Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-c52kr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-08T23:24:54.750Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Resistance of Conilon coffee cultivar Vitoria Incaper 8142 to Meloidogyne paranaensis under field conditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 July 2019

Sônia Maria de Lima Salgado ,
Bárbhara Joana dos Reis Fatobene Open the ORCID record for Bárbhara Joana dos Reis Fatobene [Opens in a new window] ,
Marcela Pedroso Mendes-Resende ,
Willian César Terra ,
Vania Aparecida Silva  and
Inorbert de Melo Lima
Sônia Maria de Lima Salgado
Affiliation:
Empresa de Pesquisa Agropecuária de Minas Gerais, Campus da Universidade Federal de Lavras, P.O. Box 176, 37000-200, Lavras, MG, Brasil
Bárbhara Joana dos Reis Fatobene*
Affiliation:
Empresa de Pesquisa Agropecuária de Minas Gerais, Campus da Universidade Federal de Lavras, P.O. Box 176, 37000-200, Lavras, MG, Brasil
Marcela Pedroso Mendes-Resende
Affiliation:
Universidade Federal de Goiás, Escola de Agronomia, Setor de Melhoramento de Plantas, P.O. Box 131, 74690-900, Goiânia, GO, Brasil
Willian César Terra
Affiliation:
Universidade Federal de Lavras, Departamento de Fitopatologia, 37200-000, Lavras, MG, Brasil
Vania Aparecida Silva
Affiliation:
Empresa de Pesquisa Agropecuária de Minas Gerais, Campus da Universidade Federal de Lavras, P.O. Box 176, 37000-200, Lavras, MG, Brasil
Inorbert de Melo Lima
Affiliation:
Instituto Capixaba de Pesquisa, Assistência Técnica e Extensão Rural, 29052-010, Vitória, ES, Brasil
*
*Corresponding author. Email: barbhara.fatobene@gmail.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Meloidogyne paranaensis is responsible for considerable losses in coffee production. Because of the distribution of this species in the main Coffea arabica producing regions, there is a need for management practices to ensure the sustainability of coffee production. In this work, we evaluated the agronomic performance of resistant clones of the Conilon coffee cultivar Vitoria Incaper 8142 in areas infested by M. paranaensis in the west region of Minas Gerais, Brazil. Clones 2V, 3V, and 6V presented the lowest number of nematodes per gram of roots and were considered resistant to M. paranaensis. All other clones were considered tolerant to this nematode, and one had good vegetative growth but allowed nematode reproduction. Clones of Vitoria Incaper 8142 of C. canephora represent an alternative to coffee production in areas infested by M. paranaensis including areas traditionally cultivated with C. arabica.

Keywords

Root-knot nematodesCoffea canephoraGenetic resistance

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 56 , Issue 1 , February 2020 , pp. 88 - 93
Check for updates
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2019 

Introduction

Root-knot nematodes (RKNs) are recognized as major agricultural pathogens, causing expressive losses in many crops (Jones et al., Reference Jones, Haegeman, Danchin, Gaur, Helder, Jones, Kikuchi, Manzanilla-López, Palomares-Rius, Wesemael, Roland and Perry2013). Among several species that parasitize coffee plants, Meloidogyne paranaensis (Carneiro et al., Reference Carneiro, Carneiro, Abrantes, Santos and Almeida1996) is especially important, hindering plant growth and causing losses of approximately 35% in yield (Lopez-Lima et al., Reference Lopez-Lima, Sánchez-Nava, Carrion, Monteros and Villain2015). The damage can be even higher depending on the level of attack and on the genetic variability within nematode population (Santos et al., Reference Santos, Correa, Peixoto, Mattos, Silva, Moita, Salgado, Castagnone-Sereno and Carneiro2018).

M. paranaensis is widely spread in Coffea arabica and C. canephora coffee growing areas in Brazil and other Latin American countries (Barros et al., Reference Barros, Oliveira, Zambolim, Ferreira and Coutinho2011; Barros et al., Reference Barros, Oliveira, Lima, Coutinho, Ferreira and Costa2014; Villain et al., Reference Villain, Sarah, Hernandez, Bertrand, Anthony, Lashermes, Charmetant, Anzueto and Carneiro2013). The alarming rise in the occurrence of this nematode in Minas Gerais State (Castro et al., Reference Castro, Campos and Naves2003; Castro et al., Reference Castro, Campos, Pozza, Naves, Andrade Junior, Dutra, Coimbra, Maximiniano and Silva2008; Salgado et al., Reference Salgado, Guimarães, Botelho, Tassone, Marcelo, Souza, Oliveira and Ferreira2015), the largest C. arabica-producing state in Brazil, requires management practices to ensure the sustainability of coffee production in these areas. The use of resistant cultivars is the best way to cultivate coffee plants in soils infested by RKNs. While most of C. arabica cultivars are susceptible to M. paranaensis, C. canephora shows genetic variability in their resistance to this nematode species (Bertrand et al., Reference Bertrand, Peña Durán, Anzueto, Cilas, Etienne, Anthony and Eskes2000; Fatobene et al., Reference Fatobene, Andrade, Gonçalves and Guerreiro Filho2018).

Some clones of Conilon coffee cultivar Vitoria Incaper 8142 of C. canephora exhibited multiple resistance to M. exigua, M. incognita, and M. paranaensis (Lima et al., Reference Lima, Furlanetto, Nicole, Gomes, Almeida, Jorge-Júnior, Correa, Salgado, Ferrão and Carneiro2015) under controlled conditions. Because Conilon coffee is recommended for regions at low altitudes, the goal of this study was to evaluate the agronomic performance of resistant clones of Conilon coffee cultivar Vitoria Incaper 8142 in areas infested by M. paranaensis in the west region of Minas Gerais.

Material and Methods

In this study, we evaluated five coffee clones 2V, 3V, 6V, 7V, and 13V resistant to M. paranaensis, and the susceptible clone 12V, previously screened by Lima et al. (Reference Lima, Furlanetto, Nicole, Gomes, Almeida, Jorge-Júnior, Correa, Salgado, Ferrão and Carneiro2015). Cultivar Catuaí Vermelho IAC 99 of C. arabica was used as a susceptible control. Clonal seedlings were formed from cuttings derived from orthotropic branches (OB) in polyethylene bags with commercial substrate (Fonseca et al., Reference Fonseca, Ferrão, Ferrão, Verdin Filho, Volp, Bittencourt, R.G., A.F.A., M.A.G. and L.H.2007).

The experiment was conducted for 4 years in Piumhi MG, Brazil (20°25′28″S; 46°1′10″W; 812 m a.s.l.), in a field previously cultivated with C. arabica and infested by M. paranaensis esterase phenotype P1 (Carneiro and Almeida, Reference Carneiro and Almeida2001). The soil texture was 61% clay, 28% silt, and 11% sand. The average air temperature and rainfall during the growing seasons were 20.5 °C and 1588 mm in 2011/2012; 21.1 °C and 1417 mm in 2012/2013; 21.0 °C and 924 mm in 2013/2014; and 21.3 °C and 1259 mm in 2014/2015. Clonal seedlings of the Vitoria Incaper 8142 and susceptible control Catuaí Vermelho IAC 99 were planted in a randomized block design with five replicates, that is, plots of seven plants, spaced 3.5 m between rows and 0.7 m between plants, in December 2012.

The infective population of M. paranaensis in the soil was evaluated twice: at the beginning of the experiment (Biotest 1) and at the first coffee harvest in June 2015 (Biotest 2). Soil samples from three equidistant spots in the plot were collected, mixed, and placed in 550 cm3 plastic pots to grow the susceptible tomato cultivar Santa Clara. Then, the population of M. paranaensis, eggs + J2, was quantified in tomato roots after 60 days. Extraction of nematodes was conducted according to Hussey and Barker (Reference Hussey and Barker1973), adapted by Bonetti and Ferraz (Reference Bonetti and Ferraz1981). The population of M. paranaensis (eggs + J2) was also evaluated in roots of coffee clones. Four subsamples of roots were collected in equidistant spots at 20 cm from the central axis of the plant and a depth of 30 cm, both perpendicular to the direction of the crop line. The samples were collected during the first coffee harvest in June 2015. Again, nematodes were extracted according to Hussey and Barker (Reference Hussey and Barker1973), adapted by Bonetti and Ferraz (Reference Bonetti and Ferraz1981) and counted using a Peter’s slide under a biological microscope. Population density was expressed as the number of eggs + J2 per gram of roots (NEM g−1).

