The Pharma Innovation Journal 2021; 10(5): 1349-1357
ISSN (E): 2277- 7695
ISSN (P): 2349-8242
NAAS Rating: 5.23
TPI 2021; 10(5): 1349-1357
© 2021 TPI
www.thepharmajournal.com
Received: 10-03-2021
Accepted: 29-04-2021
Arunasri P
Department of Plant Pathology, S.V.
Agricultural College, Tirupati,
Acharya N.G, Ranga Agricultural
University, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh,
India
Padmodaya B
Department of Plant Pathology,
DAATTC,Kadapa, Acharya N.G,
Ranga Agricultural University,
Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, India
Prasanthi A
Department of Soil Science and
Agril.Chemistry, S.V. Agricultural
College, Tirupati, Acharya N.G,
Ranga Agricultural University,
Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, India
Naidu MVS
Department of Soil Science and
Agril.Chemistry , S.V. Agricultural
College, Tirupati, Acharya N.G,
Ranga Agricultural University,
Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, India
Tirumala Reddy S
Department of Agronomy, RARS,
Tirupati, Acharya N.G, Ranga
Agricultural University, Guntur,
Andhra Pradesh, India
Reddi Kumar M
Department of Plant Pathology,
KVK,Kalikiri, Acharya N.G, Ranga
Agricultural University, Guntur,
Andhra Pradesh, India
Koteswara Rao SR
Department of Entomology,
Agricultural College, Bapatla,
Acharya N.G, Ranga Agricultural
University, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh,
India
Ravindra Reddy B
Department of Statistics and
Computer Applications, S.V.
Agricultural College, Tirupati,
Acharya N.G, Ranga Agricultural
University, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh,
India
Corresponding Author:
Arunasri P
Department of Plant Pathology, S.V.
Agricultural College, Tirupati,
Acharya N.G, Ranga Agricultural
University, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh,
India
Impact of integrated disease management practices on
soil health and disease incidence of stem rot of
groundnut incited by Sclerotium rolfsii Sacc
Arunasri P, Padmodaya B, Prasanthi A, Naidu MVS, Tirumala Reddy S,
Reddi Kumar M, Koteswara Rao SR and Ravindra Reddy B
Abstract
Sclerotium rolfsii Sacc. is a major soil borne pathogen that causes stem rot of groundnut. Per cent
incidence of stem rot will be influenced by soil health that include soil pH, electrical conductivity,
organic carbon and which in turn influence soil microflora (fungi, actinomycetes and bacteria). Integrated
Disease Management practices like combination of Indigenous Technology Knowledge inputs like
Modified Panchagavya, Combination fungicide Hexaconazole 4%+Zineb 68% (Avtar), biocontrol agent
Trichoderma asperellum GT4 and organic amendment (Neem cake) were combined in the form of 14
treatments including inoculated control and un-inoculated control. In the present investigation impact of
these soil health aspects on disease incidence of stem rot of groundnut was studied. With the soil pH 7.4
(at 45 DAS) and 7.2 (at the time of harvest) per cent disease incidence of stem rot was least (9.08% and
14.13%) in treatment T12 that includes seed treatment with Hexaconazole 4%+Zineb 68%(Avtar),seed
treatment with T. asperellum GT4 and neem cake application@500kg/ha. With the highest electrical
conductivity (0.79) and organic carbon (0.87), disease incidence of stem rot was least (9.08% and
14.13%)in treatment T12. Soil microflora responded differently to these treatments and edaphic factors.
Soil fungal population increased even upto harvest and were highest in T9 (94 ×104 cfu/g soil) with mean
of 88 ×104 cfu/g soil in treatment T9. Actinomycetes were highest (72.22×105 cfu/g soil) in treatment T8
where as bacteria were highest (72.56 ×106 cfu/g soil) in treatment (T12). Overall mean soil microflora
were highest in treatment T12 (63.37 cfu) and thus neem cake was found to influence disease incidence
and soil health.
Keywords: Sclerotium rolfsii, soil pH, electrical conductivity, organic carbon, percent disease incidence
and soil microflora
Introduction
Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) is an important oilseed crop in India which occupies first
position in terms of area and second position in terms of production. China ranks first in
groundnut production with 17.39 million tonnes followed by India 6.69 million tonnes (Pocket
book of Agricultural Statistics, 2019). Stem rot of groundnut is a major disease of groundnut
incited by Sclerotium rolfsii Sacc. and it causes yield loss of 15-70% in groundnut singly or in
combination with leaf spot or rust (Adiver, 2003) [1].
Soil fertility and chemistry including soil pH, calcium, phosphorus and zinc levels and
nitrogen form can all play a major role in the management of soil borne diseases. Although the
use of biological control methods for the effective management of soil borne diseases has been
a long-term goal in sustainable agriculture, the efficacy of this method is highly dependent on
the integrated approaches to maintaining soil health and controlling soil borne pathogens
(Milan Panth et al., 2020) [20]. Although the effect of compost and organic matter on soil borne
disease suppression has been demonstrated in many studies, the efficacy of these amendments
widely depends upon the amount added, type of soil, physical properties like structure and
chemical properties such as cation exchange capacity, pH, electrical conductivity of the soil
(Scheuerell et al., 2005) [26]. The collar rot incidence and sclerotial population of S.rolfsii of
tomato were positively correlated with the available Nitrogen (N) and Organic Carbon (OC)
content of the respective soils. Whereas, soil pH had an inverse influence on the disease
incidence and sclerotia population (Prabir Kumar et al., 2020) [22].
Soil microorganisms are the engine of nutrient cycling. Soil microbes degrade soil organic
materials in the soil, releasing nutrients for plant uptake through the mineralization process
with the rate of all these processes dependent on microbial population and activity.
~ 1349 ~
The Pharma Innovation Journal
Generally, organic amendment in arable soil might stimulate
microbial activity (Lee et al., 2015a and Lee et al., 2015b) [15,
16]
. These shifts are induced alongside changes in water
contents, carbon substrate, and soil pH depending on the crop
cultivation condition such as fertilization and irrigation
(Marschner et al., 2003) [18]. Over dosages of chemicals
(herbicides, fertilizers, insecticides, fungicides, nematicides
and antibiotics) affects the soil quality by changing the
physical, chemical and biological properties of soil. They
adversely affect the soil microflora by which ecological
balance gets disturbed (Naresh and Dhaliwal, 2020) [20].
Microbial communities in soil will have major impact on soil
health as they produce secondary metabolites and nutrients
recycling and decomposition. Organic amendments like neem
seed cake affects soil microbial population, soil catabolic
processes which affect crop yield. Soil organic amendments
also provide diversified food base, which can diversify and
change the microbial population equilibrium in the soil
(Bonanomi et al., 2018) [3]. Larkin (2015) [14] reviewed the
strategies for soil health management in which he suggested
importance of maintaining and diversifying soil biota by
integrated soil health management approaches. Saralamma
and Vithal Reddy (2003) [25] reported that T. harzianum +
Thiophanate methyl + neem cake proved effective against
increasing efficiency of suppression of root rot of S.rolfsii and
increasing yields of groundnut.
The present investigation was taken up with an objective to
study about the impact of integrated disease management
aspects on soil health properties like soil pH, EC, OC,
microflora and their effect on PDI of stem rot of groundnut
and also soil microbial load.
Materials and Methods
Field experiment was conducted on impact of treatments
imposed for integrated disease management of stem rot of
groundnut incited by S. rolfsii on soil health parameters like
soil pH, EC, OC, soil microflora during kharif 2019. Data
pertaining to PDI in response to different soil health
properties were recorded.
Soil Sample collection
Soil samples were collected at thrice at the time of sowing, at
45 DAS and before harvesting during groundnut crop season.
The samples were initially transferred aseptically to the
plastic bags that were labelled appropriately and then
transported to the laboratory. In the laboratory, fractions of
samples were immediately processed for pH determination
and microbial analysis. The rest of the samples were then air-
dried, sieved through a 2mm sieve to remove stones and
packed into plastic bags, each containing approximately 500g.
Soil samples were stored at 4oC until they were used for
further analysis.
Determination of soil pH
In a clean conical flask 20 g of air-dried soil was taken and
100 ml distilled water was added for making 1:5 soil
suspension. It was shaken for one hour at regular intervals.
After shaking, the suspension was filtered through Whatmann
No. 42 filter paper. The pH of the sample was determined
using a pH meter (Jackson, 1973) [7].
Determination of soil Electrical Conductivity (EC)
To 1g of soil sample, 1ml of water was mixed in the ratio of
1:1.Then this suspension was filtered using suction. A round
~ 1350 ~
http://www.thepharmajournal.com
Whatmann no.42 filter paper was placed in the Buchner
funnel and filter paper was moistened with distilled water and
made sure that it was tightly attached to the bottom of the
funnel and their pores were covered. With suction attached to
vacuum pump suspension was collected in Buchner funnel.
Filtrate was then transferred into 50 ml bottle and the
conductivity cell was immersed into the solution and readings
were noted (Jackson, 1973) [7].
Determination of soil organic carbon (C)
Organic matter plays an important role in supplying nutrients
and water and provides good physical conditions to the plants.
The quantity of organic carbon of the soil was estimated by
the method of Walkley and Black (1934) [28]. One gram finely
ground soil sample passed through 0.5 mm sieve without loss
was taken into 500 ml conical flask, to which 10ml of 1 N
potassium dichromate and 20 ml Con. H2SO4 were added with
measuring cylinder. The content was shaken for a minute and
allowed to set aside for exactly half an hour. Then 200 ml
distilled water, 10 ml orthophosphoric acid and 1 ml
diphenylamine indicator were added or ferrous sulphate, till
colour flashes from blue violet to brilliant green. The blank
titration was carried at the beginning without soil.
1. Weight of soil taken
2. Vol. of 1N Potassium dichromate added
3. Vol. of 0.5N FAS required to neutralize 10ml of 1 N
Potassium Dichromate solution
B = Blank without soil, T= Titre value
4. Vol. of 0.5N FAS required for soil
5. Vol. of 1 N H2Cr2O7 solution used for the oxidation of
organic carbon present in the sample. =10(B-T)
The organic carbon % was calculated by the following
formula
10 (B- T) x 0.003 100
Organic Carbon % = –––––––––––––––– x ––––––––––––
B wt. of soil (g).
The solution was titrated against standard ferrous ammonium
sulphate (FAS)
Soil microflora (fungi, bacteria and actinomycetes) in soil
Serial dilution technique (Johnson and Curl, 1972) [8] was
used to isolate fungi, bacteria and actinomycetes from
rhizosphere soil of Groundnut. Composite soil sample
collected from rhizosphere of healthy plants and stem rot
infected Groundnut plants thrice at 9DAS, 60DAS and at the
time of harvesting and soil samples were shade dried, sieved
and then used for serial dilution.
Preparation of culture medium used for isolation of
rhizosphere microflora
Three different specific medium mentioned underneath were
prepared as per the recommendation for isolation of different
microbes such as bacteria (NA), fungi (Rose Bengal Agar
medium), and actinomycetes (SCA).
Enumeration of rhizosphere soil microflora (fungi,
bacteria and actinomycetes)
To estimate the number of rhizosphere soil microflora, counts
were calculated on the basis of serial 10 fold dilution
technique, using the pour plate methods and replicate of 10
gm soil samples, and an appropriate dilution as described by
The Pharma Innovation Journal http://www.thepharmajournal.com

