Citation: Q. Shakeel, M. Mubeen, M. S. Rizwan, M. R. Shaheen, Y. Iftikhar, A. M. Ismail, and H. S. El-Beltagi, “Assessment of rice (Oryza sativa L.) genotypes against different diseases under field conditions,” Enfoque UTE, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 1-7, Apr. 2026, doi: https://doi.org/10.29019/enfoqueute.1235

---

I. INTRODUCTION

Rice is a source of income for millions of households around the globe and uplift foreign exchequer to generate government revenue [1]. Rice serves as a staple food for half of the world’s population. Due to the continuous increase in rice demand, it is projected that global rice production must increase by 25 % by 2025 to meet the needs of the growing population [2, 3]. However, to ensure food security for the rising global population consistent rice production is crucial [4]. The worldwide rice consumption has experienced a marginal upswing in recent years. As per the study, global rice consumption increased from 437.18 million metric tons in the years 2008 and 2009 to approximately 509.87 million metric tons in the 2021-2022 (Total Global Rice Consumption 2021/22). On a global scale, rice is positioned second only to wheat when it comes to production acreage. The two primary regions responsible for basmati rice production on a global scale are South and East Asia. Asia provides over 90% of the global rice production contribution and consumes it as its primary food source. Indonesia, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Thailand, Myanmar, Philippines, Brazil, Japan, India, and China are the major rice producer. Albeit, Pakistan does not stand in top rice producing countries, but it is the 4th largest exporter of rice in the world [5]. Furthermore, when compared to neighboring nations, Pakistan’s average rice production is quite poor [6]. Despite advancements in developing disease-resistant varieties and other management techniques, many diseases continue to significantly contribute to agricultural yield loss. The rice crop is susceptible to a number of diseases among which bacterial leaf blight (BLB), brown spot and grain discoloration are the most destructive diseases of rice all over the world and sternly menace the unceasing cultivation of rice crop [7]. These are widespread in Asia, particularly in, Philippines, Japan, Indonesia, India and Pakistan [8]. Xanthomonas oryzae pv. Oryzae (Xoo) caused BLB befalls mostly during the wet season and in some Asian countries thin out crop yield up to 50%. BLB’s increasing pervasiveness was also investigated, notably in the Kallar area of Punjab, Pakistan [9] where yield losses ranged from 35.8% to 50% [10, 11]. Septicity is essential during the tillering stage and can result in a yield loss of up to 100% [12]. Besides, rice blast, BLB, leaf streak, Brown spot (BS) is an important fungal disease caused Bipolaris oryzae that can cause up to 90% yield loss [13]. Brown spot disease is a globally prevalent threat to rice crops, significantly harming both nursery and field plants, and reducing the quality and yield of the grain. In nurseries, losses often occur due to the planting of infected seeds, leading to uneven germination. However, the most severe damage typically happens when the leaves and stems of seedlings become infected [14]. The fungus responsible for this disease can persist for at least two years in infected plant parts, particularly in the seeds. Brown spot disease was a major contributor to the Great Bengal Famine and remains a common problem in southern China, causing severe damage during cool summers (24-30°C) with high humidity (>92.5 %). This disease continues to impact rice cultivation worldwide, affecting crop yield and grain quality [15]. To minimize production losses, timely control of diseases is essential. Biological control, chemical protection, and the development of resistant host plants are all viable disease management methods [16]. Chemical controls can vary in effectiveness and may harm rice plants. Additionally, these chemicals are costly and not environmentally sustainable. Therefore, an integrated strategy is necessary to ensure sustained productivity. The use of bio-control agents against infections requires further investigation. An environmentally friendly, cost-effective, and efficient management strategy for bacterial blight and other diseases is crucial for sustainable rice production, not only in Pakistan but globally. Developing resistant varieties is the most effective approach to managing crop diseases and reducing yield loss. To develop a cultivar with specific traits such as disease resistance, its ability to endure environmental conditions and different genotypes must be validated [17, 18]. This study aims to assess several rice genotypes against various rice diseases through in vivo experimentation.

II. MATERIALS AND METHODS

An experiment was conducted at The Islamia University of Bahawalpur, Pakistan, in 2024 to screen rice germplasm against various rice diseases (Table I).

TABLE I. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF RICE GENOTYPE WITH ORIGIN

Seeds of each genotype were sown in single rows, 50 cm long, on raised beds. A row of the susceptible Basmati Super was planted after every two test rows to serve as a spreader. The experiment was arranged in a randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications. Standard agronomic practices were followed throughout the experiment. Environmental data (temperature, relative humidity, and rainfall) were recorded daily from the university weather station to document conditions influencing disease development.

