Advertisement

Population Dynamics of the Plant Growth-Promoting Bacterium Azospirillum brasilense and the Pathogen Pseudomonas syringae pv tomato in the Tomato Rhizosphere and Foliage and its use as a Strategy to Control Bacterial Leaf Speck of Tomato

  • Y. Bashan

Abstract

Tomato plants are a host for both Azospirillum brasilense, a plant growth- promoting bacterium (PGPB), and P. syringae pv tomato (P.s. tomato), the causal agent of bacterial speck disease of tomato, a disease of moderate economic importance. Whereas A. brasilense increases the growth and yield of tomato plants (5), P.s. tomato decreases these (13). A. brasilense is mainly a rhizosphere bacterium (3), and P.s. tomato is largely an epiphytic bacterium (8). However, both bacterial species are capable of colonizing seeds and the rhizosphere, but only colonize plant foliage under mist chamber conditions (2). The aim of this study was to measure fluctuations in the populations of the two bacterial strains on tomato foliage or in the tomato rhizosphere when inoculated alone or as a mixed culture. The effect of the relative population size on the development of bacterial leaf speck disease in tomato was monitored and discussed as a potential biocontrol strategy.

Keywords

Tomato Plant Systemic Resistance Azospirillum Brasilense Angular Leaf Spot Seed Inoculation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bashan, Y. 1997. Alternative strategies for controlling plant diseases caused by Pseudomonas syrngae. In: Pseudomonas syringae pathovars and related pathogens. Developments in plant pathology, vol. 9. (Eds.) K. Rudolph, T.J. Burr, J.W. Mansfield, D. stead, A. Vivian and J. von Kietzell, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp. 575–583.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bashan, Y. 1998. Azospirillum plant growth-promoting strains are nonpathogenic on tomato, pepper, cotton, and wheat. Can. J. Microbiol. 44:168–174Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bashan, Y. and Holguin, G. 1997. Azospirii/um-plant relationships: environmental and physiological advances (1990–1996). Can. J. Microbiol. 43: 103–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bashan, Y., Okon, Y. and Henis, Y. 1978. Infection studies of Pseudomonas tomato, causal agent of bacterial speck of tomato. Phytoparasitica 6:135–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bashan, Y., Ream, Y., Levanony, H. and Sade, A. 1989. Nonspecific responses in plant growth, yield, and root colonization of noncereal crop plants to inoculation with Azospirillum brasilense Gd. Can. J. . Bot. 67: 1317–1324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Glick, B.R., and Bashan, Y. 1997. Genetic manipulation of plant growth- promoting bacteria to enhance biocontrol of phytopathogens. Biotechnol. Adv. 15: 353–378.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gu,Y.Q., and Martin, G.B. 1998. Molecular mechanisms involved in bacterial speck disease resistance of tomato. Phil. Trans. Royal Soc. London. Series B, 353:1455–1461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Henis, Y. and Bashan, Y. 1986. Epiphytic survival of bacterial leaf pathogens. In: Microbiology of the phyllosphere. (Eds.) N.J. Fokkema and J. van den Heuvel. Cambridge University Press, pp. 252–268.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Holguin, G. and Bashan, Y. 1996. Nitrogen-fixation by Azospirillum brasilense Cd is promoted when co-cultured with a mangrove rhizosphere bacterium (Staphylococcus sp.) Soil Biol. Biochem. 28:1651–1660.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Levanony, H., Bashan, Y. and Kahana, Z.E. 1987. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for specific identification and enumeration of Azospirillum brasilense Cd. in cereal roots. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 53: 358–364.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liu, L., Kloepper, J.W., and Tuzun, S. 1995. Induction of systemic resistance in cucumber against bacterial angular leaf spot by plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria. Phytopathology 85 : 843–847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Oldroyd, G.E.D., and Staskawicz, B.J. 1998. Genetically engineered broad- spectrum disease resistance in tomato. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95:10300–10305.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yunis, H., Bashan, Y., Okon, Y. and Henis, Y. 1980. Weather dependence, yield losses and control of bacterial speck of tomato caused by Pseudomonas tomato. Plant Dis. 64: 937–939.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wei, G., Kloepper, J.W., and Tuzun, S. 1996. Induced systemic resistance to cucumber diseases and increased plant growth by plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria under field conditions. Phytopathology 86 : 221–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Y. Bashan
    • 1
  1. 1.The Center for Biological Research of the Northwest (CIB)La PazMexico

Personalised recommendations