 T3 l5.00-n.00 15.95 0.33 O.iS 5.18 14.00-19.00 16.20 1.29 0.29 8.03 T4 14.00-19.00 16,05 1.23 0.28 7.69 15.00-18.00 16.30 0.86 0.19 5.30 T5 14.00-17.00 15,60 0.88 0.20 5.66 14.00-17.00 15.75 0.91 0.20 5.78 LSD at 5X 0.874 0.674 LSD at 1% 1.156 0.89 2

MBW f 10.00-13.00 11.10 0.91 0.20 8.21 10.00-14.00 11.50 1.23 0.27 10.74 Tl 9.00-13.00 11.15 1.06 0.24 8.66 10.00-14.00 11.80 1.20 0.27 10.14

T2 10.00-14.00 12.05 1.36 0.30 11.25 10.00-13.00 11.70 1.08 0.24 9.24 T3 lO.uO-15.00 11.90 1.33 0.30 11.21 10.00-15.00 12.00 1.34 0.30 11.15

T4 10.00-14.00 .12.20 1.23 0.27 10.99 lO.uO-13.00 11.80 1.00 0.22 8.52

T5 9.00-13.CO 10.80 0.95 0.21 8.81 10.00-13.00 11.25 1.02 0.23 9.06 LSD at b% 0.600 0.636

LSD at IX a 795 0,84 3

8. kZ-ZX? r 90.QO-10Q.OO 98.90 4.93 l.lQ 4.77 95.-110.00 102.95 4.24.277 0.95 4.15 Tl 90.00-110.00 100.70 4.97 1.11 4.94 75.00-102,00 94.60 7.73 1.73 8.17 T2 95.00-115.00 104.55 4,84 1.08 4.63 80.00-110.00 94.65 8.48 1.90 8.96 T3 96.00-115.00 104.35 4.50 1.01 4.31 85.00-107.00 100,60 5.79 1,29 5,87 T4 95.00-110.00 102.80 4.75 1.06 4.62 85.00-115.00 105.05 7.64 1.71. 7,79 T5 85.00-110.00 102.90 5.9U 1.34 5.81 80.00-110,00 100,05 9.32 2,08 9.94 LSD at 5% 2,884 2.351 LSD at 1% 3.819 3.113

9. OL-OV F 114.00-135.00 121,45 6.64 1.49 5.47 108,00-135.00 119.35 7.51 1.68 6.29

Tl 105.00-140.00 121.20 9.47 2.12 7.82 95.00-130.00 112.90 11.18 2.50 9.90

T2 115,00-155.00 129.75 12.74 2.85 9,82 105.00-135.00 116.00 8.83 1.98 7.65 T3 115,00-140.00 126.95 6.92 1.S5 5,45 105.00-135.00 119.55 7.92 1.77 6.63 T4 105.U0-140.00 122.80 8.52 1.90 6.94 100.00-138.00 119.35 11.87 2.65 9.95 T5 110.00-140.00 127.25 7.16 1,60 5.63 102.00-135.00 120.15 10.38 2.32 8.64 LSD dt iX 3.399 3.040 LSD at 1% 4.502 4.027 10. OL-BL F 155.00-105.00 171.05 8.57 1.92 4.87 160.00-180.00 171.00 6.59 1.47 3,86 Tl 165.00-185.00 174.65 5.84 1.31 3,34 125.00-190.00 159.00 15.94 3.56 10.03

T2 155,00-195.00 178.10 9.49 2.12 5.33 150.00-190.00 166.10 11.21 2.51 6.75

T3 160,00-190,00 177.25 S.81 1.97 4.97 165.00-195.00 174.15 8.44 1.89 4,77

T4 150.00-190.00 175.00 10.56 2,36 6,03 150.C3-195.00 175.65 12.61 2.B2 7.22

TS 165.00-195.00 181.00 7.36 1,65 4,07 150.00-195.00 172.20 12.98 2.90 7.53 LSD at 5% 3.972 3.956

LSD at IX 5.260 5,239

11. LFW F 5.00-7.00 5.95 0.69 0.15 11,53 5.00-6.00 5.30 0.41 0.09 7,S9 Tl 5.00-6.00 5.55 0.50 O.U U.97 5.00-6.00 5.40 0.5Q 0.11 9.31

T2 5.00-6.00 5.60 0.51 0.11 9.20 5.00-5.00 5.50 0.51 O.U 9.33

T3 5.00-6.00 5.60 0.50 O.U 8.97 5.0O-7.0O 5.55 0.60 0.13 10.90

T4 5.00-5.00 5.65 0.49 O.U 9.15 5.0C-S.OO 5,35 0.49 o.n 9.15

CX)n td...

10 11

T5 5.00-6.00 5.55 0,51 0.11 9,36 5,00-7,00 5.50 0,61 0.14 11,C^ LSD at 5% 0.361 0.329

LSD at ly. 0,478 0.436 L 2. TL F 55.00-70.00 62,65 4.99 1.11 7,96 54.00-60.00 57.25 2. 24 0.50 3.92 Tl 55.00-66.00 58.95 3.05 0.68 5.18 40.00-65.00 57,15 5,04 1,13 8.82

T2 54,00-62.00 58.00 2.60 0.56 4.47 50.00-63.00 57.75 3.06 0,68 5.30

T3 56.00-66.00 61.85 3,20 0.72 5.44 55.00-65.00 60,20 3.30 0,74 5.49 T4 59.00-70.00 64.75 4.06 0.91 6.80 55.00-65.00 60.90 2.99 0.67 4,91

T5 53.00-65.00 60.05 3.02 0.67 5.02 55.00-66.00 59.00 2.36 0,64 4.85

LSD at 5% 2.035 1.726

LSD ia t 1% 2.696 2.286

13. HTL F 31.00-42.00 37.20 3.21 0.72 8.23 32.00-41.00 36.45 2.36 0.64 7.83

Tl 33.00-40.00 36.50 2.23 0.50 6.10 25.00-40.00 35.75 3.73 0.83 10.42

T2 31.00-40.00 36.00 2.97 0.66 8.26 29.00-40.00 36.45 3.02 0.67 8,28

T3 29.00-42.00 36.95 3,56 0.80 9.64 31.00-42.00 37.85 3.67 0,82 9.71

T4 33.00-44.00 39.15 3.33 0.74 8.73 33.00-43.00 38.15 3.52 0.79 9.03

T5 33.00-42.00 37.95 2.56 0.57 6.76 31.00-42.00 37.10 2.63 0.59 7,10

LSD at S% 1.809 1,683

LSD at 154 2.397 2,229

14. BWA F 14.00-17.00 15.00 0,87 0.19 5.21 14.00-16.00 15,25 0.79 0.18 4.89

Tl 14.00-17.00 15.55 0.89 0.20 5.70 11.00-16.00 15,10 1.12 0,25 7.41

T2 14.00-17.00 15.20 1.00 0.22 6.61 14.00-16.00 15.30 0.57 0,13 3,73

T3 14.00-17.00 15.50 0.76 0.17 4.91 15.00-17.00 15.70 0.73 0,16 4,67

T4 14.00-16.00 14.95 0.69 0.15 4.59 14.00-17.00 15,20 0.83 0.19 5,48

T5 14.00-16.00 15.40 0.60 0.13 3.88 14.00-17.00 15.40 0.82 0,18 5,33

LSD at S% 0,606 0.470

LSD at X% 0,803 0.622

IS.BL/AE- F 6.12-7.25 6,67 0.34 0.07 5,15 5.96-7.43 7.02 0.45 0.10 6.93 MB Tl 5.70-8.08 6.91 0.60 0.13 8.71 6.33-7.69 7.05 0.35 0.08 5.00

T2 5.33-7.19 6.74 0,50 0.11 7.90 6.40-7.69 6.82 0.34 0.07 5.02

T3 5.47-7.20 6.48 0.48 0.11 7.44 5.76-7.72 6.76 0-53 0.12 7.79

T4 5.89-7.85 6,52 0.40 0.09 5.93 5.78-7.61 6.68 0.50 0.11 7.45

T5 6.30-7.71 6,90 0,34 0.08 4.77 6.12-7.62 6.91 0.42 0.10 6.20

LSD at 5% 0,315 0.345

LSD at 1% 0,417 0.457

16. MBL/ F 1.11-1.83 1.46 0,15 0.03 10.14 1.17-1.67 1.33 0.12 2.03 8.83 MBW Tl 1.23-1.60 1.47 0,09 0,02 6,56 1,25-1.60 1.38 0.08 0.02 6, 2C

T2 1.15-1.60 1.36 0.11 0,02 7.82 1,23-1.70 1.40 0.12 0.03 8,23

T3 1.00-1.60 1.34 0.15 0,03 11.23 1,00-1.60 1.35 0.11 0.02 s.;:

T4 1.15-1,78 1.31 0.17 0.04 11.43 1.25-1.60 1.39 0.u9 :.02 6.13

T5 1.27-1,67 1.45 0.10 0.02 6.73 1.08-1.60 1.41 0.15 0.O3 1C,67 LSD at S% 0.161 0,101 LSD at 1% 0.213 Contd.... Appendix 4

1 2 10 11

.7. HTL/ F 1.33-1.60 1.50 O.OB 0.02 5.78 :1.21-1.6 0 1.48 0.10 0.02 7.59 STL Tl 1,31-1.60 1.44 0.10 0.02 7.24 1.24-1.76 1.49 0.15 0.03 11.57 •n 1.28-1.4U 1.40 0.10 0.02 7.30 1.16-1.60 1.40 0.11 0.02 7.90

T3 1.11-1.68 1.43 0.15 0.03 10.75 1.19-1.60 1.40 0.11 0.02 7.98 T4 1.27-1.76 1.46 0.12 0.03 8,29 1.21-1,83 1.49 0.17 0.04 11.70

T5 1.31-1.64 1.49 0,08 0.02 5.79 1.24-1.65 1.43 0.10 0.02 7.15

LSD at 5% O.OSl 0.096

LSD at IX 0.107 0,127

18. value F 18.65-23.20 22.00 1.01 0.23 4.54 21.37-26,71 24.50 1.53 0.34 6.67 'a * Tl 20.00-26.25 23.06 1.69 0.38 7.44 20.83-25.00 22.64 1.06 0.24 4.67

T2 20.00-26.25 23.13 1.57 0.35 6.79 20.00-23.81 22.25 0.93 0.21 4.20

T3 21.67-26.25 23.28 1.23 0.27 5.29 21.22-28.50 24.52 1,63 0.36 7.00

T4 22.00-26.90 24.59 1.41 0.32 5.86 20.00-25.00 22.90 1.38 0.31 6.03

T5 20.83-25.91 23.38 1.46 0.33 6.09 20.00-25.24 22.60 1.39 0.31 6.16

LSD at 5% 1.136 1.021

LSD at \% 1.504 1.352

19. value F 3.81-4.49 4.12 0.18 0.04 4.45 3.78-4.46 4.26 0.17 0.04 4.01 'b' Tl 3.71-5.00 4.23 0.34 0.08 8.16 3.77-4.76 4.40 0.33 0.07 7,92

T2 3.20-4.37 3.95 0.34 0.08 8.55 3.78-4.71 4.27 0.27 0.06 6,41

T3 3.75-4.52 4.14 0.20 0.04 4.85 3.92-4.76^ 4.28 0.23 0.05 5.42 T4 3.92-4.67 4.29 0.23 0.05 5.61 3.77-5.26 4.17 0.47 0.11 10,74

T5 3.68-4.67 4.13 0.26 0.06 6.18 3.67-4.71 4.16 0.29 0.06 6,99

LSD at 5% 0.174 0.153

LSD at 1% 0.231 0.202

20. Value F 2.36-3.47 2.92 0.30 0.07 10.20 2.80-3.17 2.97 0.12 0.03 4.00

Tl 2.72-3.12 2,92 0.12 0.03 4.16 2.59-4.00 3.13 0,33 0.07 10.69

T2 2.74-3.23 2.86 0.12 0.03 4.32 2.68-3.20 2.98 0,16 0.04 5.39

T3 2.72-3.25 2.96 0.14 0.03 4.80 2.69-3.09 2.88 0.13 0.03 4.49

T4 2.74-3.27 2.94 0.14 0.03 4.69 2,58-3,16 2.86 0.16 0.04 5.73

T5 2.56-3.17 2.90 0.14 0.03 4.78 2.69-3,20 2.89 0.16 0,03 5.38

LSD at 5% 0,115 0.095

LSD at IX 0.152 0.126

21. Value F 7.15-9.28 8.00 0.62 0.15 8.11 7,69-9,83 3.88 0.62 0.14 7.14 ' c' Tl 8.09-9.36 6.67 0.36 0.08 4.19 7.66-12.50 8.71 1.00 0.22 11.47

T2 8,20-9.63 8,79 0.42 0.09 4,73 7,94-9.80 8.56 0.43 0.10 5.08

T3 7.78-10.40 8.93 0.56 0.12 6,28 7.88-9.02 8.48 0.29 0.06 3.44

T4 7.7 3-9.24 8.79 0.42 0.09 4.92 7.38-8.90 8.19 0.48 0.11 5.84

T5 7.67-9.81 8,55 0.57 0.13 6.48 i 7,12-9,30 8.44 0.53 0.12 6.33

LSD at 5X 0.331 0.293

LSD at 1% 0.438 0,388

Contd * • • •

Cottd Appendix 4 1 2 10 11

22, Value F 3.25-4.98 4.17 0.30 0.07 7.76 3.37-4.00 3.75 0.18 0.04 4.70 t ^ 1 c 3.23-4.13 3.80 0.24 0.05 6.21 3.44-4.33 3,79 0.23 0.05 6.06 Tl T2 3.41-4.36 3.83 0.26 0.06 6.78 3.33-4.14 3,78 0.21 0.05 5.50 T3 3.12-4.13 3.80 0.25 0.06 6.58 3.50-4.27 3,84 0.20 0.04 5.19

T4 3.73-4.40 4.00 0.19 0,04 4.89 3,59-4.57 4,02 0.28 0.06 6.91

T5 3,50-4.27 3.90 0.20 0,04 5.09 3,35-4.27 3.84 0.22 0.05 5,84

LSD •a t 5% 0.143 0,139

LSD at 1% 0,194 0.184

23. BW/8WA F 1.15-1.73 1.50 0.16 0,04 11.62 1.25-1,57 1.37 0.10 0.02 7,64

Tl 1,25-1.67 1.38 0.11 0,02 7.50 1,25-2,09 1,45 0,18 0.04 12.44

T2 1.27-1,64 1.46 0.10 0,02- 7,01 1,31-1,60 1,45 0,09 0.02 6.16

T3 1,29-1.60 1,46 0,08 0,02 5,54 1,25-1,60 1,37 0,09 0,02 6.55

T4 1,27-1.57 1,43 0,08 0.02 6,15 1,25-1.71 1.44 0.11 0.02 7.52

T5 1.25-1.60 1.43 0.09 0.02 6.16 1.29-1.73 1.43 0.09 0.02 6.31

LSD at 5% 0,079 0.051

LSD at 1% 0.105 0,068

24. OL-OV/ F 1,15-1.33 1.22 0.02 0.01 3.11 1.14-1.22 1.17 0.02 0.01 1.89 AE-EXP Tl 1,03-1.33 1.20 0,07 0.02 5.79 1.07-1.33 1.19 0.07 0.02 5.81

