Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x5gtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-01T00:14:57.341Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Review of the Plant Parasitic Members of the genus Aphelenchus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2009

T. Goodey
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. The paper deals with nematodes of the genus Aphelenchus causing diseases in cultivated plants. A list of these, with the main pathological conditions to which they give rise, is set out on page 144.

2. Each parasite and the disease due to it is dealt with, and particulars are given concerning the structure of the worm, together with the symptoms and biology in each case.

3. A general discussion on the problem of the appropriate treatment of these diseases is given, and the suggestion is made that some form of heat treatment of infective soils is likely to give the best results, owing to the fact that comparatively low temperatures are lethal to the parasites.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Helminthology , Volume 1 , Issue 4 , September 1923 , pp. 143 - 156
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1923

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ballard, E., and Peren, G. S., 1923.—“Red Plant in Strawberries and its Correlation with ‘Cauliflower’ Disease.” Jour. of Pomology, III., No 3, 9 and 10.Google Scholar
Byars, L. P., 1920.—“The Nematode Disease of Wheat caused by Tylenchus tritici.” Bull. 842: Dept. Agric. U.S.A.Google Scholar
Cobb, N.A., 1915.— “Tylenchus similis the cause of a Root Disease in Sugar Cane and Banana.” Jour. Agric. Res., IV, 561–568.Google Scholar
Cobb, N.A., 1919.—“A Newly Discovered Nematode Aphelenchus cocophilus n. sp. connected with a serious disease ofthe Coco-nut Palm.” West Indian Bulletin, XVII, 203–210.Google Scholar
Goodey, T., 1922a.—“On the Susceptibility of Clover and some other Legumes to Stem-Disease caused by the eelworm Tylenchus dipsaci syn. devastratrix, Kühn.” Jour. Agric. Sci, XII., 20–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodey, T., 1922b.—“The Eelworm in Paperhanger's Paste, Anguilllula rediviva, etc.” Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. X., 297–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodey, T., 1923.—“Quiscence and Reviviscence in Nematodes, with special reference to Tylenchus tritici and Tylenchus dispsaci.” Jour. of Helminthology, I, 47–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marcinowski, K., 1909.—“Parasitisch und Semi-parasitisch an Pflanzen lebenden Nematoden.” Arb. K. Anst. f. Land. u. Forstwirtsch, VII., 1–192.Google Scholar
Molz, E., 1909.—“A. olesistus und Aelchenkrankheiten der Chrysanthemums.” Cent. Bakt. u. Parasit., Orig. 2, Abt.. XXIII, 656.Google Scholar
Nowell, W., 1919.—“The Red Ring or ‘Root’ Disease of Coco-nut Palms.” West Indian Bulletin, XVII., 189–202.Google Scholar
Nowell, W., 1920.—“The Red Ring Disease of Coco-nut Palms, Infection Experiments.” West Indian Bulletin, XVIII., 74–76.Google Scholar
Ritzema-Bos, J., 1891.—“Zwei neue Nematodenkrankheiten der Erdbeerpflanzen.” Zeitschr. f. Pflanzenkrankheiten, I, 1.Google Scholar
Ritzema-Bos, J.. 1893. —“Neue Nematodenkrankheiten bei Topfpflanzen.” Zeitschr. f. pflanzenhrankheiten, III.Google Scholar
Ramsbottom, H. J., 1920. “Further Investigations on the Eelworm Disease of Narcissus.” Gardener's Chronicle, LXVII., No. 1739, 204, No. 1,740, 218.Google Scholar
Schwartz, M., 1911. —“Die Aphelenchen der Veilchengallen and Blattflecken an Farnen and Chrysanthemums.” Arb. K. Anst. F. Land. u. Forst-wirtsch, VIII, 303–334.Google Scholar
Stewart, F. H., 1921. —“The Anatomy and Biology of the Parasitic Aphelenchi.” Parasitology. XIII. 160–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, A. M., 1917. —“Black Currant Eelworm.” Jour Agric. Sci., VIII., 246–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar