Brasil
Arquivos do Instituto Biológico
Sumário Anterior Atual Seguinte
Sumário
SCIENTIFIC ARTICLE | Phytopathology • Arq. Inst. Biol. 93 • 2026 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1808-1657000042025 linkcopy

Open-access Bionematicides in sugarcane planting

AuthorshipSCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

Biological nematicides have become the predominant treatment of sugarcane fields infested by nematodes, although there are few studies evaluating the effects of these products on this crop. In this context, the objective of this work was to evaluate the effect of Bacillus subtilis + Bacillus licheniformis (®Quartzo) and Pochonia chlamydosporia (®Rizotec) on nematode control and on sugarcane yield, comparing with a chemical nematicide, when applied on furrow. Eight experiments were carried on in São Paulo state, Brazil, infested areas, in which four treatments [no nematicide—control; carbosulfan 700EC 4 L·ha-1—standard treatment; B. subtilis + B. licheniformis (®Quartzo) 0.20 kg·ha-1; and P. chlamydosporia (®Rizotec) 1 kg·ha-1)] were applied on furrow. Carbosulfan was the most efficient treatment in Pratylenchus spp. control, reducing populations at least until four months after planting and contributing to average increases of 11% in yield. P. chlamydosporia reduced populations of Pratylenchus spp. four months after planting and promoted a productivity increase of 6% in relation to the control. The treatment with B. subtilis + B. licheniformis was less effective in nematodes control than the other treatments, and the plots treated with this biological product produced 5% more than check.

Keywords
Bacillus subtilis ; Bacillus licheniformis ; Meloidogyne ; Pratylenchus ; Pochonia chlamydosporia

INTRODUCTION

Plant-parasitic nematodes are one of the important biotic constraints in sugarcane production in Brazil. Since it is nearly impossible to eradicate nematodes present in a field, the best way to handle the infested area is integrating various control measures, aiming to reduce these parasites population or to improve plant development conditions (Dinardo-Miranda, 2018). For many years, chemical nematicides were the most common method in sugarcane. However, from the 2020s onwards, biological nematicides have become predominant in the treatment of sugarcane fields infested by nematodes, although there are few studies conducted with these products in the field conditions.

One of these studies was conducted by Mazzuchelli et al. (2020), who applied Bacillus subtilis on furrow and observed that the rhizobacteria provided effective control of Meloidogyne sp. and Pratylenchus spp. and, in consequence, there was a yield increase in treated plots. Another example includes five experiments carried on by Dinardo-Miranda et al. (2022), who worked with a mix of B. subtilis + B. licheniformis applied on furrow and observed that the mix of Bacillus was less efficient to reduce nematode populations than the chemical nematicide carbosulfan, promoting a smaller increase in productivity in relation to the check than the chemical product.

Although rhizobacteria have stood out as biological nematicides in sugarcane, the nematode antagonistic fungi Pochonia chlamydosporia is also attracting greater attention as a potential biocontrol agent. In addition to fighting phytopathogenic nematodes (Zinger et al., 2021; Alves et al., 2022), it has also been reported as growth promoting fungus of some crops (Monteiro et al., 2020). Involving sugarcane, Sankaranarayanan; Hari (2013, 2021) conducted experiments under potted condition and observed that P. chlamydosporia promoted 36% galling and 30% nematode population reduction in experiment conducted with Meloidogyne javanica (Sankaranarayanan; Hari, 2013) and 46% reduction in the nematode population in the roots in experiment involving Pratylenchus zeae (Sankaranarayanan; Hari, 2021).

Due to the few studies in sugarcane fields naturally infested by nematodes, specially involving P. chlamydosporia, the objective of this work was to evaluate the effect of B. subtilis + B. licheniformis (®Quartzo) and P. chlamydosporia (®Rizotec) on nematode control and on sugarcane yield, when applied on furrow in field conditions, compared to chemical nematicide carbosulfan (®Marshal Star).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This study consisted of eight experiments conducted in naturally nematodes infested areas in São Paulo State, Brazil:

  • Santa Cruz das Palmeiras: experiment 1;

  • Serrana: experiments 2, 5 and 8;

  • Olímpia: experiment 3;

  • Araras: experiment 4;

  • Lençóis Paulista: experiment 6;

  • Tanabi: experiment 7.

