Loading article...
Loading article...
Stream/Area:
-
Subject:
-
Paper ID:
IJSREM67454
Volume:
10 |
9 |
Sep 2026
Pages:
1-12
Publication Frequency:
Monthly (12 issues per year)
License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.

Botany
Pt. R. K. Shukla Degree College, Amliha, Chaubepur, Kanpur Nagar (CSJMU)
Pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan) cultivation is adversely affected by Fusarium wilt, caused by the pathovar of F. udum. In the absence of related studies, this paper re-analyzed and described some published works. These included a survey of 25 locations and 7 genotypes described by Biswas and his colleagues (2020), and a study conducted by Ravikumara and his colleagues (2022), in which they reported results of 11 host differentials, and mean wilt scores against 60 F. udum isolates from 5 state locations. The highest wilt incidence across locations in the published studies were from Anjad (26%) and Sanawad (23.8%). More elevated un-weighted mean wilt scores were reported from West Bengal (14.57% from 3 locations) and Madhya Pradesh (14.42% from 10 locations) locations. Among the host differentials evaluated in 2022, ICP 9173 showed the lowest (4.48%) wilt incidence. In 2022 greenhouse trials, ICP 8863 showed 3.33% wilt, and the remaining check lines, Parwati and ICP 2376, showed 90% wilt incidence. Based on the studies, researchers should employ an integrated pest management approach alongside pathogen-isolate validation.
KEYWORDS
Variation in the expression of symptoms of pigeonpea wilt occurs at different levels. These levels include differences among fields, genotypes of pigeonpeas and pathotypes of the wilt causing fungus. Field incidences of the disease reported by Biswas et al. (2020) ranged from 4.50 to 26.00%. Anjad and Sanawad in Madhya Pradesh recorded the highest incidences. Pigeonpea wilt is widely distributed and occurs throughout most of the growing areas of pigeonpeas. Although, for this study, data from West Bengal and Madhya Pradesh were used, it was observed that means computed from site counts from both the states were closely related, thus underscoring the need to analyze site counts from various localized areas rather than interpreting data from states in general. In the greenhouse studies conducted by the author, wilt symptoms were least observed in plants of ICP 8863 and Richa. In the later study, symptoms in plants of ICP 9174 were less in the presence of a 60 isolate panel of the wilt fungus (Ravikumara et al. 2022). The two investigations identify the importance of the test context for resistance evaluation. ICP 8863 differed from the counted greenhouse data and thus extrapolations based on limited testing data are inadequate. Subsequent studies must incorporate coreartum checks and representatives of F. udum, clear delineation of reactions, and collaborative field and laboratory studies. Rational integration of pathogen management with pathogen diagnostic tools and disease risk assessment in the field may facilitate determination of resistant plant populations and better interpretation of resistance in the field (Sharma et al., 2016; Srivastava et al., 2023). In the meantime, improvement in resistant plant populations may be possible through integration of several complementary interventions. The desired effect, i.e. long term integration of stable host resistance with other management practices, may be attainable. Heterogeneity may exist across Fusarium wilt pathosystems, and, thus, it may not be valid to assume that integrating management practices across various Fusarium wilt pathosystems will not be effective (Dave and Ingle, 2021).
Biswas, K., Tarafdar, A., Kumar, R., Singhvi, N., Ghosh, P., Sharma, M., Pabbi, S., & Shukla, P. (2020). Molecular analysis of disease-responsive genes revealing the resistance potential against Fusarium wilt (Fusarium udum Butler) dependent on genotype variability in the leguminous crop pigeonpea. Frontiers in Genetics, 11, 862. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2020.00862 Dave, A., & Ingle, S. (2021). Streptomyces sp. S-9 promotes plant growth and confers resistance in pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan) against Fusarium wilt. 3 Biotech, 11, 459. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13205-021-02989-0 Dean, R., Van Kan, J. A. L., Pretorius, Z. A., et al. (2012). The Top 10 fungal pathogens in molecular plant pathology. Molecular Plant Pathology, 13(4), 414–430. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1364-3703.2011.00783.x Di Pietro, A., Madrid, M. P., Caracuel, Z., Delgado-Jarana, J., & Roncero, M. I. G. (2003). Fusarium oxysporum: exploring the molecular arsenal of a vascular wilt fungus. Molecular Plant Pathology, 4(5), 315–325. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1364-3703.2003.00184.x Edel-Hermann, V., & Lecomte, C. (2019). Current status of Fusarium oxysporum formae speciales and races. Phytopathology, 109(4), 512–530. https://doi.org/10.1094/PHYTO-08-18-0320-RVW Gordon, T. R. (2017). Fusarium oxysporum and the Fusarium wilt syndrome. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 55, 23–39. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-phyto-080615-095919 Leslie, J. F., & Summerell, B. A. (2006). The Fusarium Laboratory Manual. Blackwell Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470278376 Lievens, B., Rep, M., & Thomma, B. P. H. J. (2008). Recent developments in the molecular discrimination of formae speciales of Fusarium oxysporum. Pest Management Science, 64(8), 781–788. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.1564 Ma, L. J., van der Does, H. C., Borkovich, K. A., et al. (2010). Comparative genomics reveals mobile pathogenicity chromosomes in Fusarium. Nature, 464, 367–373. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08850 Michielse, C. B., & Rep, M. (2009). Pathogen profile update: Fusarium oxysporum. Molecular Plant Pathology, 10(3), 311–324. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1364-3703.2009.00538.x Ploetz, R. C. (2015). Fusarium wilt of banana. Phytopathology, 105(12), 1512–1521. https://doi.org/10.1094/PHYTO-04-15-0101-RVW
Publication Date
9/25/2026
Peer Review Type
Double-Blind Peer Review
Review Rounds: 2
Documents
Article Views
1
Total views since publication
PDF Downloads
7
Total downloads since publication
Geographic Reach
5
Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.
Plagiarism Screening
This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.
Funding Information
No funding information available for this research.
Related research in the same subject area
Loading similar articles...