T2 1.11-1,45 1.24 0,09 0.02 7,56 1,12-1,34 1,23 0,07 0,01 5,41

T3 1,09-1.33 1.22 0,06 0,01 5,22 1.05-1,41 1,21 0,08 0,02 6.23

T4 1,09-1,33 1.19 0.07 0,02 6,08 1,10-1,31 1,14 0,07 0,01 5.64 T5 i;l4-1.32 1.24 0,05 o;oi 3,98 1,17-1.50 1.19 0.08 0.02 6.08 LSD at 5% 0.032 0.028 LSD at 1% 0.042 0,037

25. BI/AE- F 4.57-5,34 5.08 0.22 0.05 4,52 4.43-5.14 4.94 0,17 0,04 3.53 EXP Tl 4.67-5.56 5.07 0.23 0.05 4.53 4.65-6.40 5.22 0,49 0,11 9.25

T2 4.44-5.26 4.88 0.21 0.05 4.40 4.45-6.19 5.25 0.46 0,10 8.73

T3 4.52-5,42 5.03 0.23 0.05 4.67 4.67-6.18 5.09 0.35 0,08 6.70

T4 4.64-5,38 5.11 0.22 0.05 4.33 4.42-5.70 4.74 0.33 0.07 6.41

T5 4.51-5.88 5.00 0.34 0,08 6,67 4.63-5.80 4.93 0,37 0,08 6.94

LSE 1 at 554 0.210 0,174

LSE) at 1% 0.278 0,231

26. BL/STL F 17.59-22,00 20.27 1.05 0.23 5,40 17,14-23,00 20.63 1.37 0.31 7.16

Tl 18,52-22.08 20.07 1.07 0.24 5.53 18.00-21.62 20.69 1.16 0.26 6.27

T2 17.78-21.00 19.26 0.82 0.18 4,26 17.24-20.00 18.96 0.81 0.18 4.27

T3 18.52-22.50 20.26 0.86 0.19 4.23 17,24-21.20 18.85 0.98 0.22 5.17

T4 17.78-21.87 20.07 1,01 0.22 5.12 16.90-21.74 19.06 1.12 0.25 5.88

T5 18.52-22.40 20.17 1.00 0.22. 4.94 16.96-22,08 19.24 1.31 0.29 6,79 LSD at 5% 0.680 0.771

LSD at 1% 0.900 1.021

Contd.

Contd....Appendix 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

27. OL-OV/ F 3.85-5.71 4.93 0.45 0.15 9.38 4.20-5.29 4.84 0.33 0.07 7.27 STL Tl 4,04-5,38 4.87 0.39 0.09 8.14 3.85-5.30 4.73 0.52 0.12 12.31 T2 4,26-5.77 4.91 0.44 0.10 8.88 3.97-5.00 4.45 0.29 0.06 6.42

T3 4,44-5,42 4.91 0.28 0.06 5.62 3.62-4.82 4.42 0.33 0,07 7.53 T4 4,20-5.42 4.70 0.33 0.07 6.93 4.00-5.20 4.55 0.34 0.08 7.47 T5 4.40-5.42 4.89 0.22 0.05 4.59 3.78-5.42 4.65 0.42 0.09 9.13

LSD at 5% 0.151 0.208

LSD at X% 0.199 0.276

28. AE-EXp/ F 3.58-4.37 4.03 0.20 0.04 5.23 3.61-4.52 4.18 0.20 0.05 5.73 STL Tl 3.46-4.37 3.93 0.25 0.05 6.20 2,88-4.25 3.97 0.37 0.00 10,58

T2 3.52-4.42 3.96 0.20 0.04 5.00 3.10-4.40 3.64 0.34 0.07 9.24

T3 3.70-4.42 4.03 0.21 0.05 5.27 2.d3-4.04 3.65 0.31 0.07 8.58

T4 3.52-4.58 3.94 0.25 0.06 6.42 3.33-4.60 4.01 0.30 0.07 7.96

T5 3.40-4.37 4.05 0.22 0.05 5.65 3.07-4.17 3.90 0.35 0.08 9.60

LSD at 5X 0.119 0.168

LSD at IX 0.157 0.223

• Each value is mean of 20 specimens * F - Field population; Tl - Pure clay, T2 - Clayi sand (75i25); T3 • clayt nand(50»50); T4 - clayj sand (25»75); T5 - Pure sand. Appendix 5 i Changes in WIe meosu reinpnts of mnlc oC ^. avoriap ci^M lectori r mm whoni .jrnwn in different soil types

CHARACTER/ ALIGARH PCFULATION* GHAZIABAD POrULATlO!;* Range Mean SD SE cv Range Mean SD SS cv 1 2 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 - BL F 1152.00-1540.00 1362.00 109.07 24.39 7.95 1335.00-1470.00 1412.75 38.51 8.61 2.73 Tl 900.00-1350.00 1164.00 136.61 30.55 11.74 0850.00-1330.00 1121.00 152.97 34.02 13.64

T2 950.00-1350.00 1194.25 143.95 32.19 12..05 920.00-1350.00 1206.50U5.13 25.74 9.54

T3 1100.00-1400.00 1357.75 89.56 20.07 7.14 1250.00-1470.00 1356.50 70,36 15.73 5.60

T4 1350.00-1550.00 1438.25 82.94 18.55 6.46 1390.00-1580.00 1485.00 64.14 14.34 5,08

T5 1150.00-1540.00 1334.00 117.21 26.21 8.79 1000.00-1500.00 1345.251S5.30 34.73 12.47

LSD at 5% 50.681 70.827

LSD at 1% 80.363 93.804

. BW F 33.00-38,00 33.70 2.20 0.45 5,94 28.00-34.00 31.45 1.79 0,40 5.69

Tl 25.00-34.00 30.60 2.62 0.59 8.57 23.00-33.00 29.05 2.74 0,61 9.44

T2 26.00-36.00 31.40 3.33 0.74 10.61 26.00-40.00 31.85 2.98 0.67 9.35

T3 30.00-36.00 33.10 1.74 0.39 5.27 29.00-34.00 31.60 1.57 0.35 4.97

T4 32.00-37.00 35.15 2.09 0.47 6.15 30.00-36.00 33.10 1.86 0.42 5.80

T5 31.00-37.00 34.50 1.85 0.41 5.36 27.00-36.00 32.00 2.73 0.61 8.54

LSD at 5% 1.316 1.502

LSD at 1% 1.743 1.990

3. STL F 25.00 -30.00 27.55 1.70 0.38 6.17 25.00-29.00 28.90 2.84 0.64 9.84

Tl 25.00-29.00 27.55 1.19 0.27 4.32 25.00-31.00 27.85 1.72 0.39 6.19

T2 26.00-30.00 28.05 1.39 0.31 4.97 27.00-31.00 28.95 1.10 0.25 3.80

T3 27.00-30.00 28.45 1.23 0.28 4.34 26.00-30.00 28.30 1.22 0.27 4.30

T4 27.00-31.00 28.35 1.42 0.32 5.02 25.00-30.00 28.05 1.60 0.36 5.72

T5 27.00-31.00 29.00 1.56 0.35 5.36 26.00-31.00 28.20 1.73 0.39 6.15

LSD at S% 0.983 0.957

LSD at 1% 1.302 1.268

4. DOGO F 5.00-7.00 6.00 0.59 0.13 10.39 5.00-7.00 6.10 0.79 0.18 12.92

Tl 5.00-6.00 5.55 0.51 0.11 9.36 5.00-8.00 6.45 0.99 0.22 14.86

T2 5.00-7.00 5.90 0,79 0.18 13.36 6.00-8.00 6.55 0.60 0.13 8.70

T3 5.00-7.00 6.20 0.83 0.19 13.44 5.00-7,00 5.95 0.76 0.17 12.76

T4 5.00-6.00 5.60 0.50 0.11 8.97 5.00-8.00 6.50 1.10 0.25 16.93

T5 5.00-7.00 6.05 0.87 0.18 13.65 5.00-7.00 6.00 0.79 0.18 13,24

LSD at 5% 0.448 0.478

LSD at 1% 0.593 0.633

100.25 6.46 1.44 6.32 5. AE-M3 F 95.00-117.00 104.75 5,44 1.22 5.19 90.00-112.00 0.86 4.61 Tl 80.00-98.00 88.20 5.39 1.20 6.11 75.00-90.00 83.05 3.83 11.84 T2 90.00-107.00 98.40 4.98 1.11 5.06 80.00-115.00 94.70 11.22 2.51 0.86 T3 92.00-108.00 100.20 4.97 1.10 4.96 98.00-112.00 104.55 3.86 3.69 9.36 T4 98.00-112.00 103.80 3.97 C.89 3.82 74.00-112.00 86.95 8.14 1.82 7,56 1.69 9.16 T5 92.00-112.00 104.00 5.39 1.20 5.13 70.00-95.00 82.45 4.198 LSD at 5% 4.063

LSD at 1% 5.381 5.560 "ont-r1 _

Con Lil. . . . Api^iMnJ ix S

1 2 •3 10 11

6, MBL F 18.00-24.00 21.20 1.90 0.43 9.00 16.00-23.00 19.15 2.58 0.58 13.48 Tl 18.00-23.00 20.40 1.67 0.37 8.17 16.00-22,00 18.40 2.06 0.46 11.21 T2 16,00-23.00 19.85 2.35 0.52 11.82 13.00-24.00 19.30 2.79 0.62 14.47

T3 n.00-23.00 20.25 1.92 0.43 9.46 18.00-24.00 20.45 1.76 0.39 8.51

T4 17.00-24.00 20.80 1.96 0.44 9.44 17.00-25.00 19.50 2.34 0.50 11.46

T5 17.00-24.00 21.05 2.48 0.55 11.79 16.00-24.00 19.70 2.85 0.64 14.45

LSD at 5% 1.387 1.360

LSD at 1% 1.837 1.801

7. HBA F 9.00-15.00 11.15 1.90 0.42 16.03 11.00-14.00 12.70 0.98 0.22 7.71

Tl 9.00-13.00 11.00 0.66 0.15 5.34 9.00-15.00 12.25 1.68 0.38 13.73

T2 11.00-13.00 11.85 0.89 0.20 7.07 9.00-15.00 12.35 1.75 0.39 14.21

T3 11.00-13.00 11.30 0.98 0.22 7.96 10.00-14.00 12.15 1.09 0.24 8.97

T4 11.00-13.00 11.50 1.00 0.22 8.00 11.00-14.00 12.85 1.09 0.24 8.48

T5 11.00-13.00 11.55 1.15 0.26 9.13 10.00-14.00 12.95 1.05 0.23 8.11

. iSD at i% 0,757 0.725

LSD at 1% 1.003 0.961 e.'AE-EXP.F 155.00-180.00 168.05 7.93 1.77 4.72 152.00-170.00 163.65 5.34 1.19 3.26

Tl 135.00-160.00 151.00 7.25 1.62 4.80 125.00-160.00 146.35 9.14 2.04 6.25

T2 145.00-165.00 154.90 5.58 1.25 3.60 105.00-162.00 143.90 12.33 2.75 8.57

T3 148.00-168.00 158.10 6.73 1,^1 4.26 135.00-166.00 158.50 8.80 1.97 5.55

T4 160.00-190.00 173.25 4.53 1.01 2.77 145.00-185.00 169.90 12.94 2.89 8.99

T5 150.00-175.00 167.00 6.53 1.43 3.91 130.00-155.00 141.50 9.42 2,11L 6.65

LSD at S% 4.806 5.488

LSD at 1% 6.366 7.269

9. OI^OV F 115.00-167.00 144.25 12.22 2.73 8.47 125.00-146.00 137.00 6.41 1,47 4,68

Tl 110.00-130.00 122.60 5.47 1.22 4,46 110.00-140.00 122,20 6,87 1.54 5.62

T2 118.00-140.00 125.35 5.87 1.31 4.68 95.00-135.00 123.15 9.00 2.01 7.31

T3 120.00-142.00 132.95 7.04 1.57 5.30 125.00-145.00 133.95 4.66 1.04 3.48

T4 130.00-142.00 136.30 3.61 0.81 2.65 105.00-150.00 118.25 9.77 2.18 8.26

T5 125.00-150.00 138.80 7.05 1.57 5.08 100.00-125.00 113.10 8.76 1.96 7.74

LSD at 5% 4.555 4,729

LSD at 1% 6.032 6.263

10. OI^BL F 205.00-265.00 235.45 14.43 3.33 6.13 200.00-220.00 208.80 7.34 1.64 3.51

Tl 180.00-200.00 190.50 5.63 1.26 2.96 188.00-230.00 201.85 11.19 2.50 5.54

T2 175.00-205.00 189.55 6.91 1.54 3.64 176.00-240.00 195.45 12.50 2.79 6.39

T3 195.00-215.00 204.55 5.95 1.33 2.91 190.00-210.00 199.50 5.83 1.30 2.92

T4 205.00-225.00 214.15 7.04 1.57 3.29 165.00-225.00 188.95 11.43 2.55 6.05

T5 190.00-225.00 212.85 9.37 2.09 4,40 180.00-210.00 193.75 9.00 2.01 4.65

LSD at 5"/. 6.384 8.431

LSu at 1% 8.455 11.167

Contd....