The planting date and cultivar used in each experiment were:

  • 1 December 2016 and CTC11 in experiment 1;

  • 10 January 2017 and CTC4 in experiment 2;

  • 21 February 2017 and RB867515 in experiment 3;

  • 10 March 2017 and SP80-1816 in experiment 4;

  • 18 March 2017 and CTC4 in experiment 5;

  • 30 May 2017 and RB975357 in experiment 6;

  • 25 March 2019 and CTC9003 in experiment 7;

  • 26 March 2019 and CTC002627 in experiment 8.

All experiments were conducted in a randomized block design, with five (experiments 1, 5, 6, 7), six (experiments 2, 3, 4) or 12 (experiment 8) replications. The plots were represented by six furrows with 10 m, spaced apart by 1.5 m.

The studied treatments were:

  • Control: no nematicide;

  • Standard treatment: carbosulfan (®Marshal Star 700EC) 4.5 L.ha-1;

  • Bacillus subtilis + Bacillus licheniformis (®Quartzo) 0.20 kg.ha-1;

  • Pochonia chlamydosporia (®Rizotec) 1 kg.ha-1.

All nematicide treatments were applied in furrow planting with a CO2 pressurized backpack sprayer, after which the furrows were immediately covered with soil.

To evaluate the effect of treatments on nematode populations, soil and plant roots samples were collected at two, four and ten months after planting, except in experiment 7, in which the samplings were done two and four months. In all experiments, in each plot and sampling, plant roots and soil were collected from the first and the sixth furrow, and the nematodes extracted by the combination of sieving and centrifugation with sucrose solution (Jenkins, 1964; Coolen; D’Herde, 1972). The productivity of each plot was obtained around 14 months after planting, by the biometric method (Landell et al., 1999), considering the stalks from second to fifth furrows.

For statistical analysis, the population data were transformed by the square root of (x + 1). For each experiment, the data were subjected to analysis of variance, and the means were compared by t test at 5% significance. After each experiment, the data were analyzed in conjunction. Since the number of replications was not the same for all experiments, for these analyses, each experiment was considered as one replication, using the mean data for each parameter and treatment, as suggested by Gomes (1982). For statistical analysis, Agroestat software program was used (Barbosa; Maldonado Jr., 2011).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Pratylenchus zeae and M. javanica were founded in all experimental fields, while Pratylenchus brachyurus was recorded in experiments 2 and 8, and Meloidogyne incognita in experiment 8 (Tables 1 to 8).