Johnson and Curl, (1972) [8]. Ten g of air dried soil was taken
from each soil sample and were sieved properly to discard all
the foreign particles and added to 100ml of sterilized distilled
water to make a dilution of 10-1, from this dilution 10ml of the
aliquot was transferred to 90 ml of sterilized distilled water to
make dilution of 10-2. Likewise, the soil samples were serially
diluted (six fold series). Aliquots of 1 ml from dilution 10 -6
were spread on nutrient agar, a medium for total bacterial
counts respectively, and from 10-4 on Rose Bengal Agar for
fungi and from 10-5 on starch Casein Agar medium for
actinomycetes. Each dilution was spread onto three replicates.
The number of colonies forming on each medium was
counted at 48-72 hrs for bacteria and after 120 hrs for fungi
and actinomycetes, after incubation at 32 ± 2oC for bacteria
and 25± 2oC for fungi and actinomycetes.
Colony forming units per g of soil (cfu/g) was calculated
using the equation of Johnson and Case (2007) [9].
No. of colonies
CFU/g= × Dilution factor
Volume plated (ml)
Results and Discussion
Soil samples were collected at the time of sowing, at 45 DAS
and at the time of harvest with an objective of studying the
influence of treatments imposed for the integrated
management of stem rot of Groundnut on edaphic factors like
pH, EC, OC on the PDI of stem rot of Groundnut.
Soil pH
At the time of sowing soil pH varied from 5.8 to 6.8, at 45
DAS soil pH varied from 5.7 to 7.4 and at the time of harvest
soil pH varied from 5.8 to 7.2 (Table 1). In the present
investigation it was observed that treatments involving neem
cake amendment to soil has resulted in increase in soil pH at
45 DAS and at harvest. Treatment T 12 recorded highest soil
pH of 7.4 at 45DAS and 7.2 at the time of harvest whereas
PDI was least in this treatment at 45 DAS (9.08%) and even
at the time harvest (14.13%). Krishnaraj et al. (2018) [12]
revealed that application of neem cake to soil increased pH
from 6.8 to 7.2 due to decomposition and they also reported
that population of biocontrol agents like Trichoderma and
Pseudomonas fluorescens increased due to utilization of
nutrients from neem cake.
In the present investigation low pH values were recorded in
treatment T13(Table 1) with pH value of 5.7 and 5.5 at 45
DAS and at the time of harvest respectively and
corresponding PDI was maximum at 45 DAS (37.51%) and at
the time of harvest (64.24%). Maximum PDI was reported in
soils with pH 5.5 (treatment T 13). After treatment T12,
treatments T10 and T11 recorded next highest pH values of 7.2
and 7.4 (at 45 DAS and at time of harvest).This rise in soil pH
in Fig.1 in treatments T10 and T11 (Fig. 1) might be due to
influence of modified panchagavya. These findings were in
corroboration with the investigation of Naresh and Dhaliwal
(2020) [20] who reported soil pH was increased from 6.8 to 7.8
due to micro-organisms present in panchagavya.
Banyal et al. (2008) [2] also recorded increase in soil pH with
least PDI whereas low pH value resulted in maximum PDI.
They observed significant positive correlation between pH
and collar rot incidence in tomato caused by S.rolfsii. Tomato
plants grown in soils of Indora with soil pH 5.7 recorded
highest PDI of collar rot (45.1%) and no.of sclerotia per gram
soil was found to be maximum (4.0) when compared to other
soil samples with different pH values. They reported that
highest PDI as S.rolfsii prefers near acidic to alkaline
conditions (pH 5.5 to 7.5). In the present investigation also
T13 with soil pH (5.5 and 5.7) recorded highest PDI at the
time of harvest and even at 45 DAS whereas T 12 with soil pH
7.2 reported least PDI (Fig.2). Kator et al. (2015) [10] also
reported that S.rolfsii produced maximum growth at acidic pH
as optimum pH for maximum growth of mycelium of S.rolfsii
was in between 3.0 to 5.0 whereas for sclerotia germination at
pH from 2.0 and 5.0. Mahato et al. (2017) [17] also recorded
highest PDI (100%) collar rot of tomato caused by S.rolfsii at
pH 6.5 and 7.0 whereas least PDI was observed (51.67%) at
pH 8.0. They also opined that growth and proliferation of
S.rolfsii was favoured by pH 5.5 to 7.5 in decreasing order.
Prabir Kumar et al. (2020) [22] investigated on influence of
soil pH on Disease incidence (DI) of collar rot of betelvine
caused by S. rolfsii and also on no. of sclerotia produced.
They concluded that highest DI (17.67%) was recorded in
Namkhana village soil sample (Location 1) with soil pH 5.56
and proved to produce highest no. of sclerotia of 11.56 per
100 g soil, whereas in case of Bamkhana village soil sample
with

Table 1: Impact of Integrated Disease Management treatments on edaphic factors and PDI of stem rot of Groundnut (Field experiment during
kharif 2019)
pH* EC(ds/m)* OC(%)* PDI*
At the At the At the At the At the At the At the
Treatment 45 45 45 At the time 45
time of time of time of time of time of time of time of
DAS DAS DAS of sowing DAS
sowing harvest sowing harvest sowing harvest harvest
Seed treatment with Hexaconazole 4% +
T1 5.9 6.1 6.2 0.27 0.52 0.61 0.21 0.49 0.61 0.00 12.21 24.87
Zineb 68% WP(0.01%)
Seed treatment with Modified
T2 6.5 6.4 6.3 0.26 0.48 0.59 0.21 0.52 0.58 0.00 21.79 25.56
Panchagavya(10 dilution)
Seed treatment with Hexaconazole 4% +
T3 Zineb 68% WP (0.01%)+Seed treatment 5.8 5.9 5.8 0.30 0.47 0.55 0.22 0.47 0.52 0.00 19.49 20.10
with T. asperellum GT4@ 10g/ kg seed
Soil application of T. asperellum
T4 GT4(Talc based multiplied in 6.1 6.2 6.3 0.27 0.58 0.62 0.21 0.48 0.59 0.00 20.67 27.92
FYM@5q/ha)
Soil application of neem
T5 5.8 6.4 6.8 0.28 0.64 0.71 0.31 0.52 0.73 0.00 17.06 24.62
cake@500kg/ha
Soil drenching with modified
T6 6.0 5.8 5.9 0.27 0.54 0.64 0.29 0.43 0.77 0.00 20.85 27.50
panchagavya (10 dilution)
T7 T1+ T4 5.8 6.0 6.1 0.26 0.47 0.71 0.21 0.34 0.49 0.00 17.84 27.85
T8 T1+ T5 6.4 7.1 6.8 0.32 0.54 0.60 0.30 0.61 0.74 0.00 19.48 26.19
T9 T1+ T6 5.8 6.0 6.1 0.25 0.45 0.59 0.21 0.58 0.71 0.00 17.47 24.02
T10 T2+ T4 5.8 7.3 7.1 0.34 0.63 0.77 0.26 0.63 0.84 0.00 10.74 19.93
~ 1351 ~
The Pharma Innovation Journal http://www.thepharmajournal.com