Appendix 5

TO Tl~

11. LF. F 6.00-7.00 6.65 0.49 C.U 7.36 6.00-8,00 6.75 0.64 0.14 9.46 Tl 5,00-7.00 6.05 0.69 0.15 11.34 5.00-8.00 6.90 0.97 0.22 14.03 T2 5.00-7.00 6.20 0.77 0.17 12.38 5.00-8.00 6.85 1.09 0.24 15.90 T3 6.00-7.00 6.60 0.50 0.11 7.62 5.00-8,00 6.25 0.79 0.18 12.58

T4 6.0037,00 6.66 0.49 0.11 7.36 6.00-7.00 6.45 0.51 0.11 7.91

T5 6.00-7,00 6.70 0.47 0.10 7.02 5.00-7.00 6.35 0.67 0.15 10.56

LSD at 5% 0.351 0.371

LSD at 1% 0.465 0.491

12. SPL F 28.00,36.00 32.80 2.19 0.49 6.71 32.00-36,00 34.35 1-31 0.29 3.81

Tl 28.00-35.00 32.50 1.36 0.30 3.93 32.00-40.00 34.05 . 3.99 0.89 11.73

T2 29.00,36.00 33.05 1.54 0.34 4.39 30.00-10.00 34.70 2.51 0.56 7.25

T3 32.00-37.00 33.95 1.62 0.36 4,48 32.00-40.00 35.25 2.36 0.53 6.69

T4 32.00-30.00 34.40 1.90 0.43 5.23 32.00-42.00 36.90 3.19 0.71 8.65

T5 34.00-3B.00 35.00 2.03 0.45 5.48 32.00-40.00 35.85 3.03 0.68 8.52

LSD at S% 1.056 1.316

LSD at 1% 1.399 1.743

13. GL F 11.00-13.00 12.25 0.79 0.10 6.42 lO.OU-12.00 11.35 0.85 0.19 7.56

Tl 10.00-12.00 11.65 0.79 0.10 6.99 9.00-13.00 11.80 1.15 0.25 9.76

T2 11.00-13.00 12.05 0.76 0.17 6.30 10.00-14.00 11.75 1.02 0.23 8.68

T3 11.00-14.00 12.60 0.99 0.22 7.89 g.OO-ll.OO 10.85 1.09 0.24 10.05

T4 11.00-14.00 12.70 1.03 0.23 8.12 10.00-13.00 11.50 0.05 0.19 7.16

T5 11.00-13.00 12.00 0.79 0.10 6.62 11.00-13.00 12.00 0.77 0.17 6.29

LSD at 5% 0.632 0.656

LSD at X% 0.337 0.869

14. DL/AE- F 12.13-13.81 13.02 0.48 0,10 3.63 12.86-14.51 14:09 0.46 0.10 3.39 13.20 Tl 10.59-15.37 1.35 0.30 10,25 10.52-16.47 13.50 1.71 0.38 12.66 T2 10.53-13.46 12.U 1.05 0.24 8.70 9.74-14.27 12.73 1.28 0.29 10.02 T3 11.58-13.78 12.55 0.55 0.12 4.38 U.06-13.40 12.92 0.62 0,14 5.20 12.35 T4 11.50-12.97 0.42 0.09 3.41 12.28-17.03 14.58 0.97 0.22 .6.62 T5 11.76-14.00 12.81 0.59 0.13 4.59 11.50-19.23 15.14 1.67 0.37 11.04 I.3D at 5% 0.493 0.517 LSD at 1% 0.654 0.685

15. MBL/ F 1.50-2,00 1,87 0.11 0.02 6.17 1.25-1.92 1.52 0.19 0.04 12.19 HBrI Tl 1.46-1.82 1.66 0.10 0.02 6.15 1.14-2.10 1.52 0.22 0.05 14.73

T2 1.31-1.83 'l.58 0.16 0.03 9.93 1.29-1.85 1.57 0.18 0.04 11.29

T3 1.36-1.91 1.65 0.19 0,04 11.39 '1.38-2.00 1.09 0.17 0.04 10.05

T4 1.42-1,91 1.67 0.14 0.03 8.64 1.29-2.27 1.53 0.24 0.05 15.71

T5 1.29-2.09 1.69 0.25 0.06 14.90 1.21-2.00 1.53 0.22 0.05 14.68

LSD at 5% 0.111 0.093

LSD at 1% 0,147 0.123

16. Value F 37.71-45.76 40.42 2.33 0.52 5.57 42.29-46.15 44.95 1,03 0.23 2.55 'a' Tl 35.00-40.91 37.96 1.76 0.39 4.65 33.65-44.33 30.53 3.06 0.68 7.94

T2 35.18-41.61 33.00 1.65 0.37 4.35 28.20-42.36 38.00 3.29 0.73 0.65

T3 39.39-43.61 41. or: 2.20 0.49 5.79 36.32-45.00 42.94 2.08 0.45 5.23

Tl 35.29-44.25 40,92 1.66 0.37 4. 39 41.29-411.67 44.06 l.bQ 0.35 4.01

T5 35.94-41.67 3G.62 1.80 0.42 4.07 30.48-44.59 4 2.04 2.38 U.53 6.13

L3D at 5X 1.4 88 1.815 2.404 LSD It IX 1 .970 Contd. ContJ. . .AppPiidlx 5 1 2 3456 1 09 10 11 n. Value F 8.87-10.21 g.-l-l 0.39 0.89 4.12 8.00-12.06 10.34 0.35 0.08 4.08 'b' Tl 7.83-10.80 9.48 0.94 0.21 9.97 6.80-'11.56 9.21 1.43 0.32 15.53

T2 7.92-10.76 9.52 0.99 0.22 10.35 7.60-10.80 9.31 0.73 0.16 7.46

T3 8.52-10.80 9.67 0.64 0.14 6.36 9.52-11.51 10.18 C.50 0.11 5.29 T4 8.70-10.58 3.42 0.61 0.14 6.53 9.18-11.67 10.70 0.61 0.14 5.71 T5 8.89-11.00 9.60 0.50 0.11 5.18 9.52-12.85 11.00 0.96 0.21 8.72

LSD at 5X 0.402 0.474

LSD at 1% 0.533 0.627

18 Value y 5.02-6.22 5.78 0.19 0.04 2.74 5.20-5.80 5.50 0.19 0.04 3.51 '6'

Tl 5.00-6.9? 6.10 0.58 0.13 9.51 4.25-6.65 5.55 0.64 0.14 11.60

T2 5.35-6.97 6.29 0.62 Q.14 9.93 5.23-6.77 6.17 0.43 0.10 6.96

T3 5.40-6.75 6.15 0.39 0.09 6.36 6.01-7.44 6.80 0.29 0.06 4.57

T4 5.56-6.71 5.99 0.34 0.09 5.76 6.11-7.64 6.69 0.37 0.08 5.46

T5 5.62-6.84 6.26 0.34 0.08 5.43 5.13-7.37 6.43 0.59 0.13 9.14

LSD at 5% 0.242 0.376 LSD at IX 0.320 0.499 19. BI/AE- r 7.30-10.07 8.10 0.78 0.17 9.16 7.87-9.89 8.63 0.26 0.06 3.53 EXP * Tl 5.94-9.64 7.72 0.91 0.20 11.84 5.67-9.85 7.70 1.26 0.28 16.34

T2 6.33-8.76 7.70 0.83 0.18 10.77 6.09-9.26 8.41 0.68 0.15 8".08

T3 7.19-9.00 7.96 0.49 0.11 6.22 6.93-9.31 8.56 0.70 0.16 8.79

T4 7.06-8.87 7.87 0.57 0.13 7.29 7.96-10.96 8.82 0.67 0.15 7.62

T5 7.27-9.33 7.58 0.51 0.11 6.36 7.41-10.43 B.79 0.B5 0.19 9.59

LSD at 5% 0.325 0.420

LSD at 1% 0.430 0.556

20. BiySTL F 49.67-50.99 49.42 0.59 0.13 1.21 45.33-50.69 48.87 1.41 0.32 2.92

n 36.00-46.55 42.14 3.46 0.77 8.21 26.33-49.40 40.36 5.61 1.25 13.90

T2 36.54-46.55 42.45 3.43 0.77 8.09 34.07-46.79 41.66 3.50 0.80 8.60

T3 40.74-48.15 44.19 2.06 0.46 4.67 44.35-50.57 48.00 1.69 0.3B 3.81

T4 42.59-47.41 45.25 1.35 0.30 2.97 42.41-50.40 45.05 2.03 0.45 4.50

T5 42.59-49.68 45.94 2.12 0.47 4.61 37.04-48.67 44.13 3.36 0.75 7.63

LSD at 5y. 1.675 2.049

LSD at IX 2.218 2.714 21. OI^OV/ F 4.83-5.56 5.24 0.21 O.OS 4.09 4.64-5.34 4.75 0.20 0.05 4.13

^^ Tl 3.93-4.81 1.45 0.19 0.04 4.19 3.87-5.00 4.40 0.31 0.07 7.06

T2 4.07-4.83 4.47 0.19 0.04 4.31 3.52-4.65 4.25 0.29 0.06 6.86

T3 4.14-5.26 4.68 0.30 0.07 6.48 4.33-5.19 4.74 0.22 0.05 4.61

T4 4.43-5.11 4.82 0.23 0.05 4.78 3.86-5.00 4.22 0.30 0.07 7.20

T5 4.52-5.00 4.79 0.11 0.02 2.29 3.62-4.44 4.01 0.21 0.05 5.27

LSD at 5% 0.186 O-^^^ LSD at IX 0.247 O'^^O

22 AE-EXP F 5.64.6.67 6.12 0.31 0.07 5.02 5.01-6.50 5.66 0.19 0.04 3.03 5.49 0.31 0.07 5.57 4.46-6.40 5.20 0.55 0.12 10.43 T2 5:00-9:30 5.53 0.26, O.O6 4.67 3.89-5.78 4.97 0.42 0.09 B. 2 T3 5 00-6 22 5.56 0.31 0.07 5.51 4.65-6.39 5.61 0.46 0.10 c20 T 2 .6 30 5.77 0.31 0.07 5.46 4.60-5.56 5.13 0.30 0.07 5.3 T 32-6 5.76 0.19 0.04 3.34 4.65-5.63 5.02 0.23 0.06 =.o3 0.20; LSD at 5% 0.228 0.266 LSD at IX 0-302

Each value ia mean of 20 =P=^f^"/ ^^ - Clay, sond (75,25), T3 = Clay, sand (50, S:) F - Field popjlation) Tl » i^re ^iiyj , ^ A nc,,7';i! T5 ' Pure sand

Appendix 6 j Changes in the measuraiients of female, cyst, egg and cone top structure

of H. avenae collected from wheat grown in diffemt soil types

1 Ci-iARACTER/ j ALIGAWi POPJLAriOtl aiAzi A3AD POBJLATION* T^cZATi-lE^'T * 1 1 Range Mean s:; SE C/ Range Mean i SD I 2^ C/ 1 1 ! 2 3 5 6 7 : 8 1 9 i 10 11

1 . BL F 425.00-670.00 527.35 80.97. 18.11. 15.07 400.00-650.00 518.50 .76.34 17.07 14.74 Tl 430.00-575.00 490.75 42.84 9.56 6.89 460.00-600.00 4 84.50 65.97 14,75 10.91

T2 450.00-580.00 501.25 57.28 12.81 9.53 460.00-650.00 542.25 47.03 10.52 7.32

T3 580.00-725.00 659.50 47.04 10.52 7.13 550.00-710.00 624.75 47.14 10.54 7.55

T4 560.00-725.00 654.50 59.49 13.30 9.09 580.00-725.00 654.25 46.32 10.80 7.39

T5 550.00-750.00 646.00 61.34 13.71 9.49 525.00-750.00 636.50 61.05 13.65 9.59

LSD at 5% 35.222 29.754

LSD at 1% 46.649 39.406

2. BW F 270.00-390.00 306.60 32.97 7.37 13.37 250.00-346.00 299.50 36.34 8.13 12.13

Tl 250.00-350.00 260.ao 29.20 6.53 8.43 2 80.00-375.00 315.60 34.49 7.71 9.99

T2 300.00-380.00 345.25 21.73 4.86 6.29 300.00-400.00 364.25 27.49 6.15 7.55

T3 320.00-430.00 374.50 28.83 6.45 7.70 325.00-400.00 373.25 23.75 5.31 6.36

T4 300.00-425.00 371.75 36.49 8.10 9.75 275.00-450.00 353.00 40.73 9.11 11.54

T5 320.00-420.00 372.25 29.31 6.55 7.87 310,00-450.00 372.25 35.89 8.02 9-64

LSD at 5% . ,. 17.882 21.021

LSD at 1% 23.683 27.841

3. STL F-. 20.00-24.00 22.05 1.32 0.29 5.97 21.00-24.00 22.35 1.04 0.23 4.65

Tl 20.00-27.00 23.10 1.71 0.38 6.32 20.00-26.00 23.40 2.21 0.49 9.44

T2 21. 00-26.00 23.35 1.31 0.29 4.73 21.00-26.00 24.20 1.10 0.25 4.06

T3 21.00-27.00 23.65 l.lb 0.26 4.17 21.00-26.00 23.55 1.50 0.34 5.68

T4 20.00-25.00 23.25 1.4B 0.33 5.25 20.00-24.00 22.45 1,23 0.28 4.34

T5 20.0U-24.00 22.10 1.17 0.26 4.09 17.00-23.00 21.20 2,10 0.40 7.23

LSD at 5% 0.781 1-086

LSD at 1% 1.034 1.491

4. DOGO F 5.00-7.00 5.80 0.77 0.17 13.24 4.00-7.00 5.90 1.05 0.23 19.11

Tl 5.00-7.00 5.85 0.31 0.18 14.86 4.00-6.00 5.40 0.89 0.20 17.56

T2 5.00-7.00 5.85 0.30 0.18 14.79 4.00-6.00 5.60 0.60 0.13 10.67

T3 4.00-7.00 5.35 0.74 0.17 12.70 5.00-7.00 6.20 0.83 0.19 16.03

T4 5.00-7.00 6.15 0.81 0.18 14.21 5.00-7.00 6.10 0.85 0,19 16.97

T5 5.00-7.00 6.10 0.85 0.19 15.97 4.00-7.00 5.45 0.87 0.20 17.24

LSD at 5% 0.493 0.539

LSD at 1% 0.654 '0.714

5. AE-MB F 70.00-120.00 85.95 13.36 2.99 15.55 80.00-110.00 98.20 7.56 1.69 7.70

Tl 72.00-95.00 85.65 5.94 1.33 6.94 55.00-95.00 77.85 9,63 2.15 12.37

T2 55.00-103.00 82.45 113.22 2.95 15.09 62.00-130.00 92.15 16,50 3.69 17.90

T3 62.00-95.00 79. SO 8.70 1.95 10.91 5B.G0-110.00 86.80 11,10 2.43 12.79

T4 70.00-95.00 83.80 e.05 1.80 9.61 70.00-105.00 87.45 10.95 2.45 12.52

T5 70.00-96.00 82.85 8.07 1.80 9.74 65.00-97.00 81.95 9.53 2.13 11.63 7.508 LSD at 5',i 6.461 9.943 LSD at 1% 8.553

Contd Appendix 6

10 11

;-.5L F 27. JO-37.00 33.4 5 3.3: 3.74 9.95 27.00-36.00 31.53 3.10 0.69 9.83 Tl 30.00--10.00 34.40 2.50 0.56 7.27 2c.00-40.00 33.35 2.78 0.62 8.33