A. Brown Spot Disease

At the three-week seedling stage, a spore suspension of Bipolaris oryzae (106 spores/mL) was prepared from laboratory-cultured isolates and applied uniformly to all test entries using a hand sprayer. To promote disease establishment, the nursery was misted frequently with tap water to maintain high humidity. Disease severity was recorded three weeks after inoculation using the Standard Evaluation System (SES) 0–9 scale.

B. Bacterial Leaf Blight (BLB), Pathogen Culture and Inoculum Preparation

BLB inoculum was prepared by culturing bacterial strain PSA medium and incubating them at 28°C for 48 hours. A bacterial suspension was adjusted spectrophotometrically to approximately 1 × 10⁸ CFU/mL [19]. Plants were inoculated at the booting stage using the clipping method [20], in which the tips of the leaves were clipped with scissors dipped in the prepared suspension. This method ensures uniform infection. Disease incidence and severity were assessed 14 days after inoculation by measuring lesion length and scoring the reaction on the SES 0–9 scale.

C. Grain Discoloration (GD); Pathogen Culture and Inoculum Preparation

Fungal pathogens associated with grain discoloration were isolated from naturally infected panicles and cultured on appropriate media. A mixed inoculum (1 × 10⁶ CFU/mL) was prepared and sprayed onto panicles at the flowering stage using a hand sprayer. High humidity was maintained after inoculation to facilitate infection, similar to the protocol followed for brown spot. At harvest, panicles were collected, visually inspected, and scored for grain discoloration severity using a scale comparable to the 0–9 SES rating. The GD score reflected the combined effect of the pathogen complex rather than individual species.

D. Disease Incidence

The disease incidence for all the diseases was recorded by using a 0-9 scale (Table II) according to [21].

TABLE II. STANDARD SCALE FOR BACTERIAL LEAF BLIGHT, BROWN SPOT DISEASE AND GRAIN DISCOLORATION

The diseases incidence was calculated by using Eq. 1.

$\mathrm{Disease}\mathrm{incidence}\%=\frac{\mathrm{Number}\mathrm{of}\mathrm{Diseased}\mathrm{Plants}}{\mathrm{Total}\mathrm{number}\mathrm{of}\mathrm{plant}}\times 100$ (1)

E. Statistical Analysis

To determine the variation, the data acquired for various characteristics were subjected to statistical analysis using analysis of variance [22]. Recorded data were subjected to Pearson correlation using Statistical 8.1 software. Mean differences among the treatments were compared by Duncan’s Multiple Range Test.

III. RESULTS

A. Pathogen

Isolates of Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae (Xoo) were successfully cultured in PSA medium, producing the characteristic yellow, smooth, and viscous bacterial colonies were used for inoculation (Fig. 1A). Following inoculation, lesions in all genotypes progressed uniformly downward from the clipping point (Fig. 1B). However, lesion length showed clear genotypic variation, confirming differential resistance to BLB.

Fig. 1. Pure culture of Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae (A). Inoculation of Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae on plants (B).

B. Resistance Evaluation

Among all the 13 tested rice genotypes, including inbred lines and hybrids, CH3, CH9, and CH11 exhibited a moderately resistant (MR) response against bacterial leaf blight (BLB), brown spot (BS), and grain discoloration (GD) (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2. Disease symptoms of Bacterial blight (A), Brown spot (B) and Grain Discoloration (C) on plant leaves after two weeks inoculation.

These genotypes showed reduced lesion expansion, lower disease incidence, and overall better maintenance of physiological integrity compared with moderately susceptible (MS) entries. Among the 13 genotypes, CH3, CH9, and CH11 showed ≥70% MR, CH7 and CH12 showed >50% moderately susceptible (MS), six genotypes (CH1, CH2, CH4, CH6, CH10, and CH13) showed >25% MS, and CH5, CH8, and the control IR-24 showed >100% highly susceptible (HS) response. CH3, CH9, and CH11 showed 29.9%, 28.9%, and 27.2% MR, respectively (Table III; Fig. 3).