T11 T2+ T5 6.2 7.2 7.0 0.38 0.69 0.74 0.32 0.61 0.78 0.00 12.04 20.91
T12 T3+ T5 6.6 7.4 7.2 0.32 0.67 0.79 0.28 0.68 0.87 0.00 9.08 14.13
T13 Inoculated control 6.4 5.7 5.5 0.27 0.40 0.45 0.25 0.34 0.41 0.00 37.51 64.24
T14 Un-inoculated control 6.8 6.9 6.8 0.26 0.42 0.51 0.39 0.41 0.49 0.00 26.59 33.33
C.D. 0.109 0.081 0.042 0.027 0.007 0.027 0.008 0.006 0.006 1.479 3.311
Not
SE(m) 0.037 0.028 0.014 0.009 0.002 0.009 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.506 1.133
significant
C.V. 1.045 0.746 0.389 5.376 0.731 2.479 1.87 0.7 0.536 3.442 6.216
*Mean of three replications

Fig 1: Impact of integrated disease management treatments on soil pH at different time interval

Fig 2: Impact of integrated disease management treatments on PDI of stem rot of groundnut at different time interval

pH of 5.24 with second highest (10.78) no.of sclerotia per 100
g soil were produced with DI of 14.67%. Kulkarni and Hegde
(2019) [11] revealed that highest germination of sclerotia of
S.rolfsii in potato occur at pH 6.5 (90%) and least germination
of sclerotia was noticed at pH level of 9.5 (58.33%) whereas
percent colonization of sorghum seeds by the mycelial growth
of S.rolfsii that indicates competitive saprophytic ability was
highest at soil pH 6.0(76.67%) and least was recorded with
pH 9.5(46.67%).
Chaurasia et al. (2014) [5] revealed that oxalic acid produced
by S.rolfsii that plays major role in pathogenesis was
produced to maximum at pH 5.0 even though S.rolfsii