Vegetative traits like plant height (PH), in centimeters from the stem base to the apex of the plants, number of OB, stem diameter (SD), in centimeters measured at the stem base 10 cm above the ground, and canopy diameter (CD), in centimeters measured at 50 cm above the ground, were evaluated 48 months after planting. The vegetative vigor (VV) was evaluated according to the scale proposed by Carneiro (Reference Carneiro1995), where the score 5 means plants with excellent VV while the score 0 indicates extremely depleted or dead plants. Plants that scored from 0 to 2 were considered susceptible, and from 3 to 5 were considered tolerant and/or resistant. They were also evaluated for the percentage of dead plants (%DP). Initial reproductive development was evaluated through fruit yield (FY) in liters and the percentage of fruit with at least one empty locule (%FEL). Fruit ripening was evaluated through the percentage of green fruits (%GF).

An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed using the ‘agricolae’ package of the R statistical software (R Core Team, 2016; Mendiburu, Reference Mendiburu2015). Data were transformed when they did not fit the assumptions of the ANOVA. The clone means were compared by Tukey’s test using the ‘HSD.test’ function from the ‘agricolae’ package (p < 0.05).

Results

The presence and infectivity of M. paranaensis in the experimental field were confirmed in both biotests (Table 1). No significant differences (p > 0.05) were obtained between the number of nematodes in clone plots in both individual and joint variance analyses, indicating that the infestation of nematodes was homogeneous in the field. This condition was essential to the avoidance of erroneous evaluation of clone resistance. Significant effects were observed for the interaction years × clones in the joint ANOVA. There was a decrease in the nematode population in clone 2V, and an increase in the nematode population in the susceptible control Catuaí Vermelho IAC 99.

Table 1.

Average number1 of Meloidogyne paranaensis (eggs + J2) on roots of tomato plants grown in soil sampled in clone plot biotests

1 Means followed by the same capital letter in rows and by the same lowercase letter in columns do not differ at the 0.05 probability level according to the Tukey’s test.

2 Susceptible control Coffea arabica cultivar Catuaí Vermelho IAC 99.

Clones 2V, 3V, and 6V showed low nematode population density and good VV (Table 2). Clones 7V and 13V showed intermediate means of NEM g−1 but also presented high scores of VV. Clone 12V, previously classified as susceptible to M. paranaensis, presented vegetative growth and FY similar to those of the other Conilon coffee clones. As expected, the susceptible control Catuaí Vermelho IAC 99 had the largest NEM g−1 and consequently the lowest VV and high %DP.

Table 2.

Number of eggs + J2 of Meloidogyne paranaensis per gram of root (NEM g−1), vegetative vigor (VV), and percentage of dead coffee plants (%DP)

For NEM g−1 and VV, means followed by the same letter in columns do not differ at the 0.05 probability level according to the Tukey’s test.

1 Vegetative vigor scores according to the scale of Carneiro (Reference Carneiro1995).

2 Susceptible control Coffea arabica cultivar Catuaí Vermelho IAC 99.

On average, the vegetative traits in clones of Vitoria Incaper 8142 were significantly higher than in the susceptible control Catuaí Vermelho IAC 99 (Table 3). While some of these differences could be influenced by the resistance to nematodes, others were caused by botanical characters intrinsic to each species, such as the higher number of OB in C. canephora clones. Clones of Vitória Incaper 8142 showed higher FY and later ripening than the susceptible control Catuaí Vermelho IAC 99 (Table 4).

Table 3.

Stem diameter (SD), canopy diameter (CD), number of orthotropic branches (OB), and plant height (PH) of Coffea canephora clone cultivar Vitoria Incaper 8142 and Coffea arabica cultivar Catuaí Vermelho IAC 99 in a field infested by Meloidogyne paranaensis

Means followed by the same letter in columns do not differ at the 0.05 probability level according to the Tukey’s test.

1 Susceptible control Coffea arabica cultivar Catuaí Vermelho IAC 99.

Table 4.

Average fruit yield (FY), percentage of green fruits (%GF), and percentage of fruits with at least one empty locule (%FEL) for clones of Coffea canephora cultivar Vitoria Incaper 8142 and Coffea arabica cultivar Catuaí Vermelho IAC 99 in a field infested by Meloidogyne paranaensis

For FY and %GF, means followed by the same letter in columns do not differ at the 0.05 probability level according to the Tukey’s test.

