English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The test involved the use of a control (untreated), an entomopathogenic nematode ( Steinernema carpocapsae ), a granular insecticide (Dyfonate 2.24 Kg ai/ha) in combination with 7 sweetpotato cultivars having varying levels of resistance and susceptibility to soil insect damage. The parasite was applied three times at monthly intervals (67/cm 2 ). The parasite or insecticide did not reduce root injury by soil insects as compared to the control (untreated). Wireworms,  Diabrotica  sp. and  Systena  sp. damage in the resistant cultivars Regal, Southern Delite, Excel and Resisto was less than for the susceptible cultivars (SC–1149-19, Jewel and Centennial). Sweetpotato flea beetle resistance was observed for all cultivars except SC–1149-19 which was susceptible. In this test resistant cultivars were more effective in reducing soil insect damage than the biological or chemical control methods.

MANAGEMENT OF SOIL INSECTS AND THEIR DAMAGE TO SWEETPOTATO THROUGH THE USE OF INSECT RESISTANT CULTIVARS, INSECTICIDE AND BIOLOGICAL CONTROL.