doi: 10.15389/agrobiology.2019.1.91eng

UDC 632:579.64



O.M. Minaeva1, 2, E.E. Akimova1, 2, N.N. Tereshchenko1, 2,
A.V. Kravets1, T.I. Zyubanova1, 2, M.V. Apenysheva2

1Siberian Research Institute of Agriculture and Peat — Branch of the Siberian Federal Scientific Center of Agro-Bio Technologies RAS, 3, ul. Gagarina, 1668 PO box, Tomsk, 634050 Russia, e-mail (✉ corresponding author),,,,;
2National Research Tomsk State University, 36, pr. Lenina, Tomsk, 634050 Russia, e-mail

Minaeva O.M.
Akimova E.E.
Tereshchenko N.N.
Zyubanova T.I.
Apenysheva M.B.
Kravets A.V.

Received July 5, 2017


Currently, crop yields can be increased by high farming standards which include environmentally friendly use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides, as well as their replacement by bioformulations having similar activity. That is why both search for new promising species, strains and isolates of bacterial antagonists for their potential use as biocontrol agents, and study of antifungal activity mechanisms, particularly the relationship between the activity in model tests and in agrocenoses, are relevant. The aim of this study was to estimate bacterial isolates from redworm coprolites as potential bioactive agents to control phytopathogenic fungi causing root rot of crops. The experiments were conducted in 2013-2015. In the preliminary laboratory screening for fungistatic and growth-promoting activity we selected two strains, Pseudomonas sp. GS4 and Pseudomonas sp. PhS1, and assessed their ability to decrease the growth rate of fungal colonies in Petri dish test on nutrient agar medium and to reduce seed infestation of soft wheat (Triticum aestivum L., Irgin cultivar) in sterile paper roll test. Seeds soaked in distilled water served as control. As a standard, we used seed treatment with a chemical fungicide Dividend® Star («Syngenta AG», Switzerland) (30 g/l difenoconazole, 6.3 g/l cyproconazole) at recommended rates. In field tests, we recorded root rots in soft wheat Irgin cultivar plants and in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) Acha cultivar plants during tillering and beginning of blooming. The laboratory tests showed a statistically significant (р < 0.05) 1.5-2.5-fold decrease in the growth rate of phytopathogenic fungi Fusarium oxysporum, Bipolaris sorokiniana and Alternaria spp. as compared to control. In all experiments with bacterization, there was a 53-76 % decrease (р < 0.05) in total seed infestation by pathogens as compared to non-bacterized plants. The effect of the bacteria in planta was assessed in small model systems. The obtained data show a statistically significant (р < 0.05) reduction in the root rot disease incidence in bacterization with Pseudomonas sp. GS4 (by 33-37 %) and Pseudomonas sp. PhS1 (by 57-60 %). Root rot disease severity decreases 2.1-2.4-fold and 3.3-3.5-fold, respectively. In 2015, we revealed a tendency towards a 19-70 % increase in the total number of rhizosphere microorganisms at the beginning of plant blooming depending on the crop and type of bacterization. The number of phosphate-mobilizing bacteria in the rhizosphere under bacterization was, on average, 5.5-7.2-fold higher in wheat and 2.1-3.2-fold higher in barley than that without bacterization. Our results of root rot field study in the 2013-2015 showed the efficacy of both monocultures and complex bacterization which provided a decrease in wheat and barley root rot disease severity by 6.5-57.6 % and 18.6-50.0 %, respectively, depending on the bacterial culture and the weather conditions. The maximum biological efficacy of the isolates is noted at the beginning of blooming.

Keywords: biocontrol, rhizobacteria, Pseudomonas, Eisenia fetida, antifungal activity, phytopathogen, Bipolaris, Alternaria.




