In India it is cultivated mainly in Kerala, Sikkim, Meghalaya, West Bengal, Orissa, Tamil Nadu,

Arunachal Pradesh, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Himachal Pradesh and

Uttarakhand (Kumar et al., 2008; Sharma et al., 2010; Dohroo et al., 2012 and Nath et al., 2014)
[14, 25, 8].
In Uttarakhand, it has occupied 0.023 million ha and 0.23 MT production with a very low
productivity (National Horticulture Database, 2014) [18]. Major ginger producing districts are
Tehri Garhwal, Pauri Garhwal, Dehradun, Rudraprayag, Uttarakashi and Haridwar in Garhwal
region while Nanital, Almora, Udham Singh Nagar, Bageshwar, Pithoragarh, Champawat and
Chamoli in Kumaon region. More than 50 per cent of the area and production is contributed by
Kumaon. It is a high value cash crop for small and marginal farmers in the state and cultivated in
almost all the districts of Uttarakhand. Inspite of its cultivation in all the districts, the share of
Uttarakhand is only 3.08 per cent as against 21.64 per cent of Assam.

. The crop suffers from diseases like bacterial wilt caused by Ralstonia cc

Objective

 To isolate the pathogen that is associated with rhizome rot of ginger.

 To investigate inhibitory effect of bio-control agents and fungicides against

pathogen isolated from rhizome rot specimen of ginger under in vitro condition.

 To find out the efficacy of different fungicides and bioagents (alone or in combinations)
to control rhizome rot under in vivo conditions.

Major ginger growing areas namely; Kotabagh, Haldwani, Bindukhatta in district

Nainital; Batauri, Fafar, Lohaghat in district Champawat; Gagas valley of Ranikhet in
district Almora; Rawal Gaon, Phapha in district Pithoragarh, were surveyed for the
incidence of rhizome rot during 2015 crop season.

Symptoms of rhizome rot of ginger first appear on above ground parts at the rhizome-
stem intersection or “collar” in the form of watery, brown lesions. These lesions then
enlarge and coalesce, causing the stem to rot and collapse (Dohroo, 2005) [7]. On
 leaves, the initial symptoms caused by the basal infection appear as yellowing of the tips
of older leaves in form of chlorosis. Rhizomes from diseased plants appear brown, water
soaked, soft and rotten and will decay gradually (Dohroo, 2005) [7]. Plants with yellow
or dead shoots and healthy plants with root, rhizome and pseudostem were collected.

The infection starts at the collar region of the pseudo stem and progresses upwards as
well as downwards. Affected pseudo stem becomes water soaked and the rotting
spreads to the rhizome resulting in soft rot. Foliar symptoms appear as light yellowing of
the tips of lower leaves which gradually spreads to the leaf blades. In early stages, the
middle portion of the leaves remain green while the margins become yellow. The
yellowing spreads to all leaves of the plant from the lower region upwards and is
followed by drooping, withering and drying of pseudo Stems (Dohroo, 2005) [7]. The
disease is both seed and soil borne. High soil moisture and high soil temperature are the
most important factors for development of rhizome rot. Irrigation water from diseased
field also helps in spread of disease (Dohroo et al., 2012) [8]. Management of rhizome
rot of ginger is difficult because Pythium spp. and Fusarium spp. can persist in soil for
many years once introduced and single approach does not work effectively to
suppress the pathogens under field conditions.

The over use of chemical pesticides causes environmental and health problems have been the
matter of concern so integrated disease management can be an alternative good source. Storage
rot of ginger (Zingiber officinale) is caused by destructive and versatile pathogen Fusarium
species. The integrated management of storage rot of ginger was done by using fungicides,
biocontrol and hot water treatment.
The over use of chemical pesticides causes environmental and health problems have been the matter of
concern so integrated disease management can be an alternative good source. Storage rot of ginger
(Zingiber officinale) is caused by destructive and versatile pathogen Fusarium species. The integrated
management of storage rot of ginger was done by using fungicides, biocontrol and hot water treatment.