C. Disease Infection Evaluation

Diseases Pressure, combined with Prevailing environmental conditions, significantly influenced plant health and yield outcomes. Notably CH11 exhibited the lowest overall disease incidence for brown spot (BS), aligning with its MR classification. Other genotypes showed an MS response. BS incidence increased progressively from the flowering to milking stages, particularly on the flag leaf, resulting in measurable yield reduction across susceptible entries. Overall BS incidence ranged from 10.5% to 19.5%, with CH13 showing the highest incidence (19.5%) and CH4 the lowest (10.5%). CH11 maintained an MR response, whereas CH3 and CH9 were classified as MS (Fig. 4).

Fig. 3. Evaluating rice genotypes for resistance: Brown Spot, Bacterial Leaf Blight, and Grain Discoloration

TABLE III. MEAN PERFORMANCE OF YIELD AND ITS RELATED TRAITS OF RICE GENOTYPES. MEANS FOLLOWED BY THE SAME LETTER WITHIN A COLUMN ARE NOT SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT AT p ≤ 0.05

Fig. 4. Diseases infection on leaves (CH1, 2,3,4,5,6,7, Control, 9,10,11,12,13).

D. Yield and Yield Components of Rice

A comprehensive assessment of yield and yield-contributing traits revealed substantial genotypic variability (table 3): Plant Height: Ranged from 69 cm (IR-24) to 121.7 cm (CH7). Productive Tillers: Highest in CH8 (14.3), statistically similar to CH5, CH6, CH12, and CH13. Panicle Length: Varied from 23 cm (IR-24) to 32.2 cm (CH6). Panicle Density (Primary Branches): Ranged from 9 (CH3) to 13.7 (CH12), the latter significantly different from CH4 and CH10. Total Spikelet per Panicle: Ranged from 109 (IR-24) to 198 (CH1). Although CH1 had high spikelet numbers, its low tiller count contributed to its reduced final yield. Fertility Percentage: High across genotypes except CH5 (57%) and CH6 (55%). 1000-Grain Weight: Highest in CH12 (54.3 g) and CH13 (52.7 g), followed by CH6, CH11, and CH7. Hybrid seeds were generally thicker and heavier than those of indigenous varieties. Yield performance mirrored the superiority of the hybrids. CH12 and CH13, both hybrids developed by ICI Pakistan, recorded the highest yields (10,447 kg ha-¹ and 10,064 kg ha-¹, respectively), each statistically superior to locally bred and Chinese cultivars. Consistent with prior findings, yield showed a positive association with productive tillers, panicle length, and number of primary branches, grains per panicle, fertility percentage, and 1000-grain weight (Fig. 5). Key environmental variable during for the year 2024 were Temperature 22-39oC, Relative humidity 33-92% and Rainfall 0.0065-4.9 mm.

Fig. 5. Genotypes behavior on panicle regarding BLB, BS and GD.

IV. DISCUSSION

Rice-growing regions of Punjab frequently experience epidemic outbreaks of BLB, BS, and GD, with reported yield losses of 15–35% and, under severe BLB conditions, up to 90% [23, 24]. The primary factor contributing to these epidemics is the widespread cultivation of susceptible cultivars and the continuous introduction of imported hybrids that may harbor seed-borne pathogens [12; 25]. The environmental and cultural conditions used in the present study (25–35°C field temperatures and 28°C pathogen incubation) align well with optimal pathogen activity [26]. The bacterial strains were grown on PSA medium, with inoculum prepared on slants incubated at 28°C for 48 hours. Previous studies identified an optimal temperature of 28°C for the growth of Xoo on culture medium, with bacteria incubated at 37°C for 48 hours to screen rice varieties against bacterial blight [19, 27]. After 24 hours of incubation, the bacterial colonies appeared yellow, smooth, convex, and circular; however, they became somewhat irregular after 48 hours due to the viscous fluid secreted by the bacteria. Similar culture characteristics and viscous colonies have been reported on potato semi-synthetic agar medium [28]. The clipping method provided reliable and uniform BLB infection, consistent with previous studies showing strong correlation between clipping scores and natural BLB incidence [29]. To assess the rice plants, percent disease incidence was calculated based on lesion length, which also served to evaluate the pathogenicity of the bacterial strains on different rice varieties. Severity scores were assigned according to the standard evaluation system for rice (0-9 scale) [30]. Our findings confirm substantial genetic variability in pathogenic responses. CH3, CH9, and CH11 demonstrated strong multi-disease resistance, exhibiting minimal lesion expansion and lower disease incidence for BLB, BS, and GD. Conversely, CH5, CH8, and IR-24 showed high susceptibility, reinforcing their vulnerability in disease-prone environments. Brown spot and grain discoloration responses mirrored BLB trends, with CH11 uniquely maintaining MR status across all disease categories. The high susceptibility of CH5, CH6, and CH7 to GD suggests that these genotypes may carry seed traits or husk characteristics that favor pathogen establishment [31]. It spreads widely in dry environments with nutritional imbalances [32]. BLB causes yield losses depending on the stage of infection and the genetics of the rice cultivars [32].