~ 1352 ~
The Pharma Innovation Journal
produces this organic acid at wide pH values of 3.0 to pH 9.0
(i.e., extreme acidic to alkaline pH). But at pH 5.0 maximum
accumulation of oxalic acid was detected when S. rolfsii was
cultured on the medium. As oxalic production was correlated
to PDI of stem rot of Groundnut caused by S. rolfsii and in the
present investigation this was proved as PDI of stem rot was
highest at soil pH 5.5 (treatment T 13).
Soil electrical conductivity (EC)
Soil EC in the soils collected at the time of sowing varied
from 0.25 to 0.38, at 45 DAS it varied from 0.40 to 0.69 and
at the time of harvest varied from 0.45 to 0.79 (ds/m). At 45
DAS highest EC was recorded in the treatment T 11, T12 and
T10 with PDI (least) of stem rot values 14.29, 8.96 and
10.73% (Table 1). At the time of harvest, highest EC values
were reported in treatments T 12, T10 and T11 (Fig.3) with least
PDI of 12.50, 17.39 and 22.70%. In the present investigation
negative correlation was observed with EC and PDI of stem
rot. Treatment T13 recorded 0.40 and 0.45 at 45 DAS and at
the time of sowing with PDI of stem rot (37.51 and 72.70%).
It was found that EC was negatively correlated with PDI.
Fig 3: Impact of integrated disease management treatments on soil EC at different time interval
the treatment T12 OC was 0.68 (at 45 DAS) and 0.87 (at the
time of harvesting) with PDI of stem rot 9.08% (at 45 DAS)
and 14.13% (at the time of sowing) whereas in the treatment
T13 OC was 0.34 and 0.41(at 45 DAS and at the time of
harvest) with corresponding PDI of stem rot as 37.51 and
64.24% indicating negative correlation between OC and PDI.
In the present investigation increase in OC in T 12 and
T11(Fig.4) might be due to organic amendment neem cake as
it gets decomposed in the soil. This was in accordance with
the findings of Krishnaraj et al. (2018) [12] who revealed that
application of neem cake to soil increase organic carbon from
0.59 to 1.05. Lalnunpuia et al. (2018) [13] also proved that
treatment T8 @ [NPK100% Recommended Dose of Fertilizer
(RDF)+Neem cake 100 kg ha-1] increased soil organic carbon
(0.52) and electrical conductivity (0.96ds/m) but at the same
decreased pH.
Soil microflora
At 9 DAS soil fungi were highest in the treatment T9 (81.67
~ 1353 ~
http://www.thepharmajournal.com
These findings are in corroboration with Kulakarni and Hegde
(2019) [11] who proved that negative correlation between EC
and PDI of collar rot of potato caused by S. rolfsii who
reported at lowest EC value 0.4 (ds/m) highest competitive
saprophytic survival of S. rolfsii on sorghum (90%) and per
cent germination of sclerotia (100%) were observed. They
recorded decreased competitive saprophytic survival of S.
rolfsii on sorghum (90%) and per cent germination of
sclerotia (6.25%) at EC of 10.0dS/m. Highest EC was
recorded in T12 which might be due to neem cake. These
findings were corroboration with Elnasikh et al. (2011) [6]
who proved that neem seed cake was positively related with
EC.
Soil organic carbon
Soil organic carbon of the treatments varied from 0.21 to 0.32
(at the time of sowing, 0.34 to 0.68 at 45 DAS and 0.41 to
0.87 (at the time of harvesting).The PDI at the time sowing at
45DAS and at the time of harvesting was least with soils
having highest organic carbon. In
×104 cfu/g soil) followed by T6 (58.67×104 cfu/g soil) and
least soil fungi were observed in T 2 (15.67×104 cfu/g soil). At
60 DAS highest soil fungi were recorded in T 9 (88.33 ×104
cfu/g soil) followed by T6 (84.67×104 cfu/g soil) and least soil
fungi were observed in T1 (Table 2) and followed by T13
(32×104 cfu/g soil). At the time of harvesting highest soil
fungi were recorded in T9 (94 ×104 cfu/g soil) followed by T7
(91.67×104 cfu/g soil) and T6 (89×104 cfu/g soil) and least soil
fungi were observed in T 13 (35.33×104 cfu/g soil). It was
observed that soil fungi increased from 9 DAS to time of
harvesting in all the treatments. Mean soil fungi were highest
in T9 (Fig.5). In case of soil actinomycetes at 9 DAS soil
actinomycetes were highest in the treatment T 8 (84 ×105 cfu/g
soil) followed byT12 (79.33×105cfu/g soil) and least soil
actinomyctes were observed in T 13 (33×105 cfu/g soil). At 60
DAS highest soil actinobacteria were recorded in T 8 (75.33
×105 cfu/g soil) followed byT10 (61.67×105 cfu/g soil) and
least soil actinobacteria were observed in T 13 (21.33×105 cfu/g
soil). At the time of harvesting highest soil actinobacteria
The Pharma Innovation Journal http://www.thepharmajournal.com

