Effect of 3-year rotation sequences and pearl millet on population densities of Pratylenchus penetrans and subsequent potato yield

  • Published source details Belair G., Dauphinais N., Fournier Y., Dangi O.P. & Ciotola M. (2006) Effect of 3-year rotation sequences and pearl millet on population densities of Pratylenchus penetrans and subsequent potato yield. Canadian Journal of Plant Pathology, 28, 230-235.


This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Use crop rotation in potato farming systems

Action Link
Natural Pest Control
  1. Use crop rotation in potato farming systems

    A randomised, replicated, controlled study in 1998-2003 in arable land in Quebec, Canada (Belair et al. 2006) found that population density of root lesion nematodes Pratylenchus penetrans (pest) was consistently low in autumn following forage pearl millet Pennisetum glaucum cultivar CFPM 101 (11-430 nematodes/kg soil) and generally low following grain pearl millet Pennisetum glaucum cultivar CGPM H-1 (94-2,297 nematodes/kg soil) compared with other crops. Nematode population densities tended to be high in autumn after brown mustard Brassica juncea (1,800-5,735 nematodes/kg soil), maize Zea mays (2,043-2,467), oats Avena sativa (3,997-6,353), potato Solanum tuberosum (3,257-6,365), rye Secale cereale (3,753-9,728) and soybean Glycine max (1,398-4,768). After soybean nematode population densities were low the following spring (73-300/kg soil), whereas for after other crops they remained high. Marketable potato yield in the fourth year of the experiment was highest after three year rotations ending in forage or grain pearl millet (38.4-55.9 t/ha) and lower with other final rotation crops (23.5-43.0 t/ha). The study had 14 different three year rotation treatments, each of which was applied at random to eight replicate 1 x 2 m plots. In the fourth year, potatoes were grown in all plots. Fertilizers, pesticides and irrigation followed local standard practice and weeds were removed by hand.


Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 18

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust