Sel’skokhozyaistvennaya Biologiya [Agricultural Biology], 2015, Vol. 50, № 1, pp. 99-106.

doi: 10.15389/agrobiology.2015.1.99eng

UDC 632.4:631.147:579.64

BACTERIAL STRAINS ANTAGONISTIC TO Pyrenophora tritici-repentis
in vitro DEMONSTRATE DIFFERENT EFFICACY ON WHEAT SEEDLING
IN GREEN HOUSE

O.Yu. Kremneva, A.M. Asaturova, M.D. Zharnikova, G.V. Volkova

All-Russian Research Institute of Biological Plant Protection, Russian Academy of Agricultural Sciences, VNIIBZR, Krasnodar-39, 350039 Russia, e-mail kremenoks@mail.ru
Supported by Grant of the President of the Russian Federation and the EurAsEU International Program «Innovation biotechnologies» of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation

Received December 3, 2013


Yellow leaf spot is a wide spread diseases of soft and hard wheat. Numerous publications and the authors' own research show that its epiphytotics occur in different countries (Australia, Canada, USA, India, England, Belgium, Romania, Czech Republic, Kazakhstan) with crop losses reaching 65 %. In Russia the disease is most common in the North Caucasus. Development and application of new high-performance environmentally friendly biological products is regarded as one of the most effective biologized approach to wheat protection against the disease. In searching potential bacterial agents for use as protective means, their in vitro antagonistic activity should be accompanied by the ability to provide effective protection for seeds and seedlings. Herein we studied the repression of yellow spot development during early stages of plant vegetation in a greenhouse as influenced by the bacterial strains which were in vitro antagonistic to P. tritici-repentis (Died.) Drechsler. Winter wheat cultivar Bat’ko susceptible to the pathogen was used as test plant. Six isolates of the Bacillus family (Bacillus sp. BZR 18, B. subtilis BZR 336 s, B. subtilis BZR 336 g, B. subtilis BZR 436, B. subtilis BZR 517, B. licheniformis BZR 59), as well as Ochrobactrum sp. BZR 417 from the collection of All-Russian Research Institute of Biological Plant Protection were used as candidate bio agents. For comparison, liquid Fitosporin-M was used as a biological preparation (LLC Scientific Innovation Enterprise «BashInkom», Russia) and Prozaro emulsion concentrate was used as a chemical fungicide («Bayer CropScience», Germany). Liquid cultures of antagonistic bacterial strains were applied in three modes, namely before inoculation (prophylactic treatment), at early signs of the disease (on the day 3 after inoculation) and by their combination. All treatments were performed with inlaying and without inlaying grain with liquid bacterial culture. All studied bacterial strains except Ochrobactrum sp. BZR 417 showed considerable biological efficacy of leaf spot inhibition. The Bacillus sp. BZR 18 and B. subtilis BZR 517 were the most inhibiting strains which repressed leaf spot development at 68.5 to 83.0 % and 55.6 to 64.0 % rate, respectively, in all variants except treatment at early signs of the infection without inlaying grains when the efficiency was 26.8 and 35.9 %, respectively. B. licheniformis BZR 59 provided for 52.6 to 68.9 % leaf spot inhibition. Liquid culture of B. subtilis BZR 336 g strain ensured efficiency from 51.5 to 58.3 % in all variants except a preventive treatment without inlaying grain when the efficiency was 40.9 %. B. subtilis BZR 336 s, if used at early signs of infection with inlaying grain and in combination of prophylactic treatment with application at early signs of infection and inlaying grain, caused 60.2 and 60.3 % leaf spot repression; in other cases a 14.7 to 44.3 % repression was observed. BZR 436 B. subtilis effectiveness was from 28.4 % under preventive treatment with preliminary grain inlaying to 73.4 % under preventive treatment together with application at early signs of infection and inlaying grain. The efficiency of Ochrobactrum sp. BZR 417 strain does not exceed 45.4 % in all variants. Depending on antifungal activity of the bacterial agent, a combination of grain pre-treatment, prophylactic treatment and treatment at early signs of infection proved to be the most effective. 

Keywords: pyrenophora tritici-repentis, antagonistic bacteria, biological effect, winter wheat, tan spot disease, seedlings.

 

Full article (Rus)

Full text (Eng)

 