T2 30.00-40.00 34.85 2.39 0.65 8.29 27.00-3S.000 33.50 3.55 0.79 10.59

T3 27.00-3^.00 34,25 2. 33 0.63 3.25 30.00-37.00 34.00 2.34 0.52 6.88

T4 32.00-33.00 35.80 1.73 0.39 4.85 32.00-38.00 35.60 1.85 0.41 5.19

T5 34.00-33.00 36.20 1.36 0.30 3.75 25.00-40.00 34.45 3.02 0.67 8.76

LSD at 5% 1.484 1.764

LSD at 1% 1.966 2.336

M3W F 29.00-35.00 31.80 1.96 0.44 6.17 27.00-36.00 31.00 2.69 0.60 8.69

Tl 25.00-35.00 31.45 2.60 0-58 8.28 25.00-35.00 30.00 3.06 0.68 10.20

T2 25.00-40.00 32.85 3.34 0.75 10.18 21.00-36.00 29.40 4.04 0.90 13.76

T3 27.00-36.00 32.55 3.02 0.62 9.23 24.00-35.00 29.85 3.15 0.70 10.55

T4 30.00-37.00 34.35 1.84 0.41 5.37 30.00-36.00 32.65 2.13 0.48 6.54

T5 31.00-36.00 34.20 1.32 0.30 3.86 25.00-36.00 31.25 3.37 0.75 10.78

LSD at 5% 1.558 1.776

LSD at 1% 2.063 2.352

AE-EXP F 95.00-16b.00 136.05 19.26 4.31 14.06 110.00-160.00 143.20 14.01 3.13 9.78

Tl 110.00-140.00 126.55 7.52 1.70 6.02 90.00-135.00 115.25 10.37 2.32 8.99

T2 95.00-13J.00 121.50 12.29 2.75 10.12 100.00-165.00 127.20 17.00 3.80 13.36

T3 100.00-135.00 117.75 9.41 2.10 7.99 102.00-150.00 125.50 11.52 2.58 9.18

T4 105.00-135.00 121.10 8.67 1.94 7.16 110.00-150.00 132.25 12.30 2.75 9.30

T5 105.00-132.00 120.25 7.72 1.73 6.42 100.00-130.00 115.85 10.03 2.24 6.66

LSD at 5% 6.535 7.837

LSD at 1% 8.655 10.379

ITL F 100.00-155.00 133.60 15.08 3.37 15.28 130.00-175000 159.15 15.55 3.48 9.77

Tl 100.00-150.00 121.90 14-72 3.29 10.38 100.00-150.00 132.95 15.79 3.53 11.88

T2 80.00-160.00 135.35 21.59 4.83 15.95 115.00-220.00 154.50 26.92 6.02 17.42

T3 120.00-175.00 140.75 12.49 2.79 8.87 125.00-238.00 152.60 24.76 5.54 16.22

T4 125.00-155.00 140.75 11.73 2.62 8.33 138.00-185.00 i 151.65 11.93 2.67 7.38

T5 125.00-160.00 143.2C ) 10-09 2.26 7.04 115.00-170.OC 1 139.35 14.10 3.15 10.08

LSD at 5% 8.857 12,173

LSD at IX 11.731 16.123

10. V-A F 30.00-45.00 36.45 4.03 0.90 11.06 30.00-40.00 36.15 2.46 0.59 7.34

Tl 22.00-35.00 29.35 4.58 1.02 15.34 20.00-35.00 27.80 4.59 1.03 16.53

T2 25.00-45.00 •33.60 4.53 1.01 13.50 22.00-35.00 29.80 4,48 1.00 15.03

T3 30.00-33.00 34.45 2.30 0.51 6.59 24.00-36.00 30.95 4.01 0.90 12.94

T4 30.00-33.00 36.30 1.95 0.44 5.37 32.00-38.00 34.85 1.93 0.43 5.53

T5 30.0Q-3S.00 35.60 2.C-; 0.45 5,72 25.00-36.00 31.25 4.31 0.96 13.81

LSD at 5ii 1.915 2.103

Laua a\: 1% 2.536 2.785

1 2 34567 89 10 11

11. MBiy F 1.00-1.15 1.07 0.04 0.01 3.98 0.97-1.18 1.08 0.07 0.01 6.28 MBW Tl 1.00-1.33 1.0 9 0.09 0.02 8.47 1.00-1.48 1.10 0.13 0.03 11.87 T2 0.94-1.43 1.07 0.11 0.02 10.28 1.00-1.33 1.14 0.10 0.02 8.82

T3 1.00-1.21 1.05 0.06 0.01 6.05 l.OQ-1.42 1.13 0.12 0.03 10.25

T4 1.00-1.10 1.04 0.04 0.01 3.57 1.00-1.23 1.09 0.08 0.02 7.43

T5 0.97-1.19 1.06 0.05 0.01 4,78 1.00-1.33 1.11 0.10 0.02 9,43

LSD at 5% 0.046 0.063

LSD at 1% 0,060 0.084

12. CL F 550.00-950.00 765.35 134.25 30-02 18,51 590,00-950.00 735.75 111.72 24.98 14.40 Tl 600.00-930,00 725.75 71,73 16,04 9,37 550.00-810.00 631.50 106,38 23,79 13,97 T2 575.00-950.00 793.50 92.85 20.76 11.63 560.00-950.00 764.50 147,78 33,04 17,09 T3 720.00-1050.00 832,00 81.73 18.28 9.82 550,00-970.00 802,75 116.50 26.05 14.51 T4 660,00-950,00 831.75 79.52 17.78 9.56 630.00-950.00 807.00 94.65 21.16 11,73 T5 700.00-1010,00 863.50 93.11 20.82 10.78 750.00-1000.0 664.75 72.75 16.27 8.41 LSD at 5% 38.693 52.395 LSD at 1% 51.244 69.393

13. CT F 260.00-650,00 458.50 102.20 22.85 18.39 380.00-680.00 498.75 53.77 12,02 10.78 Tl 350.00-550.00 420.75 39.81 8.90 3.46 325.00-620.00 447.50 89.18 19.94 18.68

T2 350.00-600.00 445.50 66.84 14.95 13.22 400.00-680.00 532.75 93.56 20.92 17.56 T3 380.00-600,00 439.00 57.39 12.83 11.27 360.00-700.00 544.50 70.33 15.73 15.04

T4 430.00-570.00 519.00 47.00 10.51 9.06 320,00-700,00 558.75 85.33 19.08 17.82

T5 450.00-600.00 527.25 47.94 10.72 9.09 430.00-700.CO 573.75 37.34 8.35 7.00

LSD at 5% 31.2 84 44.492

LSD at 1% 41.433 59.031

14. CI/CW F 1.33-1.88 1.67 0.15 0.03 10,04 1.23-1.74 1.48 0.15 0.03 10.11

Tl 1.50-1.96 1.72 0.10 0.02 5.88 1.33-2.09 1.60 0.18 0.04 11.17

T2 1.59-2.00 1.79 0.13 0.03 7.95 1.27-1.94 1.47 0.17 0.04 10.41

T3 1.62-2.00 l.SO 0.13 0.03 7.75 1.22-1.92 1.43 0.20 0.04 11.54

T4 1.45-2.11 1.61 0.14 0.03 S.56 1.22-1.80 1.44 0.19 0.04 10,96

T5 1.40-1.92 1.62 0.15 0.03 9.25 1.30-1.87 1.52 0.15 0.03 9.06

LSD at S% 0.085 0.107

LSD at 1% 0.113 0.142

15. EL F 125.00-135.00 129.95 3.89 0.87 2.99 120.00-135.00 127,25 5.25 1.17 4.13

Tl 115.00-135.00 121.65 6,25 1.40 5.14 105.00-130.00 113.80 6.32 1.41 5.32

T2 110.00-130.00 118.80 4.51 1.01 3.80 105.00-130.00 119.45 6.79 1.52 5.69

T3 110.00-132.00 123.55 5.10 1.14 4.13 115.00-140.00 124.65 5,14 1.15 4.13

T4 120.00-145.00 12-i.75 7.08 1.58 5.49 115.00-135.00 125.60 4.62 1.03 3.67

T5 120.00-140.00 127.90 5.08 1.13 3.97 120.30-145.00 127.90 5.48 1.22 4.28 3.4-''^ LSD at 5% 3.282 4.620 LSD at 1% 'i-2'5'^

Contd.

OJIIL i >1 i"'ii li •

16. F 50.00-62.CO 54.25 4.17 0.93 7,67 45.00-60.00 53,40 0,99 8.29 EW 4.43 Tl 47,00-55.00 51.35 1.95 0,44 3,80 43.00-55.00 50.50 1.99 0,44 3.93 T2 48.00-55.00 51.50 2.06 0.46 4.01 50,00-55.00 51.50 2.04 0.46 3.96

T3 50.00-60.00 52,50 2,61 0.58 4.96 4c.00-55.00 51.65 2.16 0,48 4.18

T4 45.00-51.00 43.75 2.07 0.46 4,25 50.00-70.00 54.90 5.70 1.27 10.39

T5 48.00-57.00 51.20 2,40 0.54 4.68 43.00-55.00 50.50 1,82 0.41 3.61

LSD at 5% 1.79 4 2.075

LSD at 1% 2.376 2.748

F 1.93-2.54 2.39 0.23 0,05 9.00 2.17-2.60 2.38 0.11 0,02 4,88

Tl 2.13-2.60 2.32 0.13 0.03 5.46 2.13-2.60 2.35 0.14 0.03 6,14

T2 2.09-2.50 2.31 0.13 0.03 5.51 2.00-2.60 2.32 0.18 0,04 7.71

T3 2.17-2.60 2.36 0.12 0.03 5.31 2.21-2.80 2.42 0.14 0.03 5.83

T4 2.45-2.90 2.64 0.13 0.03 4.89 1.79-2.55 2.29 0.21 0,05 9.07

T5 2.19-2.80 2,50 0.16 0.04 6.38 2.26-2.74 2.53 0,11 0,03 4.53

LSD at S% 0.079 0.095

LSD at 154 0.105 0.126

18. FL F 38.00-52.00 42.50 3,68 0,82 8,05 33.00-50.00 45.50 4.01 0,90 8.81

Tl 45.00-65.00 52.50 6.09 1.36 11.60 37.00-60.00 49.10 5.68 1.27 11.58

T2 40.00-68.00 53.10 6.31 1.41 11.89 44.00-62.00 50.80 5.03 1.12 9.91

T3 45.00-65.00 52.40 4.88 1.09 9.32 45.00-66.00 55.05 5.76 1,29 10.47

T4 45.00-63.00 53.75 4.14 0.93 7.70 50.00-66.00 57.20 3.94 0.88 6.89

T5 45.u0-63.00 53.10 5.37 1.20 10.11 45.00-65.00 53.10 5.72 1.28 10.77

LSD at 5% 3.203 3.084

LSD at 1% 4.242 4 .084

19. FW F 18.00-25.00 21.95 1.76 0.39 8.02 20.00-25.00 22.30 1.69 0,38 7.57

Tl 20.J0-30.00 25.40 2.66 0.60 10.49 22.00-31.00 25.45 2,01 0,45 7.91

T2 20.00-35.00 26.10 3.67 0.82 14.06 20.00-28.00 24.65 2.16 0.48 8.76

T3 20.00-33.00 25.10 3.45 0.77 13.73 19.00-30.00 25.65 2.89 0.65 11.26

T4 20.00-34.00 25.70 4.04 0.90 15.72 24.00-33.00 26.85 2.76 0.62 10.27

T5 18.00-30.00 23.65 3.08 0.69 13.03 23.00-33.00 26.15 2.32 0.52 8.38

LSD at S% 2.059 1.506

LSD at 1% 2.727 1.995

2 0. VBW F 5.00- 8.00 6.50 0.89 0.20 13.67 5.00 - 9.00 6.45 1.28 0,28 19.79

Tl 6.00-10.00 7.75 1.12 0.25 14.43 5.00- 10.00 8.00 1.41 0,32 17.68

T2 5.00-10.00 7.75 1.29 0.29 16.60 5.00- 10.00 8.20 1.23 0.72 14.17

T3 6.00-10.00 8.20 1.36 0.30 16.68 5.00-11.00 8.50 1.85 0.41 22,59

T4 6.00-10.00 8.35 1.18 0.26 14.16 6.00-10.00 3.60 1.19 0.27 14.02

T5 5.00-10.00 3.50 1.36 0.30 15.97 6.00-11.00 9.10 1.65 0.37 18.14

LSD at S% 0.7 97 0.902

LSD at 1% 1.042 1.194

Contd..,

Contd Appendix 6

8 9 10 11

21. V3L F 9.00-12.00 9.95 1.10 0.25 11.05 0.00-10.00 9,35 0.67 0.15 7.17 Tl 10.00-12.00 10.75 0.79 0.18 7.31 10.00-13.00 11.25 1.76 0.39 13.96 T2 10.00-13.00 11.00 0.92 0.20 8.34 10.00-14.00 11.65 0.97 0.22 8.59 T3 10,00-14.00 11.25 1.58 0.35 14.09 10.00-13.00 11.70 0.98 0.22 8.36 T4 10.00-13.00 11.55 0.89 0.20 7.68-10.00-14.00 12.15 1.14 0.25 9,36

T5 10.00-13.00 11.55 0.83 0.18 7.15 10.00-15.00 12,65 1.45 0.32 11.83

LSD at 5% 0.668 0.773 LSD at 1% 0.885 1.024

22. FL/FW F 1.59-2.20 1.94 0.16 0.04 8.55 1.60-2.33 2,04 0.20 0.04 10.55 Tl 1.72-2.33 2.07 0.18 0.04 8.66 1.48-2.40 1.94 0.25 0.06 12.99 T2 1.50-2.75 2.06 0.31 0.07 15.15 1.76-2.57 2.07 0.25 0.06 12.26 T3 1.72-2.60 2.12 0.28 0.06 13.41 1.72-2.59 2.16 0.23 0.05 10.77

T4 1.59-2.52 2.13 0.29 0.06 13.50 1.82-2.48 2.14 0.20 0.04 9.28 T5 1.85-2.68 2.27 0.26 0.06 11.52 1.70-2.40 2.04 0.22 0.05 10.86

LSD at S% 0.162 0.135

LSD at X% 0,215 0,178

* Each value is mean of 20 specimens ; F = field population; Tl = Pure clay; T2 = clay j sand (75:25); T3 = clayjsand C50j50) T4 = Clayj sand (25:75) T5= pure sand

Append: 7 : Changes in the measurements of larvae of K. avenae collected fm.-n wheat grown m

ditterent soil moisture.

ALIGARH POPULATION* GHA2IABAD POPJLATION' CHAR^CTSV TREAThS.NT* Range Mean SD SE cv Range Mean SD SE CV

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

28.06 6.27 5.49 454.00-575.00 588.45 32.74 7.32 6.44 1 . BL F 470.00-560.00 500.75 Tl 400.00-650.00 484.75 2T.. 83 6.22 5.45 430.00-560.00 493.80 34.28 7.67 6.84 T2 500.00-580.00 535.50 27.90 6.24 5.21 480.00-580.00 514.75 31.27 6.99 6.07 T3 500.00-600.00 543.25 33.30 7.44 6.13 500.00-600.00 546.50 36.17 8.09 6.62 T4 490.00-620.00 543.50 46.51 10.40 8.56 500.00-630.00 564.50 36.92 8.25 6.54 T5 500.00-600.00 538.50 33.98 7.60 6.74 500.00-650.00 545.50 34.41 7.69 6.49 LSD at 5% 14.440 11.616 LSD at 1% 19.128 15.385

iW F 20.00-26.'00 22.75 1.68 0.38 7.39 19.00-23.00 20.75 1.71 0.38 7.21 Tl 20.00-25.00 21.75 1.56 0.35 7.00 18.00-23.00 19.75 1.39 0.31 6.47 T2 20.00_25.00 22.50 1.39 0.31 6.20 20.00-24.00 21.60 1.36 0.30 6.13 T3 21.00-25.00 22.90 1.59 0.35 6.93 20.00-24.00 21.55 1.26 0.28 5.55 T4 21.00-26.00 23.60 1.70 0.38 7.20 21.00-25.00 23.45 1.47 0.33 6.26 T5 20.00-25.00 23.85 1.60 0.36 7.32 21.00-25.00 22.95 1.32 0.29 5.74 LSD at 5% 0.894 0.864 LSD at 1% 1.164 1.144

3TL F 23.00-27.00 24.70 1.66 0.37 6.45 22.00-28.00 24.65 1.78 0.40 7.24 Tl 20.00-27.00 23.95 1.10 0.25 4.08 21.00-27000 23.30 1.56 0.35 5.93 T2 22.00-28.00 25.10 0.91 0.20 3.36 22.00-28.00 25.60 1.35 0.30 4.90 T3 23.00-29.00 26.20 1.40 0.31 5.14 26.00-30.00 27.65 1.31 0.29 4.73 T4 23.00-29.00 25.65 1.15 0.26 4.32 20.00-29.00 26.95 1.93 0.43 7.17 T5 21.00-25.00 23.85 1.50 0.33 5.57 20.00-25.00 23.10 1.32 0.33 4.93 LSD at 5% 0.666 , 0.967 LSD at X% 0.882 1.281