Control

c
The high disease incidence might be attributed due to heavy rains, improper drainage
and virulent nature of soil-borne pathogen, besides use of infected rhizome seed
material by growers. Further, monoculture system of ginger cultivation has also been
found to aggravatethe severity of disease (Kulkarni, 2006).
The use of formulated mixtures (coformulations) of two fungicides with different
modes of action has often been recommended to help manage fungicide resistance
development [28–30]. Recently, fungicides combining both protectant and systemic
chemicals have been formulated and made commercially available to farmerss
mainly broaden the spectrum of activity to delay selection of resistant fungal
populations and 8 to optimize efficacy [31]. The present study was, therefore,
undertaken to assess the efficacy of coformulations in comparison to solo
applications of protectant or systemic fungicides separately in controlling BGM
disease in chickpea.
Biological control of plant diseases involves one or more natural mechanisms like antibiosis,
parasitism, lysis, competition, plant growth promotion, predation and induced systemic
resistance.Antibiosis plays an important role in biocontrol by the production of secondary
metabolites which are toxic to the target pathogen(s) and still some other compounds, promote
the plant growth directly (Fravel, 1988; Sivasithampararn and Ghisalberti, 1998). These factors
often limit the interaction between plant pathogen and their antagonists resulting in less than
acceptable suppression of disease or reduction in pathogen population (Cook and Baker, 1983;
Burpee, 1990)
Chemical
Chemical control consists of seed treatment with fungicides to check the seed borne inoculum
and soil drench to check the soil borne inoculum. Use of chemical fungicides in the management
of rhizome rot consists of seed treatment with or without supplementary soil drenches with
fungicide suspension before planting or to the standing crop.
The pesticidal chemicals that control plant diseases may be used in very different ways,
depending on the parasite to be controlled and on the circumstances it requires for parasitic
activities.
Bioagent
Numerous microbes are antagonistic to plant-parasitic nematodes and soilborne
plant-pathogenic fungi, but few of these organisms are commercially available for
management of these pathogens. Inconsistent performance of applied biocontrol
agents has proven to be a primary obstacle to the development of successful
commercial products. One of the strategies for overcoming inconsistent
performance is to combine the disease-suppressive activity of two (or more)
beneficial microbes in a biocontrol preparation. Such combinations have potential
for more extensive colonization of the rhizosphere, more consistent expression of
beneficial traits under a broad range of soil conditions, and antagonism to a larger
number of plant pests or pathogens than strains applied individually. Conversely,
microbes applied in combination also may have antagonistic interactions with
each other. Increased, decreased, and unaltered suppression of the target
pathogen or pest has been observed when biocontrol microbes have been applied
in combination. Unfortunately, the ecological basis for increased or decreased
suppression has not been determined in many cases and needs further
consideration. The complexity of interactions involved in the application of
multiple organisms for biological control has slowed progress toward
development of successful formulations. However, this approach has potential for
overcoming some of the efficacy problems that occur with application of
individual biocontrol agent.
Potential advantages of biocontrol agents applied in combination include: (i) multiple modes of action
against the target pathogen or nematode; (ii) ability to affect more than one stage of the life cycle of the
target organism; (iii) activity of microbes during different times in the growing season; (iv) increased
consistency in performance over a wider range of soil conditions, stemming from the different
environmental niches of the applied microbes; and (v) potential to select organisms that affect more
than one plant pathogen or pest, thus increasing the spectrum of uses for the product (Crump, 1998;
Larkin et al., 1998; Lemanceau and Alabouvette, 1991; Lemanceau et al., 1992; Pierso
Effective use of biological control agents (BCAs) is a potentially important component of
sustainable agriculture. Recently, there has been an increasing interest among researchers
in using combinations of BCAs to exploit potential synergistic effects among them. The
methodology for investigating such synergistic effects was reviewed first and published
results were then assessed for available evidence for synergy. Correct formulation of
hypotheses based on the theoretical definition of independence (Bliss independence or
Loewe additivity) and the subsequent and statistical testing for the independence–
synergistic–antagonistic interactions have rarely been carried out thus far in studies on
biocontrol of plant diseases. Thus, caution must be taken when interpreting reported
“synergistic” effects without assessing the original publications. Recent theoretical
modeling work suggested that disease suppression from combined use of two BCAs was, in
general, very similar to that achieved by the more efficacious one, indicating no synergistic
but more likely antagonistic interactions. Only in 2% of the total 465 published treatments
was there evidence for synergistic effects among BCAs. In the majority of the cases,
antagonistic interactions among BCAs were indicated. Thus, both theoretical and
experimental studies suggest that, in combined use of BCAs, antagonistic interactions
among BCAs are more likely to occur than synergistic interactions. Several research
strategies, including formulation of synergy hypotheses in relation to biocontrol
mechanisms, are outlined to exploit microbial mixtures for uses in biocontrol of plant
diseases.