1 Susceptible control Coffea arabica cultivar Catuaí Vermelho IAC 99.

Discussion

The clones 2V, 3V, 6V 7V, and 13V of Vitoria Incaper 8142, classified as resistant to M. paranaensis under controlled conditions (Lima et al., Reference Lima, Furlanetto, Nicole, Gomes, Almeida, Jorge-Júnior, Correa, Salgado, Ferrão and Carneiro2015), also showed good performance in the field infested by M. paranaensis. The clones 2V, 3V, 6V, and 7V were also resistant to M. exigua (Lima et al., Reference Lima, Furlanetto, Nicole, Gomes, Almeida, Jorge-Júnior, Correa, Salgado, Ferrão and Carneiro2015), a valuable feature considering the widespread nature of this species within coffee plantations. In addition to the survival and good fitness of plants, integrated management of nematodes must consider the ability of plants to reduce the nematode population in fields as the extensive use of mechanization may promote the dissemination of nematodes. For this reason, clone 12V should not be planted in soils infested by M. paranaensis, despite its good performance.

The low FYs of C. arabica Catuaí Vermelho IAC 99 in the first harvest were also observed by Carvalho et al. (Reference Carvalho, Salgado, Mendes, Pereira, Botelho, Tassone and Lima2017) in areas infested by M. paranaensis. On the other hand, yields of clones were not affected by nematode parasitism, even in a distinct edaphoclimatic region at an altitude about 800 m. In fact, clones of the Conilon coffee-like cultivar Vitória Incaper 8142 were recommended for regions with average annual air temperatures between 22 and 26 °C and altitudes below 650 m (Taques and Dadalto, Reference Taques, Dadalto, Ferrão, Fonseca, Ferrão and Muner2017).

Most studies evaluating the performance of coffee genotypes cultivated in soil infested by Meloidogyne spp. were conducted under controlled conditions. Although requiring more time, the evaluation of genotypes in the field is extremely important for coffee breeding programs because the evaluation is more reliable (Oliveira et al., Reference Oliveira, Pereira, Silva, Rezende, Botelho and Carvalho2011) and the selection is more efficient. The use of coffee cultivars resistant to nematodes and adapted to specific environmental conditions can effectively contribute to the improvement of plant performance in infested areas, increasing yield, reducing production costs, and ensuring greater competitiveness and sustainability of coffee production (Carvalho et al., Reference Carvalho, Salgado, Mendes, Pereira, Botelho, Tassone and Lima2017).

Genetic control of nematodes has been implemented with relative success in coffee breeding. The first strategy adopted by breeding programs was the development of resistant C. canephora rootstocks Apoatã IAC 2258 (Gonçalves et al., Reference Gonçalves, Ferraz, Lima and Silvarolla1996) and Nemaya (Bertrand et al., Reference Bertrand, Peña Durán, Anzueto, Cilas, Etienne, Anthony and Eskes2000). Both are resistant to M. exigua but with different levels of resistance segregation to M. incognita and M. paranaensis. A more recent study identified clones of C. canephora with multiple resistance to M. incognita and M. paranaensis (Fatobene et al., Reference Fatobene, Andrade, Gonçalves and Guerreiro Filho2018) that could be used in the breeding of new rootstocks or ungrafted cultivars of C. canephora. Currently, some ungrafted cultivars of C. arabica resistant to RKNs are available, such as IPR 100 resistant to M. paranaensis (Sera et al., Reference Sera, Sera, Ito, Mata, Doi, Azevedo and Ribeiro Filho2007) and to M. exigua (Rezende et al., Reference Rezende, Andrade, Salgado, Rezende, Menezes and Carvalho2017), and IAC 125 RN (Fazuoli et al., Reference Fazuoli, Braghini, Silvarolla, Gonçalves, Mistro, Gallo and Guerreiro Filho2018) and IAPAR 59 (Salgado et al., Reference Salgado, Resende and Campos2005) resistant to M. exigua.

Considering resistance to RKNs and the increasing demand for ‘Robusta’ and ‘Conilon’ coffees in the international market, clones 2V, 3V, 6V, and 7V of Vitoria Incaper 8142 of C. canephora represent alternatives to coffee production in areas infested by M. paranaensis, as well as in areas traditionally cultivated with C. arabica.

Author ORCIDs

Bárbhara Joana dos Reis Fatobene, 0000-0002-8885-761X

Acknowledgement

The authors are grateful to Consórcio Pesquisa Café, CNPq, CAPES, FAPEMIG, and INCT-Café.

References

Barros, A.F., Oliveira, R.D.L., Lima, I.M., Coutinho, R.R., Ferreira, A.O. and Costa, A. (2014). Root-knot nematodes, a growing problem for Conilon coffee in Espírito Santo State, Brazil. Crop Protection 55, 74–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barros, A.F., Oliveira, R.D.L., Zambolim, L., Ferreira, A.O. and Coutinho, R.R. (2011). Meloidogyne paranaensis attacking coffee trees in Espírito Santo State, Brazil. Australasian Plant Disease Notes 6, 43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertrand, B., Peña Durán, M.X., Anzueto, F., Cilas, C., Etienne, H., Anthony, F. and Eskes, A.B. (2000). Genetic study of Coffea canephora coffee tree resistance to Meloidogyne incognita nematodes in Guatemala and Meloidogyne sp. nematodes in El Salvador for selection of rootstock varieties in Central America. Euphytica 113, 79–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonetti, J.I.S. and Ferraz, S. (1981). Modificação do método de Hussey & Barker para a extração de ovos de Meloidogyne exigua de raízes de cafeeiro. Fitopatologia Brasileira 6, 553.Google Scholar
Castro, J.M.C., Campos, V.P. and Naves, R.L. (2003). Ocorrência de Meloidogyne paranaensis em Cafeeiros na Região do Alto Paranaíba em Minas Gerais. Fitopatologia Brasileira 28(5), 565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castro, J.M.C., Campos, V.P., Pozza, E.A., Naves, R.L., Andrade Junior, W.C., Dutra, M.R., Coimbra, J.L., Maximiniano, C. and Silva, J.R.C. (2008) Levantamento de Fitonematóides em Cafezais do Sul de Minas Gerais. Nematologia Brasileira 32(1), 56–64.Google Scholar
Carneiro, R. (1995). Reação de progênies de café Icatu a Meloidogyne incognita raça 2, em condições de campo. Nematologia Brasileira 19, 53–59.Google Scholar
Carneiro, R.M.D.G., Carneiro, R.G., Abrantes, M.O., Santos, M.S.N.A. and Almeida, M.R.A. (1996). Meloidogyne paranaensis n. sp. (Nemata: Meloidogynidae), a root-knot nematode parasitizing coffee in Brazil. Journal of Nematology 28(2), 177–189.Google Scholar
Carneiro, R.M.D.G. and Almeida, M.R.A. (2001). Técnica de eletroforese usada no estudo de enzimas dos nematoides de galhas para a identificação de espécies. Nematologia Brasileira 25, 35–44.Google Scholar
Carvalho, A.M., Salgado, S.M.L., Mendes, A.N.G., Pereira, A.A., Botelho, C.E., Tassone, G.A.T. and Lima, R.R. (2017). Caracterização de genótipos de Coffea arabica L. em área infestada pelo nematoide Meloidogyne paranaensis. Coffee Science 12(1), 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fatobene, B.J.R., Andrade, V.T., Gonçalves, W. and Guerreiro Filho, O. (2018). Coffea canephora clones with multiple resistance to Meloidogyne incognita and M. paranaensis. Experimental Agriculture 1–9.Google Scholar
Fazuoli, L.C., Braghini, M.T., Silvarolla, M.B., Gonçalves, W., Mistro, J.C., Gallo, P.B. and Guerreiro Filho, O. (2018). IAC 125 RN – A dwarf coffee cultivar resistant to leaf rust and root-knot nematode. Crop Breeding and Applied Biotechnology 18, 237–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fonseca, A.F.A., Ferrão, R.G., Ferrão, M.A.G., Verdin Filho, A.C., Volp, P.S. and Bittencourt, M.L.C. (2007). Jardins clonais, produção de sementes e mudas. In R.G., Ferrão, A.F.A., Fonseca, M.A.G., Ferrão and De-L.H., Muner (eds) Café Conilon. Vitória: INCAPER, pp. 229–255 Google Scholar
Gonçalves, W., Ferraz, L.C.C.B., Lima, M.M.A., Silvarolla, M.B. (1996). Patogenicidade de Meloidogyne exigua e M. incognita raça 1 a mudas de cafeeiros. Bragantia 55(1), 89–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hussey, R.S. and Barker, K.R. (1973). A comparison of methods of collecting inocula of Meloidogyne spp. including a new technique. Plant Disease Report 57, 1025–1028.Google Scholar