DOGO F 5.00-7.00 5.75 0.72 0.16 12.46 6.00-7.00 6.17 0.76 0.17 11.59 Tl 5.00-7.00 5.75 0.64 0.14 11.11 4.00-7.00 5.35 1.04 0.23 19.44 T2 5.00-6.00 5.70 0.47 0.10 8.25 5.00-7.00 5.75 0.64 0.14 11.12 T3 5.00-7.00 6.20 0.89 0.20 14.43 5.00-8.00 6.30 1.03 0.23 16.37 T4 5.00-7.00 5.90 0.72 0.16 12.17 5.00-8.00 6.70 0.51 0.11 9.20 T5 5.00-6.00 5.40 0.50 0.11 9.31 5.00-8.00 6.75 0.79 0.18 13.36 LSD at 554 0.497 0.509 LSD at 1% 0.659 0.675

5. AE- F 63.00-86.00 75.10 5.88 1.32 7.63 65.00-78.00 72.45 4.12 0.92 5.69 Tl 70.00-85.00 71.40 4.18 0.94 5.27 62.00-78.00 69.35 5.71 1.28 7.85 T2 73.00-84.00 78.10 3.61 0.81 4,35 70.00-85.00 77.20 4.64 1.04 6.01 T3 75.00-86.00 79.60 4.56 1.02 (5.37 75.00-86.00 81.35 3.20 0.72 3.93 T4 75.00-88.00 81.75 5.22 1.17 7.08 70.00-82.00 74.90 4.19 0.94 5.18 T5 65.00-78.00 70.70 3.93 0.88 5.57 65.00-72.00 68.95 3.98 0.89 5.06 LSD at 5% 3.151 2.993 LSD at 1% 4.174 3.964

6. MBL F 14.00-19.00 16.20 1.88 0.42 11.61 14.00-17.00 15.40 1.09 0.24 7.11 Tl 14.00-18.00 16.00 1.21 0.27 7.59 14.00-17.00 15.65 0.99 0.22 6.12 T2 14.00-19.00 16.40 1.67 0.37 10.16 15.00-18.00 16.05 0.93 0.21 5.78 T3 15.00-19.00 16.85 1.27 0.28 7.52 15.00-18.00 16.35 1.09 0.24 6.66 T4 14.00-19.00 16.45 1.39 0.31 8.48 15.00-19.00 17.10 1.29 0.29 7.57 T5 14.00-18.00 15.50 1.25 0.28 7.25 15.00-19.00 17.15 1.31 0.29 7.63 LSD at 5?; 0.731 0.689 LSD at IX 0.969 0.913

Contd.

1 1 5 4 5 6 7 B 9 • i5 - 11 '. MBW F 10.00-13.00 11.10 0.91 0.20 8.21 10.00-14.00 11.50 1.23 0.27 10.74 Tl 10.00-13.00 11.6 0 0.82 0.18 7.08 10.00-13.00 11.25 0.91 0.20 8.09 T2 10.00-13.00 11.85 0.93 0.21 7.88 10.00-13.00 11.90 0.85 0.19 7.16 T3 10.00-13.00 11.75 0.91 0.20 7,54 10.00-14.00 12.15 0.99 0.22 8.13 T4 10.00-13.00 11.55 0.89 0.20 7.68 11.00-14.00 12.15 0.81 0.18 6.69 T5 10.00-13.00 11.55 0.89 0.20 7.68 10.00-14.00 11.80 1.2S 0.29 10.8 6 LSD at 5r< 0.783 0.705 LSD at IX 1.037 0.934

B. AE-EXP F 90.00-108.00 98.90 4.93 1.10 4.77 95.02-110.00 102.95 4.27 0.96 4.15 Tl 90.00-101.00 95.05 2.93 0.65 2.87 90.00-105.00 96.25 6.06 1.36 5.94 T2 90.00-102.00 95.35 3.81 0.85 3.59 90.00-105.00 98.00 4.00 0.90 3.84 T3 90.00-102.00 96.65 3.87 0.86 4.00 102.00-115.00 107.10 3.13 0.71 2.94 T4 95.00-116.00 104.65 6.38 1.43 6.09 105.00-116.00 110.20 3.41 0.76 3.10 T5 90.00-108.00 95.65 5.88 1.31 5.81 92.00-110.00 97.80 3.15 0.70 2.91 LSD at 5X 2.931 4.325 . LSD ^"^ IX 3.882 5,728

9. OL-OV F 114.00-135.00 121.45 6.64 1.49 5.47 108.00-135.00 119.35 7.51 1.68 6.29 Tl 105.00-125.00 115.40 3.75 0.84 2.87 105.00-120.00 112.40 8.21 1.84 6.34 T2 115.00-130.00 123.80 5.41 1.21 4.10 120.00-130.00 124.30 3.91 0.87 3.00 T3 115.00-135.00 124.05 4.45 1.00 3.60 130.00-142.00 137.75 3.63 0.81 2.63 T4 120.00-152.00 137.10 6.19 1.38 4.51 135.00-150.00 142.90 5.86 1.31 4.10 T5 120.00-140.00 130.45 6.44 1.44 4.94 135.00-145.00 139.15 2.73 0.62 2.00 LSD at 5X 4.513 5.282 LSD at IX 5.977 6.996

10. OL-BL F 155.00-185.00 171.05 8.57 1.92 4.87 160.00-180.00 171.00 6.59 1.47 3.86 Tl 155.00-176.00 165.40 5.26 1.17 2.96 155.00-180.00 163.00 9.78 2.19 4.96 T2 168.00-185.00 175.15 5.66 1.26 2.99 175.00-198.00 177.40 7.43 1.67 4.01 T3 170.00-195.00 185.35 7.27 1.63 3.92 185.00-206.00 195.65 6.43 1.44 3.29 T4 170.00-205.00 193.60 9.72 2.17 5.02 195.00-21S.00 208.65 4.83 1.08 2.31 T5 170.00-198-00 185.90 8.73 1.95 4.69 180.00-208.00 194.90 6.75 l.Il 3.46 LSD at 5X 4.547 6.576 LSD at IX 6.022 8.709

11. LFW F 5.00-7.00 5.95 0.69 0.15 11.53 5.00-6.00 5.30 0.41 0.09 7.89 Tl 5.00-6.00 5.75 0.44 O.lO 7.73 5.00-6.00 5.45 0.51 0.11 9.36 T2 5.00-7.00 5.75 0.64 0.14 11.11 5.00-6.00 5.45 0,51 0.11 9.36 T3 5.00-7.00 5.75 0.55 0.12 9.57 5.00-6.00 5.70 0.47 0. 10 B.75 T4 5.00-7.00 5.95 0.60 0.13 10.16 5.00-6.00 5.65 0.44 0. 10 7.73 T5 5.00-6.00 5.65 0.51 0.11 9.36 5.00-6.00 5.60 0.49 0.11 9.56 LSD a t 5X 0.323 0.371 LSD at IX 0.428 0.491

12. TL F 55.00-70.00 62.65 4.99 1.11 7.96 54.00-60.00 57.25 2.24 0.50 3,92 Tl 55.00-65.00 60.00 3.70 0.83 6.15 54.00-62.00 57.70 2.25 0.50 3.90 T2 56.00-64.00 60.50 2.39 0.54 4.02 55.00-61.00 58.00 1.69 0.38 2.91 T3 60.00-69.00 64.70 3.18 0.71 5.33 56.00-63.00 60.50 1.85 0.41 3.11 T4 56.00-64.00 59.95 2.33 0.52 3.95 55.00-55.00 58.85 2.66 0.59 4.52 T5 55.00-62.00 58.25 1.94 0.43 3.34 56.00-63.00 59.65 1.98 0,44 3.32 LSD i3 t 5X 2.167 2.273 LSD ,a t IX 2.869 • 3.011

13. HTL F 31.00-42.00 37.20 3.21 0.72 8.23 32.00-41.00 36.45 2.86 0.64 7.03 Tl 34.00-42.00 37.90 3.U 0.69 8.21 34.00-42.00 37.65 2.37 0.53 6.29 T2 34.00-42.00 38.05 2.72 0.61 7.16 34.00-40.00 37.10 2.02 0.45 5.45 T3 34.00-42.00 38.50 2.80 0.63 7.27 36.00-42.00 39.25 2.00 0.45 5.09 T4 35.00-42.00 38.45 2.19 0.49 5.59 34.00-42.00 39.65 2.32 0.52 6.09 T5 34.00-41. 00 38.05 1.85 0.41 4.86 35.00-42.00 37.15 2.18 0.49 5.51 LSD ,a t 5X 1.851 2.091 LSD ,?> t IX 2.452 2.769 Contd.. .

Contd.,

Contc5 ^PI^nnlUx 7

10 11

14. BVA F 14.00-17.00 15.00 • 0.87 0.19 !5.2 1 14.00-16.00 15.25 0.79 (3.1 8 1.89 Tl 13.00-17.00 14.30 ' 1.15 0.26 15.8 5 13.00-16.00 14.60 0,70 13,1 6 1.58 T2 14.00-17.00 15.45 0.83 0.18 15.1 8 15.00-17.00 15.60 0,68 '0.1 5 4.36 T3 14.00-17.00 15.50 1.03 0.23 15.3 3 15.00-17.00 15.75 0.72 0. 16 4.55 T4 15.00-IB.00 16.20 1.00 0.22 16.2 0 15.00-17.00 15.90 0.79 o.ia 4.96 T5 14.00-n.OQ 15.95 0.76 0.17 4.91 15.00-17.00 16.00 0.72 0.16 4.53 LSD at 5X 0.495 0.515 LSD at 1% 0.656 0.S82

15. BL F 6.12-7.25 6.67 0.34 0.07 5.15 5.96-7.43 7.02 0.45 O.lO 6.93 AE-MB Tl 6.20-6.94 6.78 0.18 0.04 2.83 5.62-8.46 7.12 0.61 0.14 8.81 T2 5.81-7.73 6.85 0.51 0.11 7.88 5.98-7.25 6.67 0.30 0.07 4.54 T3 6.41-8.55 6.82 0.65 0.14 8.48 6.17-7.47 6,72 0.35 0.08 5.25 T4 6.12-0.33 6.65 0,66 0,15 B.97 6.25-7.86 7,54 0.42 0.09 5.95 T5 6.53-8.09 7.62 0.49 0.11 6.88 7.2B-8.73 7.91 0,37 0.08 5.50 LSD at 5X 0.279 0.267 LSD at IX 0,370 0.354

16. MBL/ F 1.11-1.83 1.46 0.15 0.03 :L0.1 4 1.17-1.67 1.33 0.12 0.03 8.83 MBW Tl 1.25-1.54 1.34 0.11 0.02 7.97 1.25-1.64 1.49 0,11 0.02 7.58 T2 1.23-1.58 1.34 0.09 0.02 6.59 1.15-1.50 1,36 0,10 0.02 7.02 T3 1.23-1.6 0 1.43 0.09 0.02 6.45 1.23-1.54 1,35 0,09 0.02 6.63 T4 1.25-1.64 1.42 0.12 0.03 8.39 1.33-1.64 1.41 0.08 0.02 5.69 T5 1.33-1.73 1.34 0.11 0.02 7.33 1.25-1.80 1.46 0.14 0.03 9.46 LSD a t 5% 0.073 0.071 LSD a t 1% 0.097 0.094

17. HTL,/ f 1.33-1.60 1.50 0.08 0.02 5.78 1.21-1.60 1,48 o.n 0.02 7.59 STL Tl 1.36-1.71 1.57 0.09 0.02 6.54 1.41-1.80 1.62 0.09 0.02 6.54 T2 1.31-1.70 1.51 0,12 0.03 8.33 1.26-1.59 1.45 0.09 0.02 6.61 T3 1.21-1.68 1.43 0,11 0,02 7.98 1.29-1.54 1.42 0.07 0.02 5.01 T4 1.30-1.71 1.50 0.10 0.02 6.94 1.24-2.00 1.46 0.17 0.04 11.94 T5 1.31-i.ao 1.59 0.10 0.02 6.92 1.43-1.84 1.61 0.08 0.02 5.37 LSD 1> t 5S 0.075 0,081 LSD ia t IX 0.100 0.108

18. Value F 18.65-23.20 22.00 1.01 0.23 4.54 21.37-26.71 24.50 1.53 0.34 6.67 'a' Tl 19.83-24.50 21.83 1.49 0.33 6.51 22.56-26.75 25.65 2.29 0.51 9.83 T2 21.00-27.14 23.80 1.52 0,36 6.79 20.00-25.71 23.83 1.39 0.31 6.01 T3 20.40-27.62 23.72 2,20 0.49 9.24 21.74-27.62 25.36 1.73 0.39 7.19 T4 19.60-27.27 23.09 2.04 0.46 8.83 22.00-26,96 24.11 1.38 0.31 5.74 T5 18.80-27.50 22.57 2.44 0.54 10.49 20.00-25.00 23.76 1.31 0.29 5.68 LSD at 5X 0.876 0.866 LSD at IX 1.160 1.147

19. Va1 ue F 3.81-4.49 4.12 0.18 0,04 4.45 3.78-4.46 4.26 0.17 0.04 0.01 •b' Tl 3.52-4.80 4.20 0.24 0.54 6.16 3.41-4.78 4.39 0.32 0.07 8.35 T2 3.75-4.83 4.32 0.31 0.07 7.66 3.63-4.39 4.14 0.22 0.05 6.60 T3 3.85-4.83 4.38 0.28 0.06 6.39 3.75-4.31 3.97 0.27 0.06 6,71 T4 3.22-4.46 3.97 0.37 0.08 9.40 3.45-4.37 3.95 0.26 0.06 6,54 T5 3.76-4.50 4.12 0.21 0.05 5.53 3.43-4.20 3.92 0.22 0.05 5.77 LSD at 5X 0.159 0.174 LSD at IX 0.210 0.231

20. Value F 2.36-3.47 2.92 0.30 0.07 10.20 2.80-3.17 2.97 0,12 0.03 4.00 ''b ' 2.62-3.23 2.93 0.11 0.02 3.57 2.64-3.56 3.03 0.20 0.44 7.68 Tl T2 2.69-3.30 3.06 0.10 0.02 3.50 2.56-3.42 2.90 0.13 0.03 4.81 T3 2.63-3.23 2.93 0.17 0.04 5.94 2.50-2.97 ' 2.79 0.14 0.03 4.87 T4 2.39-3.35 2.82 0,30 0.07 10.62 2.38-2.98 2.71 O.n 0.04 6.49 T5 2.47-3.25 2.90 0.16 0.04 6.01 2.50-2.97 2.72 0.13 O.Cj 4.75 LSDi at 5X 0,081 o.m LHE1 at IX 0.100 0.147 Contd.

