686
Views
7
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Disease control/Moyens de lutte

Evaluation of lime products for clubroot (Plasmodiophora brassicae) management in canola (Brassica napus) cropping systems

, , , &
Pages 21-38 | Accepted 04 Jun 2021, Published online: 21 Jul 2021

Figures & data

Table 1. Effects of hydrated lime (Ca(OH)₂) on clubroot index of disease and plant growth parameters of the clubroot-susceptible canola ‘45H31ʹ under field conditions in Edmonton, Alberta, in 2017 and 2018.a

Table 2. Effects of hydrated lime (Ca(OH)₂) on clubroot index of disease (ID), canola plant height, dry shoot weight and dry root weight under greenhouse conditions 8 weeks after planting, in 2017 and 2018.a

Table 3. Effects of limestone (CaCO₃) on clubroot index of disease (ID), canola plant height, dry shoot weight and dry root weight under greenhouse conditions 8 weeks after planting, in 2017 and 2018.a

Fig. 1 The effects of hydrated lime in 2017 on the amount of Plasmodiophora brassicae in the roots of 10-day-old seedlings of the canola cultivars (a) ‘45H31ʹand (b) ‘9558C’ as determined by quantitative PCR analysis. The seedlings were grown under greenhouse conditions in potting medium inoculated with 1 × 103, 1 × 104, 1 × 105 and 1 × 106 resting spores g−1 potting medium and treated with 4.7, 8.1, 11.4 or 14.8 T ha−1 of hydrated lime, which targeted a pH of 6.0, 6.5, 7.0 or 7.5, respectively. Controls did not receive any lime (pH 5.3). Means with no letters do not differ; means differences are denoted by different letters at P < 0.05.

Fig. 1 The effects of hydrated lime in 2017 on the amount of Plasmodiophora brassicae in the roots of 10-day-old seedlings of the canola cultivars (a) ‘45H31ʹand (b) ‘9558C’ as determined by quantitative PCR analysis. The seedlings were grown under greenhouse conditions in potting medium inoculated with 1 × 103, 1 × 104, 1 × 105 and 1 × 106 resting spores g−1 potting medium and treated with 4.7, 8.1, 11.4 or 14.8 T ha−1 of hydrated lime, which targeted a pH of 6.0, 6.5, 7.0 or 7.5, respectively. Controls did not receive any lime (pH 5.3). Means with no letters do not differ; means differences are denoted by different letters at P < 0.05.

Fig. 2 The effects of limestone in 2017 on the amount of Plasmodiophora brassicae in the roots of 10-day-old seedlings of the canola cultivars (a) ‘45H31ʹ and (b) ‘9558C’ as determined by quantitative PCR analysis. The seedlings were grown under greenhouse conditions in potting medium inoculated with 1 × 103, 1 × 104, 1 × 105 and 1 × 106 resting spores g−1 potting medium and treated with 4.7, 8.1, 11.4 or 14.8 T ha−1 of limestone, which targeted a pH of 6.0, 6.5, 7.0 or 7.5, respectively. Controls did not receive any lime (pH 5.3). Means with no letters do not differ; means differences are denoted by different letters at P < 0.05.

Fig. 2 The effects of limestone in 2017 on the amount of Plasmodiophora brassicae in the roots of 10-day-old seedlings of the canola cultivars (a) ‘45H31ʹ and (b) ‘9558C’ as determined by quantitative PCR analysis. The seedlings were grown under greenhouse conditions in potting medium inoculated with 1 × 103, 1 × 104, 1 × 105 and 1 × 106 resting spores g−1 potting medium and treated with 4.7, 8.1, 11.4 or 14.8 T ha−1 of limestone, which targeted a pH of 6.0, 6.5, 7.0 or 7.5, respectively. Controls did not receive any lime (pH 5.3). Means with no letters do not differ; means differences are denoted by different letters at P < 0.05.

Fig. 3 The effects of hydrated lime in 2018 on the amount of Plasmodiophora brassicae in the roots of 10-day-old seedlings of the canola cultivars (a) ‘45H31ʹ and (b) ‘9558C’ as determined by quantitative PCR analysis. The seedlings were grown under greenhouse conditions in potting medium inoculated with 1 × 103, 1 × 104, 1 × 105 and 1 × 106 resting spores g−1 potting medium and treated with 4.7, 8.1, 11.4 or 14.8 T ha−1 of hydrated lime, which targeted a pH of 6.0, 6.5, 7.0 or 7.5, respectively. Controls did not receive any lime (pH 5.3). Means with no letters do not differ; means differences are denoted by different letters at P < 0.05.

Fig. 3 The effects of hydrated lime in 2018 on the amount of Plasmodiophora brassicae in the roots of 10-day-old seedlings of the canola cultivars (a) ‘45H31ʹ and (b) ‘9558C’ as determined by quantitative PCR analysis. The seedlings were grown under greenhouse conditions in potting medium inoculated with 1 × 103, 1 × 104, 1 × 105 and 1 × 106 resting spores g−1 potting medium and treated with 4.7, 8.1, 11.4 or 14.8 T ha−1 of hydrated lime, which targeted a pH of 6.0, 6.5, 7.0 or 7.5, respectively. Controls did not receive any lime (pH 5.3). Means with no letters do not differ; means differences are denoted by different letters at P < 0.05.

Fig. 4 The effects of limestone in 2018 on the amount of Plasmodiophora brassicae in the roots of 10-day-old seedlings of the canola cultivars (a) ‘45H31ʹ and (b) ‘9558C’ as determined by quantitative PCR analysis. The seedlings were grown under greenhouse conditions in potting medium inoculated with 1 × 103, 1 × 104, 1 × 105 and 1 × 106 resting spores g−1 potting medium and treated with 4.7, 8.1, 11.4 or 14.8 T ha−1 of limestone, which targeted a pH of 6.0, 6.5, 7.0 or 7.5, respectively. Controls did not receive any lime (pH 5.3). Means with no letters do not differ; means differences are denoted by different letters at P < 0.05.

Fig. 4 The effects of limestone in 2018 on the amount of Plasmodiophora brassicae in the roots of 10-day-old seedlings of the canola cultivars (a) ‘45H31ʹ and (b) ‘9558C’ as determined by quantitative PCR analysis. The seedlings were grown under greenhouse conditions in potting medium inoculated with 1 × 103, 1 × 104, 1 × 105 and 1 × 106 resting spores g−1 potting medium and treated with 4.7, 8.1, 11.4 or 14.8 T ha−1 of limestone, which targeted a pH of 6.0, 6.5, 7.0 or 7.5, respectively. Controls did not receive any lime (pH 5.3). Means with no letters do not differ; means differences are denoted by different letters at P < 0.05.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.