Screening potential bacterial biocontrol agents towards Phytophthora capsici in pepper
- 692 Downloads
A total of 1,487 bacterial isolates were obtained from the rhizosphere, phyllosphere, endorhiza and endosphere of field-grown pepper. In a dual assay, 232 isolates displayed the antagonistic activity towards Phytophthora capsici L.; 36.6 % and 39.2 % of them were obtained from the rhizosphere and phyllosphere, respectively. 40 of the 232 antagonistic isolates producing inhibition zones of at least 5 mm in diameter were assessed for production of siderophores and chitinase, cellulose, and protease activity. These 40 isolates fell into 15 groups according to 90 % similarity of the banding patterns obtained by amplified ribosomal DNA restriction analysis (ARDRA). Seventeen isolates spanning the 15 groups were evaluated in greenhouse tests for their ability to control Phytophthora blight of pepper. Biocontrol efficacy ranged from 0.7 % to 92.3 %, with three isolates (B1301, R98, and PX35) exhibiting maximum ability to reduce the disease severity (83.5 %, 92.3 % and 83.5 %, respectively). Based on 16S rDNA sequencing, these isolates were identified as Bacillus cereus (B1301), Chryseobacterium sp (R98) and Bacillus cereus (PX35). This is the first report that Chryseobacterium sp. (R98) can function as a biocontrol agent of Phytophthora blight.
KeywordsAntagonist Biocontrol Pepper Phytophthora capsici Phytophora blight
This research was supported by Program for New Century Excellent Talents in University (NCET-06-0492), Chinese 863 high-tech Program (2006AA10A211) and Chinese Natural Science Foundation and Science Foundation for Youths (No. 30800714).
- Anandaraj, M., & Sarma, V. R. (1995). Disease of black pepper (Piper nigrum) and their management. Journal of Spices and Aromatic Crops, 4, 17–23.Google Scholar
- Berg, G., Krechel, A., & Ditz, M. (2005). Endophytic and ectophytic potato-ssociated bacterial communities differ in structure and antagonistic function against plant pathogenic fungi. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 51, 215–229.Google Scholar
- Chernin, L., & Chet, I. (2002). Microbial enzymes in biocontrol of plant pathogens and pests. In: R. Burns, R. Dick (Eds.), (pp. 171–225). NY: Marcel Dekker Inc.Google Scholar
- Ross, I. L., Alami, Y., Harvey, P. R., Achouak, W., & Ryder, M. H. (2000). Genetic diversity and biological control activity of novel species of closely related pseudomonads isolated from wheat field soils in South Australia. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 66, 1609–1616.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Saligkarias, I. D., Gravanis, F. T., & Epton, H. A. S. (2002). Biological control of Botrytis cinerea on tomato plants by the use of epiphytic yeasts Candida guilliermondii strains 101 and US 7 and Candida oleophila strain I-182: II. A study on mode of action. Biological Control, 25, 151–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sawanth, I. S., Sawanth, S. D., & Nayana, K. A. (1995). Biological control of Phytophthora root rot of coorg mandarin (Citrus reticulata) by Trichoderma species grown on coffee waste. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 65, 842–846.Google Scholar
- Tag, E. L., Lim, S. K., Nam, D. H., Khang, Y. H., & Kim, S. D. (2003). Pyoverdin (2112) of Pseudomonas fluorescens 2112 inhibits Phytophthora capsici, a red pepper blight causing fungus. Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 13, 415–421.Google Scholar
- Tjamos, E. C., Tsitsigiannis, T. I., Tjamos, S. E., Antoniou, P., & Katinakis, P. (2004). Selection and screening of endorhizosphere bacteria from solarised soils as biocontrol agents against Verticillium dahliae of solanaceous hosts. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 110, 35–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Whipps, J. M., & Van, J. D. (1997). Ecological considerations involved in commercial development of biological control agents for soil-borne diseases In: Modern soil microbiology (pp. 525–545). New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc.Google Scholar