Thumbnail
Table 1
Population of <i>Meloidogyne javanica</i> second-stage juvenile (Mj) and of <i>Pratylenchus zeae</i> adult and juvenile (Pz) in roots (50 g) and soil (1 L), at two, four and ten months after planting, and stalks yield at the harvest (SYH, T per ha), according to nematicides treatments. Experiment 1<tfn href="tfn01">*</tfn>.
Thumbnail
Table 2
Population of <i>Meloidogyne javanica</i> second-stage juvenile (Mj) and of <i>Pratylenchus zeae</i> + <i>P. brachyurus</i> adult and juvenile (Pspp) in roots (50 g) and soil (1 L), at two, four and ten months after planting. Experiment 2<tfn href="tfn01">*</tfn>.
Thumbnail
Table 3
Population of <i>Meloidogyne javanica</i> second-stage juvenile (Mj) and of <i>Pratylenchus zeae</i> adult and juvenile (Pz) in roots (50 g) and soil (1 L), at two, four and ten months after planting, and stalks yield at the harvest (SYH, T per ha), according to nematicides treatments. Experiment 3<tfn href="tfn01">*</tfn>.
Thumbnail
Table 4
Population of <i>Meloidogyne javanica</i> second-stage juvenile (Mj) and of <i>Pratylenchus zeae</i> adult and juvenile (Pz) in roots (50 g) and soil (1 L), at two, four and ten months after planting, and stalks yield at the harvest (SYH, T per ha), according to nematicides treatments. Experiment 4<tfn href="tfn01">*</tfn>.
Thumbnail
Table 5
Population of <i>Meloidogyne javanica</i> second-stage juvenile (Mj) and of <i>Pratylenchus zeae</i> adult and juvenile (Pz) in roots (50 g) and soil (1 L), at two, four and ten months after planting, and stalks yield at the harvest (SYH, T per ha), according to nematicides treatments. Experiment 5<tfn href="tfn01">*</tfn>.
Thumbnail
Table 6
Population of <i>Meloidogyne</i> javanica second-stage juvenile (Mj) and of <i>Pratylenchus zeae</i> adult and juvenile (Pz) in roots (50 g) and soil (1 L), at two, four and ten months after planting, and stalks yield at the harvest (SYH, T per ha), according to nematicides treatments. Experiment 6<tfn href="tfn01">*</tfn>.
Thumbnail
Table 7
Population of <i>Meloidogyne javanica</i> second-stage juvenile (Mj) and of <i>Pratylenchus zeae</i> adult and juvenile (Pz) in roots (50 g) and soil (1 L), at two and four months after planting, and stalks yield at the harvest (SYH, T per ha), according to nematicides treatments. Experiment 7<tfn href="tfn01">*</tfn>.
Thumbnail
Table 8
Population of <i>Meloidogyne javanica</i> + <i>M. inconita</i> second-stage juvenile (Mspp) and of <i>Pratylenchus zeae</i> + <i>P. brachyurus</i> adult and juvenile (Pspp) in roots (50 g) and soil (1 L), at two, four and ten months after planting, and stalks yield at the harvest (SYH, T per ha), according to nematicides treatments. Experiment 8<tfn href="tfn01">*</tfn>.

In experiments 1, 2, 4 and 6, the nematicides did not significantly reduced the nematode population, comparing with check treatment, in all sampling carried on (Tables 1, 2, 4 and 6). Despite that, in experiment 1, plots treated with nematicides produced about 10% more than the check, a statistically significant value (Table 1). The increase in productivity of the plots treated with carbosulfan may be the result of a nematode population reduction, in a period prior to the two months, when the first sampling was made. It is known that the hotter and rainier the epoch of planting, the shorter is the period in which chemical nematicides remain effective, because they can be leached and metabolized by plants more quickly than in plantations made in drier epoch (Dinardo-Miranda, 2018; Dinardo-Miranda et al., 2022). So, since the experiment 1 was planted in December, it was subjected to a greater rainfall volume in the first two months after planting (347.8 mm) than the other experiments (251.9, 146.8, 209.0, 77.8, 0, 26.4, and 34.4 mm in experiment 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8, respectively), which would justify that, at two months, when the first sampling was carried out, there was not a significant reduction in nematode populations in plots treated by carbosulfan. On the other hand, the productivity in plots treated with biological nematicides was also higher than the check in experiment 1, which can be attributed to effects of microorganisms on plant growth. It is well known that P. chlamydosporia, B. subtilis, and B. licheniformis promotes plant growth and increases crops productivity (Sukkasem et al., 2018; Monteiro et al., 2020; Mahapatra et al., 2022).

The productivity data from experiment 2 were not obtained (Table 2).

In experiments 4 and 6, the lack of significant increase in productivity due to nematicides application is explained by the lack of effectiveness of those products on nematode control (Tables 4 and 6).

In experiment 3, nematicides treatments did not significantly reduced M. javanica population, both in roots and in soil, comparing with check treatment, in all sampling carried on, but carbosulfan and B. subtilis + B. licheniformis reduced P. zeae population on roots at least two months after planting, while P. chlamydosporia reduced P. zeae populations on roots at least four months after planting. As a result of the better control of P. zeae, in the first months of the plants development, the highest productivity was observed in the treatment with P. chlamydosporia, which differed significantly from that observed in the check plots. Plots treated with P. chlamydosporia produced 13% more than the check (Table 3).