were recorded in T10 (69×105 cfu/g soil) followed by
T6(58.67×105 cfu/g soil) and least soil actinobacteria were
observed in T13 (24.33×105 cfu/g soil). It was observed that
soil actinobacteria decreased from 9 DAS to 45DAS and even
at time of harvesting in all the treatments except T 12 in which
actinobacteria at 45DAS were increased slightly at the time of
harvest. Mean Actinobacteria were highest in T 10 (60.67)
which is statistically significant when compared to all other
treatments. In case of bacteria at 9 DAS soil bacteria were
highest in the treatment T1 (80.67 ×105 cfu/g soil)followed
byT10 (60.67×105cfu/g soil) and least soil bacteria were
observed in T11 (35.67×105 cfu/g soil).At 60 DAS highest soil
bacteria were recorded in T 10(75.33 ×105 cfu/g soil) followed
byT10 (61.67×105 cfu/g soil) and least soil actinobacteria were
observed in T13 (21.33×105 cfu/g soil). At the time of
harvesting highest soil bacteria were

Fig 4: Impact of integrated disease management treatments on soil OC at different time interval

Table 2: Efficacy of treatments on Rhizosphere microflora of Groundnut (Field experiment during kharif 2019)
ACTINOMYCETES(×105) BACTERIA(×106) cfu/g
FUNGI(×104)cfu/g soil*
S.N cfu/g soil * soil * Overall
Treatment
o. 9 60 At 60 At 9 60 At mean
Mean 9 DAS Mean Mean
DAS DAS harvest DAS harvest DAS DAS harvest
Seed treatment with Hexaconazole 4% + Zineb 68%
T1 18.67 32.00 40.00 30.22 42.33 34.33 28.33 35.00 80.67 58.67 41.33 60.22 41.81
WP(0.01%)
T2 Seed treatment with Modified Panchagavya (10 dilution) 15.67 41.67 56.00 37.78 61.33 40.67 34.67 45.56 41.00 37.67 40.67 39.78 41.04
Seed treatment with Hexaconazole 4% + Zineb 68% WP
T3 (0.01%)+Seed treatment with T. asperellum GT4@ 10g/ 18.33 58.67 63.67 46.89 74.33 60.33 43.67 59.44 42.33 36.00 26.33 34.89 47.07
kg seed
Soil application of T. asperellum GT4(Talc based
T4 31.67 39.67 72.33 47.89 49.33 31.67 23.33 34.78 53.33 39.67 32.33 41.78 41.48
multiplied in FYM@5q/ha)
T5 Soil application of neem cake@500kg/ha 19.00 47.00 82.33 49.44 54.00 40.67 34.00 42.89 43.33 31.33 28.00 34.22 42.19
T6 Soil drenching with modified panchagavya (10 dilution) 58.67 84.67 89.00 77.44 42.67 50.33 58.67 50.56 40.67 57.33 50.00 49.33 59.11
T7 T1+ T4 38.67 80.67 91.67 70.33 56.00 44.33 32.33 44.22 45.33 38.67 30.67 38.22 50.93
T8 T1+ T5 21.33 54.67 64.33 46.78 84.00 75.33 57.33 72.22 58.67 43.67 35.67 46.00 55.00
T9 T1+ T6 81.67 88.33 94.00 88.00 65.00 50.33 40.33 51.89 48.33 38.67 31.67 39.56 59.81
T10 T2+ T4 18.00 64.33 68.00 50.11 70.33 61.67 69.00 67.00 60.67 80.67 72.00 71.11 62.74
T11 T2+ T5 25.33 69.33 79.00 57.89 52.33 47.33 42.33 47.33 35.67 56.33 48.33 46.78 50.67
T12 T3+ T5 18.33 66.00 71.00 51.78 79.33 60.67 57.33 65.78 56.00 74.33 87.33 72.56 63.37
T13 Inoculated control 24.67 32.00 35.33 30.67 33.00 21.33 18.67 24.33 38.33 30.33 24.67 31.11 28.70
T14 Un-inoculated control 40.00 41.33 46.00 42.44 36.67 41.33 26.33 34.78 40.00 41.33 30.67 37.33 38.19
Overall mean 30.71 57.17 68.05 51.98 57.19 47.17 40.45 48.27 48.88 47.48 41.40 45.92
*Mean of three replications C.D. at 5%
Treatment 0.913
Rhizosphere microflora 0.423
Interval 0.423
Treatment X Rhizosphere microflora X Interval 2.738