24.5 Fungicides Fungicides are chemicals used to control fungal diseases of plants. A wide range
of chemicals have been used as fungicides so it is not surprising that they affect many different
metabolic processes in fungal cells. The biological action of a fungicide is intimately related to
its metabolism in the target organism and, in the case of chemicals that are translocated within
the plant (systemic compounds), it may also be affected by metabolism in the host plant. Most
fungicides are of low acute toxicity to mammals. Fungicides are frequently classified as either
protectant or systemic. Protectant fungicides protect plants or plant structures against infection
at the sites where the chemical is applied. They usually inhibit or prevent development at
several stages of the infection process and are generally described as broad spectrum
fungicides because they are effective against a range of fungi. They 24. Disease management:
chemtcals 379 have little or no capacity to penetrate host tissue and must be applied to the
plant surface before infection occurs. They are also removed more easily during weathering
because they are only on the surface of the plant. As the plant grows, new tissue is
unprotected. Protectant fungicides, therefore, need to be applied repeatedly during the
growing season to ensure protection from disease. Protectant fungicides are mainly inorganic
compounds, although some organic compounds are also used. The discovery of non-phytotoxic
compounds which can be absorbed through plant surfaces and then translocated to other
tissues where they are toxic to fungi constituted a major advance in chemical protection. These
compounds, known as systemic fungicides, can control and eradicate established infections.
They are less subject to the effects of weather than protectant fungicides because they
penetrate host tissue. They are usually more specific than protectant fungicides in the fungi
they control. Although systemic fungicides have many attributes of the 'ideal' fungicide, they
frequently kill fungi by affecting only one step in a biosynthetic pathway. This characteristic,
combined with intensive and inappropriate use, has encouraged some fungi to develop
resistance (insensitivity or tolerance) to these fungicides relatively quickly. This effect has not
been observed with the protectant fungicides although, in some cases, they have been in use
for over 1O0 years.

Disease is a major constraint for the production of healthy rhizome, cause even total failure
of crop (Fagaria et al., 2006). Ginger is affected by various diseases, such as, rhizome rot,
bacterial wilt, soft rot, leaf blight etc. Among all of these, rhizome rot is most damaging one
(Chattopadhya, 1997). The fungus Fusarium oxysporum and Pythium aphanidermatum are
associated with it causation (Ram et al., 1999).  The infected rhizomes become rotten and
the crop is completely destroyed (Baruah et al., 1998). However, the disease is important
because it causes economic losses to growers resulting in decreased prices of products to
the consumers.
Review literature

Among all diseases of ginger rhizome rot of ginger caused by Pythium and Fusarium sp.was first
reported in India by Mehrotra (1952), is a major bottleneck, causingn huge crop losses upto 70
per cent in a cropping season (Dohroo, 2001).

Rhizome rot of ginger is complex in nature as several pathogens such as Pythium

aphanidermatum (Edson) Fitzp; (Subramanian, 1919) [44], P. myriotylum Drech, Fusarium
oxysporum f. sp. zingiberi Trujillo (Haware and Joshi, 1974) [13]; F. solani (Mort.) Sacc. (Kumar,
1977) [21] and Sclerotium rolfsii (Haware and Joshi, 1973) [12] have been reported.

Rhizome rot (also known as soft rot) is one of the most destructive diseases of ginger worldwide
(Dohroo 2005), with losses of 50–90% (Nirmal 1992). The species most commonly associated
with the disease is Pythium aphanidermatum (Stirling et al 2009), which is a soil as well as seed
borne pathogen.
There are more than dozens of diseases affecting ginger but rhizome rot is one of the most
destructive diseases of ginger worldwide (Dohroo, 2005) with losses up to 50–90%. Rhizome rot
of ginger caused by pathogens like Pythium aphanidermatum, Fusarium solani etc are major
constraints for the production of healthy rhizome, sometimes causing total failure of crop
(Fageria et aL., 2006; Poudyal, 2012).
The fungus Fusarium oxysporum and Pythium aphanidermatum are associated with it causation
(Ram et al., 1999).

Rhizome rot of ginger caused by species of Pythium, was first reported by Butler in 1907,
which has been a persistent threat to the cultivation of ginger in Surat (Gujrat) in India.