In experiments 5 and 7, the carbosulfan effect on the reduction of P. zeae population in plant roots was observed at two and four months after planting, while the effect of B. subtilis + B. licheniformis treatment on the reduction of P. zeae population in plant roots was observed only in experiment 7, at four months after planting. P. chlamydosporia had no significant effect on P. zeae population in plant roots. No nematicide interfered with the M. javanica populations in the roots in both experiments (Tables 5 and 7). In both experiments, the productivity of plots treated with carbosulfan was significantly higher than that of the check plots, in response to the reduction in the population of P. zeae in the first months of plant development. Since the treatments with B. subtilis + B. licheniformis and P. chlamydosporia did not significantly reduced nematode population in plants roots in experiment 5, the productivity observed in these treatments were like the check, although they did not differ of the treatment with carbosulfan (Table 5). In experiment 7, plots treated with P. chlamydosporia produced more than the control, although this treatment did not significantly reduce nematode population (Table 7). These data suggested that, also in the experiment 7, the fungus may have acted as a growth promoter, as described by several researchers, as Farias et al. (2018) and Monteiro et al. (2020).

In experiment 8, just carbosulfan significantly reduced P. zeae + P. brachyurus population in plants roots, in all samplings. Because of this, the productivity of plots treated with carbosulfan was higher than the others (Table 8).

The treatments performance could be better evaluated by analyzing the nematode population data from eight experiments and yield data from seven experiments (Table 9). No nematicide significantly reduced the population of Meloidogyne spp. in plants roots, in all samplings carried out, but plots treated with biological nematicides showed lower populations of Meloidogyne spp. in the soil ten months after planting, compared to check- and carbosulfan-treated plots. In relation to Pratylenchus spp. population, carbosulfan was the most efficient treatment, reducing P. zeae or P. zeae + P. brachyurus populations in plants roots at least until four months after planting. P. chlamydosporia significantly reduced Pratylenchus spp. population at four months after planting. In this occasion, Pratylenchus spp. population in roots differed significantly that observed on check plots and did not differ from the observed in carbosulfan treatment. The treatment with B. subtilis + B. licheniformis was less effective, since the Pratylenchus spp. population in roots in this treatment did not differ significantly than the one observed on check plots and did not differ from the observed in carbosulfan treatment (Table 9).

Plots treated with nematicides produced significantly more than check plots. Since carbosulfan was more efficient in Pratylenchus spp. control, at least until four months after planting, the higher yield was observed in that treatment, followed by treatments with P. chlamydosporia and B. subtilis + B. licheniformis. Plots treated with carbosulfan produced on average 10% more than check plots, while plots treated with P. chlamydosporia and B. subtilis + B. licheniformis produced 6 and 5% more than the control, respectively (Table 9).

According to several researchers, bacteria belonging to genus Bacillus may present different action mechanisms on plant-parasitic nematodes, namely, the production of toxic metabolites, the interference in host recognition, the competition for nutrients and the resistance induction in plants (Sukkasem et al., 2018; Mahapatra et al., 2022). P. chlamydosporia reduces nematode populations because it infects nematode eggs and J2-stage juveniles by means of its ability to produce secondary metabolites such as aurovertins and pochonins, among others (Zhou et al., 2010), and acts to induce resistance to the nematodes (Monteiro et al., 2020). For both biological nematicides, all these mechanisms contribute to reduce the number of nematodes inside the roots, as registered in the present work, especially in experiments 3 and 7, and on average of eight experiments.

The results of these experiments are partially in agreement with those from Cardoso; Araújo (2011) and Morgado et al. (2015), who reported that the application of B. subtilis in the soil caused the reduction of Meloidogyne spp. and P. zeae reproduction factor, while reduction of Meloidogyne spp. population was not observed here. However, those researchers conducted the work in greenhouse, not in infested field.

The results of the present study agree partially with those obtained by Mazzuchelli et al. (2020). Although those authors had worked with B. subtilis, they reported that the biological product was more efficient than the chemical nematicide on nematode control, reducing nematode population until during the ratoon. In the present work, chemical nematicide was more efficient than biological product and, in both cases, around ten months after planting, nematode population was high in all plots, including in the check ones. Moreover, in the present study, the nematode population reduction was followed by increased productivity.

As in the present study, Dinardo-Miranda et al. (2022) also observed that carbosulfan was more efficient than B. subtilis + B. licheniformis to reduce nematode populations, at least until four months after sugarcane planting, increasing sugarcane yield in 11%. B. subtilis + B. licheniformis promoted 5% increase in productivity, values like those observed in the present study. Those authors, however, reported a certain effectiveness of the biological nematicide in the control of M. javanica, which was not verified in this study.

About P. chlamydosporia, the results of the present study agree with those obtained by Sankaranarayanan; Hari (2021), that registered reduction in P. zeae population in sugarcane roots conducted in pots treated with the fungus, comparing with no treated pots, but they are in disagreement with those obtained by Sankaranarayanan; Hari (2013), that also registered reduction in M. javanica population in sugarcane roots conducted in pots treated with the fungus, comparing with no treated pots.

CONCLUSION

P. chlamydosporia is more efficient than B. subtilis + B. licheniformis in reducing the Pratylenchus spp. populations in sugarcane roots, but it is less efficient than carbosulfan. On average, P. chlamydosporia and B. subtilis + B. licheniformis increase sugarcane yield in 6 and 5%, respectively, while carbosulfan increases in 10%.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors thank the sugarcane mills in which the experiments were conducted for their operational support.

  • FUNDING
    Not applicable.
  • ETHICAL APPROVAL
    Not applicable.
  • DECLARATION OF USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELIGENCE TOOLS
    In this work Artificial Inteligence tools were not used.
  • Peer Review History:
    Double-blind Peer Review.

AVAILABILITY OF DATA AND MATERIAL

The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

REFERENCES

  • ALVES, L.E.S.G.; FONTANA, L.F.; DIAS-ARIEIRA, C.R. Green manure and Pochonia chlamydosporia for Meloidogyne javanica control in soybean. Revista Caatinga, v.35, n.3, p.625-632, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-21252022v35n313rc
    » https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-21252022v35n313rc
  • BARBOSA, J.C.; MALDONADO JR., W. AgroEstat. Sistema para análise estatística de ensaios agronômicos, Versão 1.1.0626. Jaboticabal: FCAV/Unesp, 2011.
  • CARDOSO, R.B.; ARAÚJO, F.F. Multiplicação de Bacillus subtilis em vinhaça e viabilidade no controle da meloidoginose, em cana-de-açúcar. Revista Brasileira Engenharia Agrícola e Ambiental, v.15, n.12, p.1283-1288, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1415-43662011001200010
    » https://doi.org/10.1590/S1415-43662011001200010
  • COOLEN, W.A.; D’HERDE, C.J. A method for the quantitative extraction of nematodes from plant tissue Ghent: State Nematology and Entomology Research Station, 1972.
  • DINARDO-MIRANDA, L.L. Nematoides e pragas da cana-de-açúcar 2. ed. Campinas: Instituto Agronômico, 2018.
  • DINARDO-MIRANDA, L.L.; MIRANDA, I.D.; SILVA, H.D.S.; FRACASSO, J.V. Biological control of phytoparasitic nematodes in sugarcane fields. Pesquisa Agropecuária Tropical, v.52, e73758, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-40632022v5273758
    » https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-40632022v5273758
  • FARIAS, C.P.; CARVALHO, R.C.; RESENDE, F.M.L.; AZEVEDO, L.C.B. Consortium of five fungal isolates conditioning root growth and arbuscular mycorrhiza in soybean, corn and sugarcane. Annals of the Brazilian Academy of Sciences, v.90, n.4, p.3649-3660, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1590/0001-3765201820180161
    » https://doi.org/10.1590/0001-3765201820180161
  • GOMES, F.P. Curso de estatística experimental 10. ed. Piracicaba: ESALQ/USP, 1982.
  • JENKINS, W.R. A rapid centrifugal-flotation technique for separating nematodes from soil. Plant Disease Reporter, v.48, n.9, p.692, 1964.
  • LANDELL, M.G.A.; VASCONCELOS, A.C.M.; SILVA, M.A.; PERECIN, D.; BARBOSA, V.; PENNA, M.J. Validação de métodos de amostragem para estimativa de produção de cana-de-açúcar, em áreas de colheita mecanizada. STAB - Açúcar, Álcool e Subprodutos, v.18, p.48-51, 1999.
  • MAHAPATRA, S.; YADAV, R.; RAMAKRISHNA, W. Bacillus subtilis impact on plant growth, soil health and environment: Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Journal of Applied Microbiology, v.132, n.5, p.3543-3562, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1111/jam.15480
    » https://doi.org/10.1111/jam.15480
  • MAZZUCHELLI, R.C.L.; MAZZUCHELLI, E.H.L.; ARAUJO, F.F. Efficiency of Bacillus subtilis for root-knot and lesion nematodes management in sugarcane. Biological Control, v.143, 104185, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2020.104185
    » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2020.104185
  • MONTEIRO, T.S.A.; PACHECO, P.V.M.; GOUVEIA, A.S.; BALBINO, H.M.; FREITAS, L.G. Pocchonia In: AMARESAN, N.; KUMAR, M.S.; ANNAPURNA, K.; KUMAR, K.; SANKARANARAYANAN, A. (ed.). Beneficial microbes in agro-ecology: bacteria and fungi. Bardoli: Elsevier, 2020. p.669-682. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-823414-3.00033-2
    » https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-823414-3.00033-2
  • MORGADO, T.D.T.; GUERRA, J.T.; ARAUJO, F.F.; MAZZUCHELLI, R.C.L. Effectiveness and persistence of biological control of nematodes in sugarcane. African Journal of Agricultural Research, v.10, p.4490-4495, 2015. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJAR2015.10344
    » https://doi.org/10.5897/AJAR2015.10344
  • SANKARANARAYANAN, C.; HARI, K. Bio-management of root knot nematode Meloidogyne javanica on sugarcane by combined application of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and nematophagous fungi. Journal of Sugarcane Research, v.3, p.62-70, 2013.
  • SANKARANARAYANAN, C.; HARI, K. Integration of arbuscular mycorrhizal and nematode antagonistic fungi for biocontrol of root lesion nematode Pratylenchus zeae Grahan, 1951 on sugarcane. Sugar Tech, v.23, p.194-200, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12355-020-00876-1
    » https://doi.org/10.1007/s12355-020-00876-1
  • SUKKASEM, P.; KURNIAWAN, A.; KAO, T.C.; CHUANG, H.W. A multifaceted rhizobacterium Bacillus licheniformis functions as a fungal antagonist and a promoter of plant growth and abiotic stress tolerance. Environmental and Experimental Botanic, v.155, p.541-551, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2018.08.005
    » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2018.08.005
  • ZHOU, H.; QIAO, K.; GAO, Z.; VEDERAS, J.C.; TANG, Y. Insights into radicicol biosynthesis via heterologous synthesis of intermediates and analogs. Journal of Biological Chemistry, v.285, n.53, p.41412-41421, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M110.183574
    » https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M110.183574
  • ZINGER, F.D.; ZINGER, L.K.C.R.; MORAES, W.B.; CAMARA, G.R.; ALVES, F.R. Quantification of damage and yield losses and management of root-knot nematodes in conilon coffee. Revista Caatinga, v.34, n.2, p.287-297, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-21252021v34n205rc
    » https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-21252021v34n205rc

Edited by

Publication Dates

  • Publication in this collection
    16 Feb 2026
  • Date of issue
    2026

History

Creative Common - by 4.0
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
location_on
Instituto Biológico Av. Conselheiro Rodrigues Alves, 1252 - Vila Mariana - São Paulo - SP, 04014-002 - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: arquivos@biologico.sp.gov.br
rss_feed Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS
Reportar erro