ConLd. . . . Api'i r

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

_ _ - _ -— — 21. Value F 7.15-9.23 8.00 0.62 0.15 '•B.l l 7,.69-9.8 3 a.as 0.62 0.14 7.14 "^ Tl 7.10-6.?2 8.00 0.40 0.09 4.68 8,.03-10.0 0 8.56 0.47 0.10 5.39 T2 8.20-9.82 9.00 0.49 0.11 5.49 8 .14-9.66 8.87 0.42 n,09 4,7 6 T3 8.17-9.13 8.45 0.46 0.10 5.05 8 .50-9.83 9.08 0,41 0,09 4,47 T4 8.17-10.6? 9.22 0.68 0.15 7.37 8 .33-11.07 9.60 0.67 0.15 6.96 T5 8.12-9.8< 9.24 0.45 0.10 5.34 8 .38-9.76 9.14 0.34 0.08 3.81 LSD at by. 0.305 0.347 LSD at 1'^ 0,404 0.496 -

22. Value F 3.25-4.98 4.17 0.30 0.07 7.76 3 .37-4.00 3.75 0,18 n.04 4.70 ''^' Tl 3.55-4.66 4.19 0.31 0.07 8.SO 3 .64-4.34 3.95 0.22 0.05 5.8S T2 3.51-4.20 3.84 O.n 0.04 4.56 3 .50-4.00 3.72 0.14 0.03 3.67 T3 3.58-4.36 3.97 0.24 0.05 6.57 3 .53-4.07 3.78 0.15 0.03 3.92 Tl 3.33-3.93 3.65 0.18 0.04 5.05 3 .41-4.05 3.71 0.21 0.05 5.79 T5 3.40-4.04 3.68 0.18 0.04 4.72 3 .29-4.00 3.73 0.18 0.04 4.77 LSD at SX 0.147 0.158 LSD at 1% 0.194 0.210

23. BW/BWA F 1.15-1.73 1.54 0.16 0.04 11.62 ]L.25-1.5 7 1.37 0.10 0.02 7.64 Tl 1.37-1.73 1.52 0.09 0.02 6.78 L. 31-1. 50 1.36 0.05 0.01 3.84 T2 1.18-1.57 1.46 0.13 0.03 9.05 1.25-1.60 1.38 0.06 0.02 5.52 T3 1.22-1.60 1.47 0.11 0.02 7.69 1.29-1.60 1.37 0.09 0.02 6.40 T4 1.22-1.73 1.46 0.15 0.03 10.42 1.23-1.67 1.48 0.12 0.03 7.85 T5 1.18-1.71 1.49 0.13 0.03 9.34 1.23-1.60 1.44 0.09 0.02 6.17 LSD at 5% 0,065 0.071 LSD at IX 0.087 0.Ct)4

24. OL-OV F 1.15-1.33 1.22 n.02 O.Dl 3.U 1.14-1.22 1.17 0.02 O.Ol 1.89 '^^-^^P Tl 1.12-1.32 1.21 0.05 0.01 3.84 1.12-1.22 1.17 0.03 0.01 2,74 T2 1.27-1.50 1.30 0.02 OiOl 2.01 1.21-1.32 1.27 0.03 0,01 2,20 T3 1.20-1.50 1.26 0.07 0.01 5.33 1.22-1.33 1.29 0.03 0,01 2.30 T4 1.24-1.42 1.31 0.07 0.01 5.12 1.24-1.38 1.30 0.03 O.Ol 2.72 T5 1.22-1.38 1.29 0.04 0.01 3.20 1.23-1.33 1.28 0.03 0.01 2.17 LSD at 5X 0.038 O.04O LSD at IX 0.050 0.052

25. BL, F 4.57-5.34 5.09 0.22 0.05 4.52 4.43-5.14 4.94 O.n 0.04 3.53 '^-EXP j^ 4.48-5.50 5,09 0.27 0.06 5.36 4.21-5.79 5. 13 0.35 0.08 7.06 T2 4.64-5.98 5,62 0.36 0.08 7.07 4.54-5.52 5.25 0.27 0.06 5,46 T3 5.00-6.33 5.62 0.35 0.08 6.19 4.59-5.45 5.10 0.29 0.06 5.64 T4 4.45-6.20 5.20 0.47 0.11 9.12 4.54-5.62 5.12 0.31 0,07 6,12 T5 4.50-5.69 5.32 0.35 0.08 6.92 4.34-5.42 5.03 0.25 0,05 5,03 LSD at 5X 0,149 0.232 LSD at IX 0.197 0.307

26. BL/STL F 17.59-22.QO 20.27 1.05 0.23 5.40 17.14-23.00 20,63 1.37 0,31 7.16 Tl 17.86-20.37 20.24 0.73 0.15 3.87 16.67-21.54 21.19 1.08 0.24 5.68 T2 17.86-22.11 21.33 0.95_ 0.21 4.80 18.14-22.54 20.11 1.01 0,23 5,41 T3 17.86-22.40 20.7 3 1.15 0.26 5,70 17.86-21.92 19,77 1.06 0,24 5,34 T4 18.12-24.00 21.10 1.68 0.27 8.18 18.23-26.00 20.95 1.92 0,43 9.12 T5 17.86-21.15 22.57 0.B7 0.19 4.63 21.15-25.00 i 23,61 1.09 0.24 5.49 LSD at 5X 0,543 0,602 LSD at IX 0,719 0.903 27. OL-OV/ f 3.85-5.71 4,93 0.45 0,15 9.38 4.20-5.29 4.84 0.33 0.07 7.27 STL Tl 4.41-5.40 4,85 0,27 0,06 5.48 4.11-5.60 4.82 0.42 0.09 6.50 T2 4.29-5.20 4,93 0.22 0.05 4.57 4.29-5.20 4.85 0.27 0.05 5.79 T3 4.14-5.20 4.73 0,29 0.06 6.28 4.64-5.46 4.99 0.25 0.06 5.03 T4 4.61-5.63 5,28 0.31 0.07 5.95 4.82-7,00 5.33 0,40 0.11 8.94 T5 4.48-5.23 5.46 0.20 0.0^1 4.11 5,72-5,60 0. 02 0,26 "^.06 4.5 5 LSD It 5X 0,196 0.242 LSD at IX 0,26C ) 0.320 Cont<1. ,

m v/) o o o o o o

o o O to V o T-t cNi in 03 ^ c (N n cN rH rn

ft o CO ro n r- CO Ol rH CO in 00 »-l .-I CD CO O VO (N Cvl X) •V -^ r^ n rf O (D

(N VO r-t n o in •* rS

n o (j\ t- rn \o VO (N in O vo t~- CO in in m •.;}• lO vo T}" EH

T) C in 10 •^ n] o o o o o o J^ •«1" o o o o o o 0 H E -H ^ n n o n \o CO :a H :o o o o o o o CM o H CM t % >, M r^ l-l c^ CO CO Ti> 0 E-t O CT» r^ vD o (N > •H rn n n •»!< rt o o c0 C•* •p o o 0 c •r^ 0) *J ft n (0 in T3 r^ T3> o o o -tt s t^ ^ CM o n u) o

C • •a -p ft in \o Tf -H in cu m iH ^ n • t t • • • •C (U -H n n fO n ro n -P u TH fl It) 0 &< fi ,H CM n T}> in Q Q u

J* c 0 u

00 CM Appendix - 8 : Chnnqes in the measurements of male of H. avenag. collected from wheat grown in different soil moisture.

CHARACTER/ ALIGARH POPULATION* GHA2IABAD PAPULATION* TREATt4ENT » « Range Mean 3D SE CV Range Mean SD SE CV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 g 10 11

BL F 1152.00-1540, 00 1362.0 0 109.07 24.39 7.95 1336.00-1470,00 1412.75 38.51 0.61 2.73

Tl 990.00-1280. 00 1111.40 80.80 18.07 7.27 650,00-1300,00 1150.00 160.79 35.95 13.98

T2 1060.00-1400. 00 1226.45 111.98 25.04 9.13 1020,00-1460.00 1259.75 135.37 30.27 10.75 T3 1200.00-1520. 00 1380.25 103.18 23.07 8.05 1150.00-1435.00 1347.00 78.63 17.58 5.97

T4 1300.00-1520. 00 1434.25 96.30 21.53 7.62 1350.00-1580.00 1482,75 144.80 32,38 11.47

T5 1000.00-1380. 00 1205.50 114.28 25.25 9.48 1025.00-1350.00 1184.00 99,23 22.28 8.41

LSD at 5% 69.020 69.146

r LSD at 1% 92,471 91.578

BW F •33.00-38,00 33.70 2.20 0.45 5.94 20.00-34.00 31.45 1,79 0.40 5.69

Tl 26.00-35.00 31.15 2.85 0.64 8.87 25.00-36.00 31.75 2,49 0.55 7.84

T2 30.00-36.00 33.40 1.85 0.41 5.53 27.00-36.00 32.00 2.66 0.59 8.30

T3 30,00-37,00 34.70 1.81 0.40 5.21 30.00-38.00 34.15, 2.48 0.55 7.25

T4 32.00-38,00 35,35 2,41 0.54 7.08 29.00-36.00 33.40 2.19 0.''.9 6.54

T5 26,00-35,00 30,90 2.63 0.59 8.00 25.00-37.00 32.70 3.78 0.85 li;57

LSD at 5% 1.475 1.5 22

LSD ,at 1% 1.953 2.016

3. STL F 25.00-30,00 27.55 1.70 0.38 6.17 26.00-29.00 20.90 2.84 0.64 9.04

Tl 25.00-29.00 26.50 1.23 0.27 4.56 25.00-31.00 27.70 1.66 0,37 5.98

T2 25.00-30,00 27.95 1.70 0.38 «.08 27.00-32.00 29.10 1.86 0.42 6.39

T3 28.00-31.00 29.60 1.14 0.25 3.86 27.00-32.00 29.90 1.45 0.32 4.90

T4 25.00-32,00 29.00 2.45 0.50 7.75 26,00-31.00 29.35 1.42 0,32 4.85

T5 25,00-30.00 26.80 1.43 0.31 5.30 26.00-30,00 27.65 1.18 0,2 6 4.03

LSD at 5% 0.062 0.870

LSD at 1% 1,142 1.152

4. DOGO F 5,00-,7.00 6,00 0.59 0,13 10.39 5.00-7.00 6.10 0.79 0.18 12.92

Tl 5.00-6,00 5.50 0.51 0.11 9.20 5.00-7*00 5.95 0.76 0.17 12.75

T2 5,00-8,00 6.30 1.08 0.24 17.16 4.00-7.00 6.10 0,85 0.19 13.97

T3 5.00-7,00 6.35 0.81 0.18 12.80 5.00-6.00 5.60 0,50 0.11 8.97

T/1 5.00-7,00 5.60 0.50 0.11 9.31 5.00-7.00 5.75 0.05 0,19 14.79

T5 5,00-7,00 5.85 0.81 0.18 13.89 5.00-7.00 6.40 0.60 0. 13 9.35

LSD at 5% 0.474 0,531

LSD at 1% 0.627 0.703

1.44 6.32 F 95.00-117.00 104,75 5.44 1.22 5.19 90.00-112.00 100.25 6.46 1.77 8.79 Tl 75.00-98.00 90.05 6.73 1.50 7.47 65.00-100.00 09.90 7.90 1,52 6.83 T2 00.00-105.00 04.30 0.34 1.06 0.05 05.00-110.00 99.35 6.78 3.76 T3 92,00-110.00 101.75 5.64 1.26 5.54 92.00-106.00 100.10 3.76 0.84 • T4 90.00-110.00 100.00 6.49 1.45 6.44 85.00-115.00 100.50 9.77 2.18 9.7? 7.80 1.74 8.26 T5 75.00-107.00 95.10 0.57 1.92 9.01 72.00-105.00 94.45

LSD at 5% 3.001 4.953

LSD at i% 3.97 4 6.573

Contd Appendix B

6. MBL F 18.00.24.00 21.20 1.90 0.43 9.00 16.00-23.00 19.15 2.58 0.5S 13.48 Tl 16.00-23.00 19.30 2.27 0,51 11.78 17.00-24.00 19.70 2.13 0.48 10.81 T2 16.00-24.00 19.55 2.46 0.55 12.58 17.00-24.00 20.25 2.02 0.45 9.99 T3 17.00-23.00 20.50 2.01 0.45 9.82 17.00-25.00 20.70 2.60 0.58 12.55 T4 16.00-23.00 19.40 2.28 0.51 11.75 18.00-23.00 20.90 1.52 0.34 7.26

TS 16.00-22.00 19.10 1.86 0.42 9,74 17.00-24.00 20.40 2.39 0.53 11.73 LSD at 5% 1.330 1.522 LSD at i;C 1.761 2.016

7. MBW F 9.00-15,00 11,15 1,90 0.42 16.03 11.00-14.00 12,70 0.98 0.22 7.71 Tl 10.00-12.00 11.25 0.91 0.20 8.09 9.00-14.00 11.45 1.19 0.27 10.40

T2 10.00-14.00 11.85 1.18 0.26 9.98 10.00-13.00 11.45 1.19 0.27 10.40 T3 10.00-13.00 12.05 0.94 0.21 7.84 10.00-14.00 12.05 1.39 0.31 11.57

T4 9.00-15.00 11.95 1.70 0.38 14.23 10.00-14.00 12.40 0.99 0.22 S.73 T5 11.00-14.00 12.60 1.09 0.24 8.69 11.00-14.00 12.75 1.02 0.23 8.68 LSD at 5% 0.626 0.820 LSD at 1% 0.829 1.087

8. AE-EXP F 155.00-180.00 168.05 7.93 1.77 4.72 152.00-170.00 163.65 5,34 1.19 3.26 Tl 140,00-165,00 154,15 7,18 1.60 4,66 105.00-160.00 144.60 13.37 2.99 9.25

T2 142.00-175.00 160,90 8,64 1.93 5.37 150.00-165.00 158,60 4.96 1,11 3.12

T3 155,00-175,00 164.25 6.92 1.55 4.25 150.00-180.00 162.50 11,51 2,57 7,09 T4 160,00-185.00 172,25 6.69 1.49 4.12 160.00-178.00 169,85 6.77 1,51 - 4,26

T5 130.00-167.00 155.35 0.20 1.83 5.28 130.00-165.00 149.20 12.58 2.81 8.43 LSD at S'/. 4.293 6.089

LSD at 1% 5.686 8.064

9. OL-OV F 115.00-167.00 144.25 12.22 2.73 8.47 125.00-146.00, 137.00 6,41 1.47 4.68 Tl 110.00-140.00 127.25 8,88 1.98 6.98 90.00-128.00 119.90 8.97 2,01 7.43

T2 105.00-138.00 128.00 7.62 1.70 5.95 100.00-136.00 122,25 10.36 2.32 8.47

T3 132.00-145.00 140,30 5.12 1.37 4.61 118.00-150.00 133.90 9.98 2.23 7.48 T4 120.00-136.00 130.15 4,72 1.05 3.62 120.00-135.00 127.85 4.61 1.03 3.61

T5 110,00-135.00 125.00 6,98 1.56 5.58 115.00-140.00 129.30 5.48 1.22 4.24 LSD at 5% 4.148 5.119

LSD at 1% 5.494 6.780

10. OL-BL F 205.00-265.00 235.45 14.43 3.33 6.13 200.00-220.00 208.80 7.34 1.64 3.51

Tl 190.00-235.00 214.40 13,39 2.99 6.25 147.00-205.00 189.45 11.01 2.46 5.81

T2 210.00-235.00 226,35 7.82 1.75 3.46 198.00-225.00 210.50 8.68 1.94 4.12

T3 210.00-250.00 232.50 12.30 2.75 5,29 185.00-235.00 213.60 14.00 3.13 6.55

T4 210.00-250,00 231,20 9.12 2.04 3.95 195.00-255.00 231.00 25.54 5,93 11.49

T5 180.00-22 0.00 195.05 10,25 2.29 5.26 195.00-218,00 201.40 13.35 2.93 £.29 LSD at 5% 4,275 6.638

LSD at 1% 5.662 8.791

(>Mit-.i. . . . Appt^ll'll 8 9 10 11

11. LFW F 6.00-7.00 6.6 5 0.49 0.11 7.36 6.00-3.00 6.75 0.64 0.14 9.46

Tl 6.00-7.00 6.75 0.44 0.10 6.58 6.00-8.00 6.85 0.59 0.13 8.57

T2 5.00-7.00 6.50 0.61 _0.14 9.34 5.00-7.00 6.45 0.60 0.13 9.38 T3 6.00-7.00 6.60 0.50 0.11 7.62 6.00-7.00 6.70 0.47 0.10 7.02 T4 5.00-7.00 6.40 0.63 0.15 10.63 5.00-7.00 6.40 0.68 0.15 10.53 T5 6.00-7.00 6.50 0.51 0.11 7.89 5.00-7.00 6.40 0.75 0.17 11.78 LSD at 5% 0.402 0.523 LSD at 1% 0.533 0.693

12. SPL F 28.00-36.00 32.80 2.19 0.49 6.71 32.00-36.00 34.35 1.31 0.29 3.81 Tl 32.00-36.00 33.10 1.6b 0.38 4.93 26.00-36.00 32.35 3.20 0.72 9.32 T2 32.00-38.00 34.90 1.94 0.43 5.41 32.00-37.00 35.00 1.69 0.38 4.82 T3 33.00-38.00 35.25 2.00 0.45 5.51 30.00-38.00 35.85 2.08 0.47 5.81 T4 32.00-36.00 34.30 1.17 0.26 3.33 32.00-37.00 35.45 1.64 0.37 4.62 T5 31.00-36.00 33.55 1.96 0.44 5.67 32.00-37.00 34.95 1.82 0.41 5.21 LSD at 5% 1.114 1.708

LSD at 1% 1.475 2.263

13. GL F 11.00-13.00 12.25 0.79 0.18 6.42 10.00-12.00 11.35 0.85 0.19 7.56 Tl 9.00-12.00 10.80 1.20 0.27 11.08 10.00-12.00 11.35 0.87 0.20 7.71 T2 10.00-13.00 11.dO 1.06 0.24 8.95 10.00-13,00 11.90 1.05 0.23 8.79 T3 11.00-13.00 12.15 0.81 0.18 6.69 8.00-14.00 12.15 1.50 0.33 12.32

T4 10.00-13.00 11.65 1-09 0.24 9.35 10.00-13.00 12.05 0.83 0.18 6.85 T5 10.00-12.00 11.45 0.89 0.20 7.75 10.00-13.00 11.90 0.97 0.22 8.13

LSD at S% 0.563 0.541

LSD at 1% 0.745 0.717

14. BVAE- F 12.13-13.81 13.02 0.48 0.11 3.63 12.86-14.51 14.09 0.46 0.10 3.39 MB Tl 10.52-14.02 12.38 0.99 0.22 7.96 10.00-15.25 12.77 1.37 0.31 10.73 T2 11.58-14.22 13.03 0.77 0.17 5.93 10.00-14.21 12.68 0.91 0.20 7.22 T3 11.48-15.00 13.56 0.89 0.20 7.03 12.10-14.20 13.46 0.41 0.09 3.14 T4 11.5.J-13.91 12.54 0.60 0.13 4.03 10.79-14.24 12.56 0.72 0.16 5.75 T5 11.49-14.33 12.70 0.80 0.18 6.30 11.67-14.12 12.53 0.59 0.13 4.72 LSD at S% 0.507 0.840

LDS at 1% 0.672 1.113

15. MBL/MBW F 1.50-2.00 1.87 0.11 0.02 6.17 1.25-1.92 1.52 0.19 0.04 12.19

Tl 1,33-1.92 1.72 0.19 0.04 10.91 1.36-2.00 1.73 0.20 0.04 11.73

T2 1.29-1.92 1.65 0.15 0.03 9,39 1.50-2.00 1.77 0.14 0.03 7.65

T3 1.21-2.00 1.70 0.21 0.05 13.07 1.38-2.00 1.73 0.19 0.04 11.15

T4 1.29-2.00 1.62 0,21 0.05 12.91 1.46-2.00 1.6^ 0.17 0.04 9.06

T5 1.31-1.92 1.53 0.15 0.03 9.54 1.40-1.82 1.60 0.12 0.03 7.l0

LSD at 5% 0,103 0.113

LSD at r/o 0.136 0.150

Contd....

I I-MI 1 I H II

8 9 10 11

16. Value F 37.71-/"= .T'^ 4r".4 7 ?. ~ 1 0.5? 5.57 -l"^. rq--! 6. 1'^ 4,1 . o ^ 3 .0^ ^ 1 -) ^ . '" Tl 31.1!=-4\2T 35.54 2.65 0.59 7.51 26.03-43.33 3 6 . 2 T 4. 2 7 . ^ 11. ^"

T2 32.29-47.50 36.72 2.21 0.4^ 5.69 34.00-46.15 3 -.37 7,61 Q_ , „ 6.-,^

T3 33.78-44.67 39.77 2.66 0.59 7.08 35.94-43.10 39.49 1.98 0.44 5,:i

T4 36.14-42.62 40.57 2.34 0.52 6.17 41.68-46.33 44.39 2.91 0.65 7.SB

T5 30.57-40.00 34.54 2.41 0.54 7.34 33.71-40.62 36.25 2.02 0.45 5.46

LSD at 5% 1.243 1.643

LSD at 1% 1.646 2.168

17. Value F 8.87-10.21 9.44 0.39 0.09 4.12 8.00-12.06 10.34 0.35 0.08 4.08 'b' Tl 7.46-9.48 8.69 0.55 0.12 6.37 8.16-10.40 9.53 0.58 0.13 6.16

T2 8.46-10.67 9.53 0.64 0.14 6.77 9.54-11.04 10.30 0.46 0.10 4.47

T3 8.07-11.04 9.96 0.85 0.19 8.80 7.22-11.36 10.09 1.10 0.24 11.46

T4 8.15-10.80 9.75 0.73 0.16 7.45 8.39-10.98 9.75 0.87 0.19 8.90

T5 8.15-10.80 8. 84 0.64 0.14 6.69 7.88-10.65 9.18 0.80 0.18 8.22

LSD at 5% 0. 464 0.519

LSD at IX 0. 614 0.688

18. Value F 5.02-6.22 5. 78 0.19 0.04 2.74 5.20-5.80 5.50 0.19 0.04 3.51

Tl 4.74-5.71 5. 19 0.29 0.06 5.52 4.42-6.84 5.15 0.69 0.15 11.35

T2 4.51-6.22 5. 41 0.50 0.11 9.42 4.36-6.43 5.98 0.46 0.10 7.70

T3 4.87-6.31 5. 89 0.45 O.lO 8.08 5.68-6.83 6.25 0.32 0.07 5.06

T4 8.89-6.00 5. ,49 0.33 0.07 6.09 4.37-8.48 5.54 1.03 0.23 18.58

T5 5.24-6.22 5. ,47 0.41 0.09 6.61 4.86-6.34 5.55 0.41 0.99 7,37

LSD at 5% 0, .285 0.275

LSD at 1% 0,.37 8 0.365

19. BL/AE- F 7.30-10.07 8 .10 0.78 0.17 9.16 7.87-9.89 8.63 0.26 0.06 3.53 EXP Tl 6.41-7.76 7 .21 0.38 0.09 5.35 6.83-9.85 7.97 0.80 0.18 10.04

T2 6.66-8.48 7 .63 0.63 0.14 8.26 6.58-8.71 7.94 0.52 0.12 6.68

T3 7.79-9.50 8 .40 0.55 0.12 6.98 7.57-9.10 8.30 0.41 0.09 4.91

T4 6.42-8.53 7 .83 0.74 0.16 9.45 6.19-9.41 7.96 1.02 0.23 12.80

T5 7.00-8.42 7 .75 0.43 0.09 5.52 6.07-8.79 7.93 0.71 0.16 8.89

LSD at 5% 0 .404 0.484

LSD at 1% 0 .535 0.640

20. BL/STL F 48.67-50.99 49.42 0.59 0.13 1.21 45.33-50,69 48.87 1.41 0.32 2.92

Tl 35.33-45.16 41.90 2.87 0.64 6.93 26.00-48.15 41.45 5.06 1.13 12.22

T2 40.71-46.71 43.90 2.72 0.61 6.56 35.00-48.21 43.29 3.73 0.83 8.79

T3 41.67-52.00 46.63 3.04 0.68 6.86 41.07-47.78 45.09 1.95 0.44 4.34

T4 40.07-48.00 43.59 2.42 0.54 5.32 28.33-49.33 43.03 4.57 1,02 10.61

T5 35.71-48.21 43.32 3.03 0.68 7.03 36.61-44.44 40.69 2.27 0.51 5.:7

LSD at 5*<, 1.524 2.162

LSD at i% 2.019 2.864

Contd.

Contd... Appendix 8

10 11 21. 01-OV/ F 4.83-5.56 5.24 0.21 0.05 4.09 4.64-5,34 4.75 0.20 0.05 4,13 STL Tl 3.79-5,40 4.80 0,29 0.07 6,86 3,60-4,81 4.33 0.29 0.07 6.76

T2 4.20-5.20 4.57 0.26 0.06 5.46 3.50-4.82 4.21 0.38 0.08 8.98

T3 4.14-5.19 4.70 0.32 0.07 6.62 4.14-4.83 4.49 0.25 0.06 5,61

T4 4.07-4.81 4.48 0,22 0.05 4.89 4.07-4.81 4.36 0,19 0.04 4,42

T5 4.00-5.40 4.51 0,40 0.09 8,89 3.83-4.81 4.41 0,22 0.05 5.03

LSD at S% 0.139 0.168

LSD at \% 0.184 0.223

22. AE-EXP/ F 5.64-6.67 6.12 0.31 0.07 5.02 5.81-6.50 5.66 0.19 0.04 3.08 STL Tl 5.24-6.42 5.84 0.32 0.07 5.44 4,20-6,04 5.23 0.49 0.11 9.29 T2 5.20-6.40 5.79 0.27 0.06 4.74 5.00-6.07 5.47 0.31 0.07 5.62

T3 4.77-6.25 5.53 0.40 0.09 7.33 4.67-5.93 5.42 0.28 0.06 5.21

T4 5.00-6.25 5.59 0.30 0.07 5.59 5.00-5.93 5.41 0.23 0.05 4.35 T5 5.00-6.60 5.63 0.49 0.11 8.80 4.33-6.00 5,10 0.46 0,10 9.01

LSE) at 5% 0.17: 0,222 LSD at 1% 0.22E 0.294

* Each value is mean of 20 specimens * F « Field population; Tl, T2, T3, T4, £. T5 « 10, 20, 30, 40 & 50 percent, aoH moisture respectively. Apicuiix - '.) t Cli.ui jf"'" in Llir ini- i-JU L t-.niMi Ls o £ Ft-i nit-, cya'-, e^jg n.1 oonr lop .1L i . are

of H. avenae collected fro"i wheat grown in different soil moisture.

CHAPJ\CTER/ ALlGARIi POFJLATIO;; GKJ\2IABAD FOEyLATIC:;' TREATMENT* Ran jO Mean SD ss cv Rsnge Mean SD SE CV

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 11

1. BL F 425.00-670.00 527.35 80,97 13,11 15.07 40C.00-650.00 518,00 76.34 17,07 14.74 Tl 450.00-560.00 500.25 26.52 5.93 5.11 420.00-560.00 430,75 45.23 10.34 8.10 T2 500.00-620.00 553.25 37.65 8.46 6,82 475,00-630,00 548.25 50.37 11.26 9.19

T3 500.00-625.00 559.00 4 4.89 10.04 8,03 525.00-650,00 5 35.00 36.99 8.27 6.32

T4 500.00-630.00 559.00 48.79 10,91 8.73 500.00-650,00 559.25 45.63 10.20 3.16

T5 450.00-550.00 495.25 49.11 10.98 9,40 430.00-550.00 490.50 42,87 9,59 7.79

LSD at 5% 26.810 27.304

LSD at 154 35.508 36.162

2. BW F 270.00-390.00 306.60 32.97 7.37 13,37 250.00-360,00 299.50 36.34 8.13 12.13

Tl 200.00-300.00 272.50 26,28 5.88 9,64 225.00-400,00 265.50 5C.S4 11.37 16.22

T2 250.00-360.00 303.25 31,22 6.98 10.29 275.00-450.00 323.25 52,45 11.73 16.22

T3 200.00-400.00 313.75 54.24 L2.13 17.29 260.00-400.00 336.00 44.59 9.97 13.63

T4 290.00-400.00 331.75 36.57 8.18 11.02 280,00-390,00 328.25 32.21 7.20 10.60

T5 220.00-400.00 280.25 47.76 10.63 15,34 200.00-420,00 270.00 46,21 10.30 14.49

LSD at 5% 24,852 28.396

LSD at 1% 32.915 37.608

3. STL F 20.00-24.00 22.05 1,32 0.29 5,97 21.00-24,00 22,35 1.04 0,23 4.65

Tl 18.00-23.00 20,25 1,30 0.29 4.81 17.00-24.00 20.75 2,02 0.45 7,29

T2 20.00-25.00 22.75 1,41 0.31 5,08 20,00-25,00 22.30 1,92 0.43 7,09

T3 21.00-25.00 23.25 1.33 0.31 4,69 20,00-26.00 2 3,80 1.55 0.41 6.43

T4 21.00-26.00 23,15 1,31 0.29 4,82 20,00-26.00 23.75 1.99 0,45 5.94

T5 18,00-24.00 21.00 1,90 0.43 6.94 18.00-24.00 21.05 1. •; 7 0.33 5,14

LSD at S% 0.927 1.04 8

LSD at 1% 1.22a 1.389

4. DOGO F 5.00-7.00 5.80 0.77 0.17 13.24 4.00-7,00 5,90 1.35 0.23 19.11

Tl 4.00-6.00 5.30 0.65 0.19 16,71 5,00-7.00 6.40 0.75 0,17 11,78

T2 S.00-7.00 5.95 0.76 0.17 12,76 5.00-7.00 6.00 0.S6 0.19 14.31

T3 5.00-7.00 6,10 1.02 0.23 16.73 5.00-7,00 6,20 0.77 0.17 12.38

T4 5.00-7.00 6.30 0.73 0.16 11,63 5,00-7.00 6,25 0.79 0.18 12.58

T5 5.00-7.00 6,30 0.98 0.22 15.53 5.00-8.00 6.40 1.09 0.24 17,12

LSD at 5% 0.533 0.581

LSD at 1% 0.706 0.769

5. AE-K3 F 70.00-12J.00 85.95 13.36 2.99 15,55 80.00-110,00 98.20 7,56 1,69 7.70

Tl 70.00-102.^^0 80.45 9.56 2,14 9.22 60.00-95.00 78.95 10,33 2,31 13,08

T2 62.00-110.00 89.20 7.47 1.67 7.60 75.00-105.00 96,05 3.39 1,88 3.83

T3 62.00-110.00 89.20 7,47 1,67 7.60 90,00-115.00 105.65 5,36 1.31 6.17

T4 90.00-120,00 101,95 6,2? 1.85 3.12 70.00-95.:'0 106,15 C'. ;2 1.38 1 :.:•<:

T5 82.00-96.00 30.40 4.11 0.92 4.13 75.00-110.00 91.35 1 ^ ^7 1.41 =.£5

LSD at 5% 4.95 3 6.336

LSD at 1% 6.560 8.392

ConLci Api -t'tnl i X

7 R 9 1^ n

;. H3L F 27.00-37.00 33.45 3.33 0.74 9.96 27.00-36.00 31.55 3.10 0.59 9.83

Tl 32.00-36.00 34.10 1.33 0.30 3.91 23,00-37.00 33. 10 3.88 0.87 11.72 T2 30.00-37.00 34.45 2.28 0.51 6.62 28.00-37.00 34.00 2.71 0.61 7.9S T3 32.00-38.00 36.00 1.49 0.33 4.13 27.00-39.00 34.20 4.10 0.92 11.96

T4 34.00-38.00 35.90 1.16 0.26 3.25 28.00-38.00 34.85 2.66 0.59 7.64 T5 20.00-37.00 34.00 2.57 0.50 7.57 27.00-37.00 32.70 3.29 0.74 10.29 LoD at 5X 1.233 2.107 L3D .It IX 1.633 2.700

7. MBW F 29.00-35.00 31.80 1.96 0.44 6.17 27.00-36.00 31.00 2.69 0,60 8.69

Tl 27.00-34.00 30.35 2.41 0,54 7.95 23.00-34.00 28.85 2.81 0.63 9.76 T2 27.00-36.00 31.05 2.62 0.59 8.45 25.00-33.00 29.20 2.42 0.54 8.23

T3 26.00-37.00 31.30 3.33 0.74 10.63 26.00-35.00 30.35 3.53 0.79 11.63 T4 27.00-35.00 31.00 2.27 0.51 7.33 26.00-36.00 30.30 2.87 0.64 9.45 T5 25.00-35.00 29.80 2.89 0.65 9.71 26.00-36.00 30.50 3.00 0.67 9.84

LSD at 5% 1.633 1.772

LSD at 1% 2.163 2.347

8. AE-EXP F 95.00-165.00 136.95 19.26 4.31 14.06 110.00-160.00 143.20 14.01 3.13 9.7S Tl 110.00-132.00 120.25 6.77 1.51 5.04 125.00-150,00 135.45 9.95 2.23 8.20

T2 118.00-146,00 129.30 11.41 2.55 8.19 130.00-165.00 153.65 5.38 1.20 4,03 T3 135.00-165.00 149.10 9.67 2.16 6.49 140,00-178.00 168.55 15.21 3.40 10.93

T4 135.00-162.00 150.05 8.29 1.85 5.53 145,00-175.00 165.60 8.54 1.91 6.30 T5 120.00-175.00 153.30 13.72 3.07 8.95 135.00-165.00 154.35 9,44 2.11 7,03

fcSD at 5% 6.069 6.202

LSD at l;'. 8.038 8.214

9. NL F 110.00-155.00 133.60 15.08 3.37 15.28 130.00-175.00 159.15 15,55 3.48 9,77

Tl 110.00-135.00 123.50 15.48 3.46 9.47 120.00-156.00 142.35 9,70 2.17 6.81

T2 115.00-140.00 126.00 8.83 1.97 5.32 140.00-162.00 152.80 6.31 1.41 4.13

T3 125.00-150.00 136.10 8.72 1.95 5.25 140.00-175,00 167,40 14.93 3.34 9,60

T4 140.00-170.00 156.85 9.06 2.02 5.77 150.00-170.00 165.90 10,39 2.32 6.70

T5 110.00-135.00 125.60 7.62 1.70 4.93 110.00-165,00 151,95 12.95 2.90 8.52

LSD at 5X 6.953 6.657

LSD at 1% 9.208 8.817

10. V-A F 30.00-45.00 36.45 4.03 0.90 11.06 30.00-40,00 36.15 2.64 0.59 7.34

Tl 31.00-35.00 30.10 1.45 0.32 4.37 34.00-41.00 37.25 2.17 0.49 5.83

T2 35.00-40.00 36.80 1.61 0.36 4.37 35,00-41.00 37,30 2.05 0.46 5.51

T3 35.00-40.00 38.20 1.70 0.38 4.46 35.00-42.00 38.10 2.15 0.48 5.64

T4 35.00-45.00 39.35 2.94 0.66 7,48 36.00-42.00 38,75 1.97 0,44 5. 03

T5 34.00-45.00 38.10 2.77 0,62 7.27 32.00-44.00 38.20 3.02 0.67 7.?0

LSD at 5X 1.320 1.522

LSD at 1% 1.7 48 2.015

Con td.

CoiiLd. . . . APi "till I 3 9 10 11

11. MBL/ F 1.00-1.15 1.07 0.04 0.01 3.98 0.97-1.18 1.08 0.07 0,01 6.23 MBW 1.15 0.12 0.03 10.C6 Tl 1.00-1.30 1.13 0.09 0,02 7.73 1.00-1.36 1.16 0.12 0.03 10.CO T2 l.CO-1.37 1.12 0,11 0.02 9.81 1.00-1.42 1.13 0.13 0.03 11.75 T3 1.00-1.32 1.15 0.10 0,02 8,49 1.00-1.38 1.15 0.11 0.02 9.99 T4 1.00-1,42 1,16 0,11 0.02 10.58 1.00-1.37 1.10 0.11 0.02 9.73 T5 1.00-1.33 1.14 0,10 0.02 8.51 1.00-1.32 0.067 LSD at S'A 0.057 0.089 LSD at 1% 0.076

12, CL F 550,00-950,00 765,35 134.25 30,02 18.51 590.00-950.00 735.75 111.72 24.98 14.40

Tl 575.00-920.00 681.25 124,73 27.89 16.60 520.00-860.00 664.50 81.21 18,16 11,69

T 590,00-950,00 762.00 107.62 24,06 14,12 590.00-930.00 733.25 87.44 19.55 11.92

T 600.00-970.00 774,00 121,47 27.16 15.69 550.00-990.00 755.50 104.94 23.47 13,39

T4 650,00-950.00 633.00 110.98 24.82 15.14 620.00-950.00 813.75 177.77 26.33 14.47

T5 640,00-900.00 705,75 103,69 23,18 12.05 560.00-900.00 666.50 122.79 27.46 14.70

LSD at 55', 56.156 67.764

LSD at 1% 74.374 89.749

13. CW F 260.00-650.00 458.50 102.20 22.85 18.39 380.00-680,00 498.75 53.77 12.02 10.78

Tl 330.00-650.00 408.00 78.04 17.45 17.42 320,00-580.00 438.25 80.32 17.96 18.34

T2 310.00-680.00 444.00 100.31 22.43 22.59 350.00-610.00 475.50 75.27 16.83 15,33

T3 350.00-620,00 472.25 80.70 18.04 17.09 260.00-500.00 458.00 88.71 19.84 19.37

T4 400.00-650.00 514.75 60.16 13.45 13.84 380.00-575.00 491.25 56.66 12.67 11.53

T5 350.00-600.00 408.25 67.79 15.16 13.08 300.00-550.00 447.95 72.17 16.14 13.62

LSD at 5% 48.980 46,240

LSD at 1% 64.872 61.241

14. CL/a-J F 1.33-1.88 1.67 0.15 0.03 10.04 1.23-1.74 1.48 0,15 0,03 10.11

Tl 1.36-1.98 1.69 0.19 0.04 11.50 1.33-2.11 1.58 0.18 0,04 11.55

T2 1.40-2.34 1.76 0.28 0.06 16.07 1.27-2.14 1.56 0,20 0,04 12.82

T3 1.38-2.14 1.65 0.20 0.05 12.37 1.35-2.04 1.66 0,16 0.04 9.61

T4 1,43-1.97 1.62 0.15 0.03 8,98 1,42-2.35 1.68 0.25 0.06 15.16

T5 1,45-1.90 1.67 0.11 0,02 6,82 1,37-2.03 1.52 0.19 0.04 11.99

LSD at S'/, 0,125 0,131

LSD at 1% 0,165 0,173

15. EL F 125.00-135,00 129.95 3,89 0.87 2,99 120,00-135.00 127.25 5.25 1.17 4,13

Tl 112.00-135.00 125.55 6.48 1.45 5,16 110,00-125.00 117.95 5,06 1.13 4,29

T2 120.00-135,00 125,95 4.47 1.00 3.49 115.00-135.00 123.15 5,61 1,25 4,55

T3 124.00-140.00 130.25 5.41 1.21 4.15 120,00-138.00 129.65 5.44 1.22 4.23

T4 120.00-135,00 128,60 4.43 0.99 3,44 120,00-135,00 125.75 5.53 1.24 4.40

T5 125.00-145.00 133.90 5.15 1.15 3,85 125.00-14 0.00 131.30 5.34 1.19 4.C7

LSD at 5r. 3.173 3.330

LSD at 1% 4.203 4.410

Contd....

Co 11 LI,!

8 9 10 n

16. EW F 50.00-62.00 54.25 4.17 0.93 7.67 45.00-60.00 53.40 4.43 0.99 8.29 Tl •17.00-56.00 51.65 2.94 0.66 5.70 45.00-55.00 51.00 3-08 0.69 6.03

T2 50.00-60.00 52.60 2.70 0.60 5.14 45.00-60.00 53.45 3.<59 O.BO 7,47 T3 50.00-62.00 •i'-j.XO 4.!iU 1.02 O.JO 50.00-62.00 54.25 3.00 0.b5 7.00

T4 50.00-62.00 55.00 3.73 0.83 6.78 47.00-60.00 52.95 4.27 0.96 8,07

T5 45.00-60.00 53.30 3.89 0.87 7.31 45.00-65.00 51.35 6.18 1.38 12.04

LSD at 5% 2.523 2.757

LSD at 1% 3.342 3.651

17. EL/EW F 1.93-2.54 2.39 0.23 0.05 9.00 2.17-2.60 2.38 0.11 0.02 4.88

Tl 2.27-2.54 2.43 0.08 0.02 3.31 1.85-2.67 2.32 0.24 0.05 10.26

T2 2.08-2.80 2.38 0.16 0.04 6.93 2.25-2.60 2.33 0.11 0.02 4.60

T3 2.24-2.67 2.41 0.14 0.05 5.85 2.08-2.70 2.38 0,16 0.04 6.86

T4 2.25-2.54 2.35 0.08 0.02 3.34 2.33-2.56 2.42 0.06 0.01 2.68

T5 2.10-2.79 2.51 0.20 0.05 8.34 2.35-2.70 2.53 0.11 0.02 4.40

LSDat 5% 0.091 0.091

LSD at X% 0.121 0,121

la. FL F 38.00-52.00 42.50 3.6-3 0.32 8.05 38.00-50.00 5.50 4 .01 C1,9 0 8.81

Tl 35,00-46.00 39.65 3.70 0.33 7,31 40.00-46.00 2.85 3.81 0.85 7.50

T2 45.00-58.00 52.65 4.03 0,90 7.65 48,00-55.00 51.90 2.24 0.50 4.33

T3 50.00-60.00 55.20 3.53 0.79 6.40 45.00-56.00 51,75 3.06 0.63 5.91

T4 50.00-62.00 55.65 4.02 0.90 7.22 45.00-56.00 51,75 3.06 0.68 5.91

T5 32.00-42.00 37.95 3.53 0.79 6.09 38.00-45.00 41.30 3,97 0.89 7.06

LSD at 5% 2.390 1.837

LSD at 1% 3.166 2,433

19. FW F 18.00-25.00 21.95 1.76 0.39 8.02 20.00-25.00 22.30 1.69 0.33 7.57

Tl 18.00-23.00 20.65 1.72 0.39 7.00 13.00-23.00 20.85 1.81 0.41 7.61

T2 20.00-28.00 24.95 2.30 0.51 9.24 22,00-27.00 25.10 1.41 0.37 5.62

T3 22.00-28.00 25.25 2.05 0.46 8.11 20.00-27.00 24.60 1.98 0.44 8.07

T4 23.00-28.00 25,90 1.33 0.30 5.15 20.00-27.00 24.60 1.98 0.44 8.07

T5 18.00-22.00 20.45 1.39 0.31 5.27 17.00-24.00 20.70 1.52 0.34 5.93

LSD at 5% 1.159 1.062

LSD at 1% 1.536 1.407

20. vaw F 5.00-8.00 6.50 0.89 0.20 13.67 5,00-9.00 6.45 1.28 0.28 19.79 Tl 5.00-8.00 6.00 0.69 0.15 9.09 5.00-8.00 5.85 0.67 0.15 9.79

T2 6.00-9.00 7.00 0.75 0.17 10.19 7.00-9.00 7.75 0.64 0.14 8.24

T3 7.00-9.00 8,15 0.74 0.17 9,14 6,00-9.00 7.65 0.87 0.20 11.44

T4 7.00-9.00 7.70 0.80 0.18 10.41 6.00-9.00 7.80 0.33 0.19 10.69

T5 6.00-8.00 6.95 0.76 0.17 9.55 6.00-8.00 6.80 0,70 0.16 8,92

LSD at 5% 0.480 0.460

LSD at 1% 0,635 0.609

Contd.... Appendix 9

10 11 21. VSL F 9.00-12.00 9.95 1.10 0.25 11.05 6.00-10.00 9.35 0.67 0.15 7.17 Tl 8.00-11.00 9.00 0.88 0.20 7.74 8.00-11.00 9.85 1.05 0.23 9.59 T2 10.00-13.00 11.85 1.09 0.24 9.19 10.00-13.00 11.90 0.97 0.22 3.13 T3 11.00-14.00 12.30 0.98 0.22 7.96 10.00-13.00 11,95 1.00 0.22 8.36

T4 11.00-14.00 12.20 1.00 0,22 8,24 10.00-13.00 11.90 0,97 0.22 8.13

T5 11.00-14.00 12.35 1.04 0.23 8,42 11.00-14.00 12.40 0.82 0.18 6.62

LSD at 5% 0.658 0.521

LSD at 1^ 0.871 0.690

22. FL/FW F 1.59-2.20 1.94 0.16 0.04 8.55 1.60-2.33 2.04 0.20 0.04 10.55

Tl 1.84-2.29 2.06 0.13 0.03 6.34 1.80-2.50 2.14 0.17 0.04 7.89

T2 1.67-2.50 2.12 0.18 0.04 8.31 1.81-2.39 2.07 0.13 0,03 6.47

T3 2.00-2.39 2.19 0.11 0.03 5.28 1.93-2.40 2.11 0.11 0.03 5.45

T4 1.92-2.30 2.15 0.11 0.02 4.91 1.93-2.40 2.11 0.11 0.03 5.45

T5 2.00-2.40 2.19 0.10 0.02 4.41 2.U0-2.33 2.19 0.10 0.02 4.58

LSD at 5% 0.085 0.081

LSD at 1% 0.113 0.108

* Each walue is mean of 20 speciinens

J F = Field pOt^alation; Ti,T2, T3, T4 and T5 = 10, 20, 30, 40 & 50 percent soil moisture respectively.