~ 1354 ~
The Pharma Innovation Journal
Fig 5: Impact of integrated disease management treatments on soil fungal population at different time interval
recorded in T10(80.67×105 cfu/g soil) followed by
T12(74.33×105 cfu/g soil) and least soil bacteria were observed
in T13 (30.33×105 cfu/g soil). Soil bacteria decreased in all the
treatments from 9 DAS to 45 DAS except T 12 in which
bacterial count was increased. It was observed that soil
bacteria decreased from 45 DAS and at the time of harvesting
in all the treatments except T 2 and T12 in which actinobacteria
at 45DAS were increased. Mean actinobacteria were highest
in T10 (60.67×105 cfu/g soil) which is statistically significant
when compared to all other treatments. Soil bacteria varied
from 35.67 to 80.67 ×106 cfu/g soil at 9 DAS, 30.33 to
80.67×105 cfu/g soil at 60 DAS and 24.67 to 87.33×10 6 cfu/g
soil at the time of harvest. Mean soil bacteria were highest in
T12(72.56×106cfu/g soil) and least in T13 (30.33 ×106cfu/g
soil). At 9 DAS highest bacterial counts were reported in T 1
(80.67×106cfu/g soil) and least bacterial population was
recorded in T11(35.67×106cfu/g soil).
In the present investigation fungal population was highest in
T9 (88×104cfu/g soil) and this was statistically significant
when compared to all other treatments. Fungal population was
highest even at 9 DAS, 45 DAS and at the time of harvest
which might be due to involvement soil drenching with
modified panchgavya which consists of different fungi in its
composition itself and soil drenching with might have
influenced soil fungi. These are in accordance with the
findings of Boomiraj and Christopher (2007) [4] who reported
that higher bacterial and fungal count were recorded in the
treatment involving poultry manure (145×10 6cfu) and
panchagavya (103×104cfu). Next best treatment included
~ 1355 ~
http://www.thepharmajournal.com
application of neem cake and panchagavya (140×10 6 cfu and
102×104cfu). Ram et al. (2018) [24] also revealed that
Panchagavya contained highest number of total bacteria (6.25
× 109 cfu/ml).
The present investigation revealed that treatment T 8 recorded
highest mean actinomycetes (72.22×105cfu/g soil). The reason
might be due to involvement soil application of neem cake
that might have increased soil pH to neutral which might be
favourable for the growth of actinomycetes (Fig.6). These
findings were in accordance with Elnasikh et al. (2011) [6]
who investigated on the effect of neem cake on fungi, bacteria
and actinomycetes. They reported that neem seed cake
positively affected the microbial load of actinomycetes and
affected negatively the fungal population and bacteria. Zanane
et al. (2018) [29] investigated on microbial population of
bacteria, actinomycetes and fungi in different soil samples
and correlated with edaphic factors like soil pH, EC and
organic carbon. They found that S 3 with soil pH 7.4 was rich
with the microflora with bacteria (146±1.250 cfu×10 8/g),
actinomycetes (209±0.251cfu×105/g) and fungi 10.33± 32.145
cfu ×105 / g). As pH in this treatment T12 was 7.2 at the time
of harvest and 7.4 at 45 DAS, actinomycetes were also
highest.
In the present investigation mean bacterial population were
highest in treatment T12 (63.37×106 cfu/g soil) which might be
due to neem cake. These findings were in accordance with
Zanane et al. (2018) [29]. Next highest bacterial count was
recorded in T10 (62.74×106 cfu/g soil) and in T9
The Pharma Innovation Journal http://www.thepharmajournal.com

Fig 6: Impact of integrated disease management treatments on soil Actinomycetes population at different time interval

Fig 7: Impact of integrated disease management treatments on soil bacterial population at different time interval