REFERENCES

  1. Hosford R.M. Tan spot of wheat and related diseases workshop. Fargo, North Dakota State University, 1982.
  2. Sykes E.E., Bernier C.C. Qualitative inheritance of tan spot resistance in hexaploid, tetraploid and diploid wheat. Can. J. Plant Pathol., 1991, 64(1): 38-44.
  3. Misra A.P., Singh R.A. Pathogenic differences amongst three isolates of Helminthosporium tritici-repentis and the performance of wheat against them. Ind. Phytopathol., 1972, 25(3): 350-353.
  4. Cook R.J., Yarham D.J. Occurrence of ten spot of wheat caused by P. tritici-repentis on wheat in England and Wales in 1987. Plant Pathol., 1989, 38(1): 101-102.
  5. Maraite H., Berny J.F., Goffi A. Epidemiology of tan spot in Belgium. Proc. 2nd Int. Tan spot workshop. Fargo, North Dakota State University, 1992: 73-79.
  6. Dumitras L., Bontea V. Data noi privinol parasitul foliar al griulu Helminthosporium repentis Diedicke. Studii si Cercetari de Biologie Vegetala, 1981, 33: 169-172.
  7. Šarová J., Hanzalová A., Bartoš P. Incidence of wheat leaf spot pathogens in the Czech Republic. Cereal Res. Commun., 2003, 31: 145-151.
  8. Khasanov B.V. Mikologiya i fitopatologiya, 1988, 22(1): 78-84.
  9. Granin E.F., Monastyrnaya E.I., Kraeva G.A., Kochubei K.Yu. Zashchita rastenii, 1989, 12: 21.
  10. Andronova A.E. Zashchita i karantin rastenii, 2001, 5: 32.
  11. Kremneva O.Yu., Volkova G.V. Zashchita i karantin rastenii, 2007, 6: 45-46.
  12. Kremneva O.Yu., Volkova G.V. Zashchita i karantin rastenii, 2011, 10: 37-39.
  13. Hirrell M.C., Spadley J.P., Mitchell J.K., Wilson E.W. First report of tan spot caused by Drechslera tritici-repentis and rating their reaction. Plant Dis., 1990, 74(3): 252.
  14. Hosford R.M., Jordahl J.G., Hammond J.J. Effect of wheat genotype, leaf position, growth stage, fungal isolate, and wet period on tan spot lesions. Plant Dis., 1990, 74: 385-390.
  15. Spravochnik pestitsidov i agrokhimikatov, razreshennykh k primeneniyu na territorii Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Handbook of pesticides and agrochemicals allowed for use in the Russian Federation]. Moscow, 2012.
  16. Taechowisan Th., Chanaphat S., Ruensamran W., Phutdhawong W.S. Antifungal activity of 3-methylcarbazoles from Streptomyces sp. LJK109, an endophyte in Alpinia galangal. J. Appl. Pharm. Sci., 2012, 02(03): 124-128.
  17. Perelló A., Moreno V., Mónaco C., Simón M.R. Effect of Trichoderma spp. isolates for biological control of tan spot of wheat caused by Pyrenophora tritici-repentis under field conditions in Argentina. BioControl, 2008, 53: 895-904.
  18. Perelló A., Simón M.R., Sisterna M., Cordo C., Arambarri A. Microflora of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in Buenos Aires Province (Argentina) and its possible significance in biological control of foliar pathogens. J. Plant Dis. Protect., 2001, 108: 459-471.
  19. Khana M.R., Brienb E.O., Carneyc B.F. A fluorescent pseudomonad shows potential for the control of net blotch disease of barley. Biological Control, 2010, 54(1): 41-45.
  20. Istifadah N., McGee P. Endophytic Chaetomium globosum reduces development of tan spot in wheat caused by Pyrenophora tritici-repentis. Austral. Plant Pathol., 2006, 35(4): 411-418.
  21. Istifadah N., Saleeba J., McGee P. Isolates of endophytic Chaetomium spp. inhibit the fungal pathogen, Pyrenophora tritici-repentis, in vitro. Canadian Journal of Botany—Revue Canadienne De Botanique, 2006, 84(7): 1148-1155.
  22. Borovaya V.P. Zashchita i karantin rastenii, 2007, 4: 49.
  23. McLoughlin A.J., Quinn P., Betterman A., Brooklan R. Pseudomonas cepacia suppression of sunflower wilt fungus and role of antifungal compounds in controlling the disease. Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 1992, 56: 1760-1763.
  24. McLoughlin A.J. Plasmid stability and ecological competence in recombinant cultures. Biotechnological Advances, 1994, 12: 279-324.
  25. Homma Y. Mechanisms in biological control — focused on the antibiotic pyrrolnitrin. In: Improving plant productivity with rhizobacteria /M.H. Ryder, P.M. Stephens, G.D. Bowen (eds.). Adelaide, Australia, CSIRO Division of Soils, 1994: 100-103.
  26. Kremneva O.Yu., Asaturova A.M., Volkova G.V. Biotekhnologiya, 2013, 5: 54-59.
  27. Asaturova A.M., Dubyaga V.M., Tomashevich N.S., Zharniko-
    va M.D. Elektronnyi politematicheskii nauchnyi zhurnal KubGAU, 2012, 75(01) (http://ej.kubagro.ru/2012/01/pdf/37.pdf).
  28. Asaturova A.M., Nadykta V.D., Ismailov V.Ya., Dubyaga V.M., Tomashevich N.S., Zharnikova M.D., Zhevnova N.A., Khom-
    yak A.I. Elektronnyi politematicheskii nauchnyi zhurnal KubGAU, 2013, 85(01) (http://ej.kubagro.ru/2013/01/pdf/66.pdf).
  29. Metodicheskie ukazaniya po registratsionnym ispytaniyam fungitsidov v sel'skom khozyaistve [Tests for registration of fungicides in agriculture: guidelines]. St. Petersburg, 2009.
  30. Thomashow L.S., Weller D.M. Current concepts in the use of introduced bacteria for biological disease control: mechanisms and antifungal metabolites. Plant-Microbe Interact., 1996, 1: 187-235.
  31. Boronin A.M. Sorosovskii obrazovatel'nyi zhurnal, 1998, 10: 25-31.
  32. Van Loon L.C., Bakker P.A.H.M., Pieterse C.M.J. Systemic resistance induced by rhizosphere bacteria. Ann. Rev. Phytopathol., 1998, 36: 453-483.

 

back