Despite this, the best-performing hybrids under disease pressure, CH12 and CH13, excelled primarily in yield-related traits rather than disease resistance while other moderately susceptible genotypes showed incidences ranging from 13.3% to 19.5% [21]. Their large panicles, high fertility percentage, and heavier seeds contributed to superior yields but without the disease resilience observed in CH3, CH9, and CH11 [25]. This contrast highlights an important breeding insight: disease resistance and high yield potential do not necessarily co-occur naturally. Resistance genes may impose metabolic costs, while high productivity may leave plants physiologically vulnerable under pathogen stress. Therefore, the integration of resistance and high-yield traits through targeted hybridization is essential for long-term cultivar improvement. Average grain yield losses ranging from 8.2% to 23.0% were reported in northwestern Sierra Leone from 1983-1985 [33]. Earlier studies have reported up to 52% yield loss due to brown spot disease at various rice growth stages [33]. The most severe impact on the next crop’s germination is observed when glume blotch occurs at flowering [34]. Our results revealed that among the 13 rice genotypes, including inbred lines and hybrids, CH3, CH9, and CH11 showed the least severity (MR) for bacterial leaf blight (BLB), brown spot (BS), and grain discoloration (GD). The lowest disease incidence and severity in CH3, CH9, and CH11 align with previous findings of minimal pathogenic incidence for BLB, BS, and GD.

V. CONCLUSIONS

Under natural ecosystem of Punjab, Pakistan, the current study provide comprehensive framework of field evolution of rice genotypes against diseases by integrating standard disease rating scale, artificial inoculation and quantitative measurement of lesions. Evaluation of BLB, BS and GD in single experimental setup improve methodological rigor. It enables research to multi disease assessment along with agronomic performance

This study demonstrated substantial genotypic variation in response to bacterial leaf blight, brown spot, and grain discoloration under Pakistan’s agro-climatic conditions. Three genotypes CH3, CH9, and CH11 exhibited the most reliable and consistent resistance across all diseases evaluated. CH11 further showed the lowest brown spot incidence among all entries. In contrast, the hybrid genotypes CH12 and CH13 demonstrated superior yield potential, producing the highest grain yields under disease pressure due to their robust panicle architecture, high fertility, and large grain size.

FUNDING

This research was supported by the Deanship of Scientific Research, Vice Presidency for Graduate Studies and Scientific Research, King Faisal University, Saudi Arabia, under grant number KFU260712.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT

The authors declare no conflict of interest. All authors contributed substantially to this work and approved the final version of the manuscript.

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE STATEMENT

The authors declare that generative artificial intelligence tools were used for the following purposes: Translation of abstract. The tool(s) used include: Google translator. The authors take full responsibility for the content of the manuscript.

VI. REFERENCES

[1] S. Muthayya et al., “An overview of global rice production, supply, trade, and consumption,” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, vol. 1324, pp. 7-14, Sep. 2014, https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.12540

[2] N. Hashim et al., “Smart farming for sustainable rice production: an insight into application, challenge, and future prospect,” Rice Science, vol. 31 no. 1, pp. 47-61, Jan, 2024, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsci.2023.08.004.

[3] N. K. Fukagawa and L. H. Ziska, “Rice: importance for global nutrition,” Journal of Nutritional Science and Vitaminology, vol. 65, no. Supplement, pp. S2-S3, Oct. 2019, https://doi.org/10.3177/jnsv.65.S2

[4] D. Renard and D. Tilma, “National food production stabilized by crop diversity,” Nature vol.571, pp. 257–260, Jun. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1316-y

[5] Government of Pakistan, Economic survey of Pakistan (2024-2025), Islamabad, Pakistan: Economic Advisor’s Wing, Finance Division, 2025.