(59.81×106 cfu/g soil) as shown in fig.7. Rakesh et al. (2017) References

[23]
reported that Panchagavya plays a major role in
influencing microbial loads (bacteria, fungi and
actinomycetes) and reported increased microbial load of
110×106 cfu, 25×105 cfu and 21×105 cfu.
Conclusion
Soil borne pathogens can be managed with integrated disease
management with treatments that maintain equilibrium
between the ecosystems. Management practices that maintain
soil health along with crop health are to be integrated. Future
line of work is to be conducted on influence of all the
important edaphic factors on stem rot of groundnut and soil
microbial communities at different locations.
Acknowledgement
The Author was thankful to Acharya N.G.Ranga Agricultural
University (A.P) for providing facilities for conducting
experiments.
~ 1356 ~
1. Adiver SS. Influence of Organic Amendments and
Biological Components on Stem Rot of Groundnut”,
National Seminar on Stress Management in Oilseeds For
Attaining Self Reliance in Vegetable Oil Indian Society
of Oilseeds Research, Directorate of Oilseeds Research,
Hyderabad from 2003, 15-17.
2. Banyal DK, Mankotia V, Sugha SK. Soil characteristics
and their relation to the development of tomato collar rot
caused by Sclerotium rolfsii. Indian Phytopathology
2008;61(1):103-107.
3. Bonanomi G, Lorito M, Vinale F, Woo SL. Organic
amendments, Beneficial microbes, and soil microbiota:
Toward a unified framework for disease suppression.
Annual Review of Phytopathology 2018;56:1-20.
4. Boomiraj K, Christopher LA. Impact of organic and
inorganic sources of nutrients, Panchagavya and
botanicals spray on the soil microbial population and
enzyme activity in bhendi (Abelmoschus esculentus L.
The Pharma Innovation Journal
Montech). In: Agriculture and Environment. Ed. Arvind
Kumar, APH Publishing Corporation, New Delhi 2007,
257-261.
5. Chaurasia S, Amit Kumar Chaurasia, Shubha Chaurasia,
Sushmita Chaurasia. Effect of Different Factors on
Organic Acid Production by Sclerotium rolfsii
International Journal of Pure Applied Biosciences 2014;2
(6): 146-153.
6. Elnasikh MH, Osman AG, Sherif AM. Impact of Neem
seed cake on soil microflora and some soil properties.
Journal of Science and Technology 2011;12(1):144-150.
7. Jackson ML. Soil Chemical Analysis. Prentice Hall of
India (Pvt.) Ltd., New Delhi 1973.
8. Johnson LF, Curl EA. Methods for Research on the
Ecology of Soil-Borne Plant Pathogens. Burgess
Publishing Company, Minneapolis 1972.
9. Johnson TR, Case CL.L aboratory Experiments in
Microbiology (8th ed.)Pearson Education,Inc.,San
Francisco, California, USA 2007, 141-143.
10. Kator L, Hosea ZH, Oche OD. Sclerotium rolfsii;
causative organism of southern blight, stem rot, white
mold and sclerotia rot disease. Annals of Biological
Research 2015;6(11):78-89.
11. Kulkarni VR, Hegde YR. Epidemiological studies, viz.
Effect of soil temperature, moisture, Electrical
conductivity (EC), Soil pH on Sclerotium rolfsii
Sacc.causing Sclerotial wilt or rot in potato and survival
and host range. Indian Journal of Pure and Applied
Biosciences 2019;7(5):138-146.
12. Krishnaraj KR, Murali S, Arunpandian S, Jayaraman K.
Effect of soil application of neem cake amended with
Trichoderma and Pseudomonas fluorescens on soil health
and yield of tomato crop. International Journal of Applied
and Pure Science and Agriculture 2018;4(7):19-25.
13. Lalnunpuia, David AA, Thomas T, Rao S. Effect of
different levels of fertilizers and neem cake on soil health
growth and yield of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) cv.
Kufri Jyoti. International Journal of Applied Research
2018;4(8):132-138.
14. Larkin RP. Soil health paradigms and implications for
disease management. Annual Review of Phytopathology
2015;53:199-221.
15. Lee CH, Park SJ, Kim MS, Yun SG, Ko BG, Lee DB, et
al. Characteristics of compost produced in food waste
processing facility. CNU Journal of Agricultural Sciences
2015a;42(3):177-181.
16. Lee GJ, Kang BG, Kim KS. Effect of fertigation by soil
testing application level on the growth of young jujube
tree and soil chemical properties on sprinkler type
irrigation. Journal of the Korean Society of International
Agriculture 2015b;27(2):226-230.
17. Mahato A, Biswas MK, Patra S. Effects of Soil Edaphic
Components on incidence of tomato collar rot disease
caused by Sclerotium rolfsii(Sacc.).International Journal
of Plant and soil Science 2017;20(6):1-8.
18. Marschner P, Kandeler E, Marschner B. Structure and
function of the soil microbial community in a long-term
fertilizer experiment. Soil Biological Biochemistry
2003;35:453-461.
19. Milan Panth, Samuel Hassler C, Fulya Baysal-Gurel.
Methods for Management of Soilborne Diseases in Crop
Production Agriculture 2020;10(16):1-21.
20. Naresh RK, Dhaliwal SS. Effects of Kunapajala and
Panchagavya on nutrients release, crop productivity and
~ 1357 ~
http://www.thepharmajournal.com
soil health. Asian Agri-History 2020;24(2):147-161.
21. Pocket Book of Agricultural Statistics. Government of
India Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare
Department of Agriculture, Cooperation & Farmers
Welfare Directorate of Economics & Statistics New
Delhi 2019, 26.
22. Prabir Kumar G, Mondal B, Dutta S. Influence of
Edaphological factors on Sclerotium rolfsii Sacc., causing
collar rot of betelvine (Piper Betle L.) under Coastal
Saline Zone Of West Bengal. Plant Archives
2020;20(1):1943-1946.
23. Rakesh S, Poonguzhali S, Saranya B, Suguna S,
Jothibasu. Effect of Panchagavya on growth and yield of
Abelmoschus esculentus cv. Arka Anamika. International
Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences
2017;6(9):3090-3097.
24. Ram RA, Singha A, Vaish S. Microbial characterization
of on-farm produced bio-enhancers used in organic
farming. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences
2018;88(1):35-40.
25. Saralamrna S, Vithal Reddy T. Integrated Management of
Sclerotial Root Rot in Groundnut, National Seminar on
Stress Management in Oilseeds For Attaining Self
Reliance in Vegetable Oil Indian Society of Oilseeds
Research, Directorate of Oilseeds Research, Hyderabad
2003, 20-21.
26. Scheuerell SJ, Sullivan DM, Mahaffee WF. Suppression
of seedling damping-off caused by Pythium ultimum, P.
irregulare and Rhizoctonia solani in container media
amended with a diverse range of Pacific Northwest
compost sources. Phytopathology 2005;95:306-315.
27. Bonanomi G, Lorito M, Vinale F, Woo SL. Organic
amendments, beneficial microbes, and soil microbiota:
Toward a unified framework for disease suppression.
Annual Review of Phytopathology 2018;56:1-20.
28. Walkley AJ, Black CA. Estimation of soil organic carbon
by the chromic acid titration method. Soil Science
1934;37:29-38.
29. Zanane C, Latrache, Elfazazi K, Zahir H, Elloquali M.
Isolation of actinomycetes from different soils of Beni
Amir Morocco. Journal of Material and Environmental
Science 2018;9(10):2994-3000.