  1. Compant S., Duffy B., Nowak J, Clement C., Barka E.A. Use of plant growth-promoting bacteria for biocontrol of plant diseases: principles, mechanisms of action, and future prospects. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2005, 71(9): 4951-495 CrossRef
  2. Raupach G.S, Kloepper J.W. Mixtures of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria enhance biological control of multiple cucumber pathogens. Phytopathology, 1998, 88(11): 1158-1164 CrossRef
  3. Johnson K.B. Pathogen refuge: a key to understanding biological control. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol., 2010, 48: 141-60 CrossRef
  4. Maksimov I.V., Abizgil'dina R.R., Pusenkova L.I. Prikladnaya biokhimiya i mikrobiologiya, 2011, 47(4): 373-385 (in Russ.).
  5. Gupta G., Parihar S.S., Ahirwar N.K., Snehi S.K., Singh V. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR): current and future prospects for development of sustainable agriculture. Journal of Microbial & Biochemical Technology, 2015, 7: 096-102 CrossRef
  6. Berg G., Fritze A., Roskot N., Smalla K. Evaluation of potential biocontrol rhizobacteria from different host plants of Verticillium dahlia Kleb. J. Appl. Microbiol., 2001, 91: 963-971 CrossRef
  7. Georgakopoulos D.G., Fiddaman P., Leifert C., Malathrakis N.E. Biological control of cucumber and sugar beet damping-off caused by Pythium ultimum with bacterial and fungal antagonists. J. Appl. Microbiol., 2002, 92: 1078-1086 CrossRef
  8. Smyth E.M., McCarthy J., Nevin R., Khan M.R., Dow J.M., O'Gara F., Doohan F.M. In vitro analyses are not reliable predictors of the plant growth promotion capability of bacteria; a Pseudomonas fluorescens strain that promotes the growth and yield of wheat. J. Appl. Microbiol., 2011, 111(3): 683-692 CrossRef
  9. Akimova E.E., Blinova P.A., Minaeva O.M., Tereshchenko N.N., Kravets A.V. Materialy Mezhdunarodnoi  nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii «Zashchita rastenii v sovremennykh tekhnologiyakh vozdelyvaniya sel'skokhozyaistvennykh kul'tur» [Proc. Int. Conf. «Plant protection in modern crop cultivation technologies»]. Krasnoobsk, 2013: 11-14 (in Russ.).
  10. Minaeva O.M., Akimova E.E. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Biologiya, 2013, 3(23): 19-37 (in Russ.).
  11. Zakharenko V.A. Agrokhimiya, 2015, 6: 64-76 (in Russ.).
  12. Kozhemyakov A.P., Belobrova S.N., Orlova A.G. Creating and analyzing a database on the efficiency of microbial preparations of complex action. Sel’skokhozyaistvennaya Biologiya [Agricultural Biology], 2011, 3: 112-115 (in Russ.).
  13. Benizri E., Baudon E., Guckert A. Root colonization by inoculated plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria. Biocontrol. Sci. Techn., 2001, 11: 557-574 CrossRef
  14. Lugtenberg B., Kamilova F. Plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria. Annu. Rev. Microbiol., 2009, 63: 541-56 CrossRef
  15. George E., Kumar S.N., Jacob J., Bommasani B., Lankalapalli R.S., Morang P., Kumar B.S. Characterization of the bioactive metabolites from a plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria and their exploitation as antimicrobial and plant growth-promoting agents. Appl. Biochem. Biotech., 2015, 176: 529-546 CrossRef
  16. Lutz M.P., Wenger S., Maurhofer M., Défago G., Duffy B. Signaling between bacterial and fungal biocontrol agents in a strain mixture. FEMS Microbiol.Ecol., 2004, 48: 447-455 CrossRef
  17. Zhou D.-M., Wang K.-P., Liu H.-X., Gu C., Guo J.-H. Field evaluation of different application methods of the mixture of Bacillus cereus strain AR156 and Bacillus subtilis strain SM21 on pepper growth and disease resistance. Biocontrol. Sci. Techn., 2014, 24(12): 1451-1468 CrossRef
  18. Schisler D.A., Slininger P.J., Bothast R.J. Effects of antagonist cell concentration and two-strain mixtures on biological control of Fusarium dry rot of potatoes. Phytopathology, 1997, 87: 177-183 CrossRef
  19. Xu X.-M., Jeffries P., Pautasso M., Jeger M.J. Combined use of biocontrol agents to manage plant diseases in theory and practice. Phytopathology, 2011, 101(9): 1024-1031 CrossRef
  20. Minaeva O.M., Akimova E.E., Evdokimov E.V. Prikladnaya biokhimiya i mikrobiologiya, 2008, 44(5): 565-570 (in Russ.).
  21. Chulkina V.A., Konyaeva N.M., Kuznetsova T.T. Bor'ba s boleznyami sel'skokhozyaistvennykh kul'tur v Sibiri [Combating crop diseases in Siberia]. Moscow, 1987 (in Russ.).
  22. Dospekhov B.A. Metodika polevogo opyta (s osnovami statisticheskoi obrabotki rezul'tatov issledovanii) [Methods of field trials (with the basics of statistical processing of research results)]. Moscow, 1985 (in Russ.).
  23. Opredelitel' bakterii Berdzhi. Tom 1 /Pod red. Dzh. Khoulta, N. Kriga, P. Snita, Dzh. Steili, S. Uill'yamsa [Bergey's Manual of Determinative Bacteriology. V. 1. Dzh. Khoult, N. Krig, P. Snit, Dzh. Steili, S. Uill'yams (eds.)]. Moscow, 1997 (in Russ.).
  24. Toropova E.Yu., Vorob'eva I.G., Chulkina V.A., Marmuleva E.Yu. About a role of biological diversity in the phytosanitary optimization of agrarian landscapes. Sel’skokhozyaistvennaya Biologiya [Agricultural Biology], 2013, 3: 12-17 CrossRef (in Engl.).
  25. Gorobei I.M., Ashmarina L.F. Glavnyi zootekhnik, 2010, 5: 31-35 (in Russ.).
  26. Tereshchenko N.N., Kravets A.V., Akimova E.E., Minaeva O.M., Zotikova A.P. Sibirskii vestnik sel'skokhozyaistvennoi nauki, 2013, 5: 10-17 (in Russ.).