[6] M. Y. Saleem, J. I. Mirza and M. A. Haq, “Combining ability analysis of some morphophysiological traits in Basmati rice,” Pakistan Journal of Botany, vol. 42, no. 5, pp. 3113–3123, 2010, https://www.pakbs.org/pjbot/PDFs/42(5)/PJB42(5)3113.pdf

[7] A. D. Ofori et al., “The role of genetic resistance in rice disease management,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 26 no. 3, pp. 956, Jan. 2025, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms26030956

[8] R. Bhandari et al., “Screening of rice genotypes against brown leaf spot (Bipolaris oryzae) (Breda de Haan) shoemaker, under field and laboratory conditions at Banke, Nepal,” Discover Plants, vol.1, art. No. 10, Jul. 2024, https://doi.org/10.1007/s44372-024-00008-z

[9] O. Ritbamrung et al., “Evaluating Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae (Xoo) infection dynamics in rice for distribution routes and environmental reservoirs by molecular approaches,” Scientific Reports, vol. 15, no. 1, art. no. 1408, Jan. 2025, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-85422-3

[10] S. Yasmin et al., “Biocontrol of bacterial leaf blight of rice and profiling of secondery metabolites produced by rhizopheric Pseudomonas aeruginosa BRp3,” Frontiers in Microbiology, vol. 8, no. 1895, Sep. 2017, https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2017.01895

[11] S. Savary et al., “The global burden of pathogens and pests on major food crops,” Nature Ecology and Evolution, vol. 3, pp. 430–439, Feb. 2019, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-018-0793-y

[12] M. A. Ali et al., “Silicate fertilization in no-tillage rice farming for mitigation of methane emission and increasing rice productivity,” Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, vol. 132, no. 1-2, pp. 16–22, Jul. 2009, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2009.02.014

[13] N. Gowrisri et al., “Morphological and molecular characterization of Magnaporthe oryzae B. Couch, inciting agent of rice blast disease,” Madras Agricultural Journal, vol. 106, pp. 255-260, Jun. 2019, https://doi.org/10.29321/MAJ.2019.000256

[14] K. H. Kaboré, A. I. Kassankogno and D. Tharreau, “Brown spot of rice: worldwide wisease impact, phenotypic and genetic diversity of the causal pathogen Bipolaris oryzae, and management of the disease,” Plant Pathology, vol. 74, pp. 908–922, Feb. 2025, https://doi.org/10.1111/ppa.14075

[15] K. G. Mukerji and C. Manoharachary, Taxonomy and ecology of Indian fungi. New Delhi, India: IK International Pvt Ltd., 2010.

[16] D. C. He et al., “Biological control of plant diseases: an evolutionary and eco-economic consideration,” Pathogens, vol. 10, no. 10, pp. 1311, Oct. 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens10101311

[17] I. S. Akos et al., “A review on gene pyramiding of agronomic, biotic and abiotic traits in rice variety development,” International Journal of Applied Biology, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 65–96, 2019. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338257104_A_review_on_gene_pyramiding_of_agronomic_biotic_and_abiotic_traits_in_rice_variety_development

[18] I. S. Akos et al., “Evaluation of inherited resistance genes of bacterial leaf blight, blast and drought tolerance in improved rice lines,” Rice Science, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 279–288, May, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsci.2020.08.001

[19] M. F. Firdouse et al., “Survey and isolation of rice bacterial leaf blight caused by Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae,” International Journal of Plant and Soil Science, vol. 35, no. 19, pp. 1755-1760, 2023. https://doi.10.9734/ijpss/2023/v35i193725

[20] A. K. Gangireddy et al., “Integrating phenotypic and molecular profiling for selection of promising advanced breeding lines for blast resistance in rice (Oryza sativa L.),” Molecular Biology Reports, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 184, Feb. 2025, https://doi.10.1007/s11033-025-10279-8

[21] IRRI, Standard evaluation system for rice, 4th ed. The Philippines: IRRI, 1996.

[22] R. G. D. Steel and J. H. Torrie, Principles and procedures of statistics, New York, USA: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1984.

[23] K. A. Garrett et al., “Complexity in climate-change impacts: an analytical framework for effects mediated by plant disease,” Plant Pathology, vol. 60, pp. 15-30, Jan. 2011, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3059.2010.02409.x

[24] A. Anwar et al., “Screening and assessment of genetic diversity of rice (Oryza sativa L.) germplasm in response to soil salinity stress at germination stage,” Agronomy, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 376, Jan. 2025, https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15020376

[25] M. Arshad et al., “Climate variability and yield risk in South Asia’s rice–wheat systems: emerging evidence from Pakistan,” Paddy and Water Environment, vol. 15, pp. 249–261, Apr. 2017, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10333-016-0544-0

[26] P. Krishnan et al., “High-temperature effects on rice growth, yield, and grain quality,” In: Advances in agronomy, Amsterdam, The Netherland: Elsevier, 2011, pp. 87-206, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-387689-8.00004-7