Jones, J.T., Haegeman, A., Danchin, E.G.J., Gaur, H.S., Helder, J., Jones, M.G.K., Kikuchi, T., Manzanilla-López, R., Palomares-Rius, R.E., Wesemael, W.M.L., Roland, N. and Perry, R.N. (2013). Top 10 plant-parasitic nematodes in molecular plant pathology. Molecular Plant Pathology 14(9), 946–961.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lima, E.A., Furlanetto, C., Nicole, M., Gomes, A.C.M.M., Almeida, M.R.A., Jorge-Júnior, A., Correa, V.R., Salgado, S.M., Ferrão, M.A.G. and Carneiro, R.M.D.G. (2015). The multi-resistant reaction of drought-tolerant coffee ‘Conilon Clone 14’ to Meloidogyne spp. and late hypersensitive-like response in Coffea canephora. Phytopathology 105, 805–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lopez-Lima, D., Sánchez-Nava, P., Carrion, G., Monteros, A.E. and Villain, L. (2015). Corky-root symptoms for coffee in central Veracruz are linked to the root-knot nematode Meloidogyne paranaensis, a new report for Mexico. European Journal Plant Pathology 141, 623–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mendiburu, F.D. (2015). Agricolae: Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. R Package Version 1.2-3.Google Scholar
Oliveira, A.C.B., Pereira, A.A., Silva, F.L., Rezende, J.C., Botelho, C.E. and Carvalho, G.R. (2011). Prediction of genetic gains from selection in Arabica coffee progenies. Crop Breeding and Applied Biotechnology 11(2), 106–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rezende, R.M., Andrade, V.T., Salgado, S.M.L., Rezende, J.C., Menezes, J.D.O. and Carvalho, G.R. (2017). Genetic gain in the resistance of Arabica coffee progenies to root-knot nematode. Crop Science 57, 1355–1362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
R Core Team (2016). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
Salgado, S.M.L., Guimarães, N.M.R.B., Botelho, C.E., Tassone, G.A.T., Marcelo, A.L., Souza, S. R., Oliveira, R.D.L. and Ferreira, D.F. (2015). Meloidogyne paranaensis e Meloidogyne exigua em lavouras cafeeiras na região Sul de Minas Gerais. Coffee Science 10(4), 475–481.Google Scholar
Salgado, S.M.L., Resende, M.L.V. and Campos, V.P. (2005). Reprodução de Meloidogyne exigua em Cultivares de Cafeeiros Resistentes e Suscetíveis. Fitopatologia Brasileira 30(4), 413–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santos, M.F.A., Correa, V.R., Peixoto, J.R., Mattos, V.S., Silva, J.G.P., Moita, A.W., Salgado, S.M.L., Castagnone-Sereno, P. and Carneiro, R.M.D.G. (2018). Genetic variability of Meloidogyne paranaensis populations and their aggressiveness to susceptible coffee genotypes. Plant Pathology 67, 193–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sera, G.H., Sera, T., Ito, D.S., Mata, J.S., Doi, D.S., Azevedo, J.A. and Ribeiro Filho, C. (2007). Progênies de Coffea arabica IPR 100 resistentes ao nematoide Meloidogyne paranaensis. Bragantia 66, 43–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taques, R.C. and Dadalto, G.G. (2017). Zoneamento agroclimatológico para a cultura do café Conilon no estado do Espírito Santo. In Ferrão, R.G., Fonseca, A.F.A., Ferrão, M.A.G. and De-Muner, L.H. (eds) Café Conilon. Vitória: INCAPER, pp. 69–79.Google Scholar
Villain, L., Sarah, J.L., Hernandez, A., Bertrand, B., Anthony, F., Lashermes, P., Charmetant, P., Anzueto, F. and Carneiro, R.M.D.G. (2013). Diversity of root-knot nematodes parasitizing coffee in Central America. Nematropica 43(2), 194–206.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Table 1. Average number1 of Meloidogyne paranaensis (eggs + J2) on roots of tomato plants grown in soil sampled in clone plot biotests

Figure 1

Table 2. Number of eggs + J2 of Meloidogyne paranaensis per gram of root (NEM g−1), vegetative vigor (VV), and percentage of dead coffee plants (%DP)

Figure 2

Table 3. Stem diameter (SD), canopy diameter (CD), number of orthotropic branches (OB), and plant height (PH) of Coffea canephora clone cultivar Vitoria Incaper 8142 and Coffea arabica cultivar Catuaí Vermelho IAC 99 in a field infested by Meloidogyne paranaensis

Figure 3

Table 4. Average fruit yield (FY), percentage of green fruits (%GF), and percentage of fruits with at least one empty locule (%FEL) for clones of Coffea canephora cultivar Vitoria Incaper 8142 and Coffea arabica cultivar Catuaí Vermelho IAC 99 in a field infested by Meloidogyne paranaensis