[27] A. Dhungana et al., “Screening rice genotypes for brown spot disease resistance,” Tunisian Journal of Plant Protection, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 29-39, 2020. http://doi.org/10.52543/tjpp.15.2.1

[28] A. Ali et al., “Screening of Pakistani rice (Oryzae sativa) cultivars against Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae,” Pakistan Journal of Botany, vol. 41, no. 5, pp. 2595-2604, 2009. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/SCREENING-OF-PAKISTANI-RICE-(ORYZAE-SATIVA)-AGAINST-Ali-Khan/f67377961da40e162c28dd13c35ff7d9b21250b0

[29] Y. Ke, S. Hui and M. Yuan, “Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae inoculation and growth rate on rice by leaf clipping method,” Bio-protocol, vol. 7, no. 19, pp. 1-7, Oct. 2017, DOI: 10.21769/BioProtoc.2568

[30] M. Z. Rafique et al., “Comparison of transgenic plant production for bacterial blight resistance in Pakistani local rice (Oryza sativa L.) cultivars,” African Journal of Biotechnology, vol. 9, no. 13, pp. 1892–1904, Mar. 2010, https://scispace.com/pdf/comparison-of-transgenic-plant-production-for-bacterial-2rt4c9ff30.pdf

[31] H. S. Gusnawaty et al., “Visual observation and image analysis method of blight disease severity for resistance assessment of two rice varieties,” Journal of Tropical Plant Pests and Diseases, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 275-286, Sep. 2025, https://doi.org/10.23960/jhptt.225275-286

[32] B. S. Teja et al., “Biological control of bacterial leaf blight (BLB) in rice–A sustainable approach,” Heliyon, vol. 11, no. 2, art. no. e41769, Jan. 2025, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2025.e41769

[33] K. Singh et al., “Screening of rice genotypes for bacterial blight of rice under artificial inoculation in South Gujarat conditions,” International Journal of Environmental and Agriculture Research, vol. 10, no. 10, pp. 1-5, Oct. 2024, https://ijoear.com/assets/articles_menuscripts/file/IJOEAR-OCT-2024-1.pdf

[34] R.K. Gangwar et al., “Screening of rice genotypes against glume discolouration,” Agriways, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 65-68, Apr. 2020, http://www.agriwaysjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/journals/volume7.2/2_SCREENING%20OF%20RICE%20GENOTYPES%20AGAINST%20GLUME%20DISCOLOURATION.pdf

---

* Corresponding autor: qaiser.shakeel@iub.edu.pk; amismail@kfu.edu.sa

1. Qaiser Shakeel in with Cholistan Institute of Desert Studies, Faculty of Agriculture and Environment, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur, Bahawalpur-63100, Pakistan. E-mail: qaiser.shakeel@iub.edu.pk ORCID Number https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6360-5996

2. Mustansar Mubeen in with Department of Plant Pathology, College of Agriculture, University of Sargodha, Sargodha-40100, Pakistan. E-mail: mustansar01@yahoo.com ORCID Number https://orcid.org/0009-0003-9231-9560

3. Muhammad Shahid Rizwan in with Cholistan Institute of Desert Studies, Faculty of Agriculture and Environment, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur, Bahawalpur-63100, Pakistan. E-mail: shahid.rizwan@iub.edu.pk ORCID Number https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0052-7406

4. Muhammad Rashid Shaheen in with Department of Horticultural Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture and Environment, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur, Bahawalpur-63100, Pakistan. E-mail: rashid.shaheen@iub.edu.pk ORCID Number https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4692-7381

5. Yasir Iftikhar in with Department of Plant Pathology, College of Agriculture, University of Sargodha, Sargodha-40100, Pakistan. E-mail: yasir.iftikhar@uos.edu.pk ORCID Number https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4182-8969

6. Ahmed Mahmoud Ismail in with Pests and Plant Diseases Unit, College of Agricultural and Food Sciences, King Faisal University, Al-Ahsa 31982, Saudi Arabia. E-mail: amismail@kfu.edu.sa ORCID Number https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9679-640X

7. Hossam S. El-Beltagi in with Agricultural Biotechnology Department, College of Agricultural and Food Sciences, King Faisal University, Al-Ahsa 31982, Saudi Arabia. E-mail: helbeltagi@kfu.edu.sa ORCID Number https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4433-2034

---

Copyright: © 2026 The Authors.

License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/