Suppression of the blossom-blight phase of fire blight is a key point in the management of this destructive and increasingly important disease of apple and pear. For blossom infection to occur, the causal bacterium, Erwinia amylovora, needs to increase its population size through an epiphytic phase that occurs on stigmatic surfaces. Knowledge of the ecology of the pathogen on stigmas has been key to the development of predictive models for infection and optimal timing of antibiotic sprays. Other bacterial epiphytes also colonize stigmas where they can interact with and suppress epiphytic growth of the pathogen. A commercially available bacterial antagonist of E. amylovora (BlightBan, Pseudomonas fluorescens A506) can be included in antibiotic spray programs. Integration of bacterial antagonists with chemical methods suppresses populations of the pathogen and concomitantly, fills the ecological niche provided by the stigma with a nonpathogenic, competing microorganism. Further integration of biologically based methods with conventional management of blossom blight may be achievable by increasing the diversity of applied antagonists, by refining predictive models to incorporate antagonist use, and by gaining an improved understanding of the interactions that occur among indigenous and applied bacterial epiphytes, antibiotics, and the physical environment.

No abstract

The biological control agents Pseudomonas fluorescens A506 and Pantoea vagans C9-1 were evaluated individually and in combination for the suppression of fire blight of pear or apple in 10 field trials inoculated with the pathogen Erwinia amylovora. The formulation of pathogen inoculum applied to blossoms influenced establishment of the pathogen and the efficacy of biological control. Pantoea vagans C9-1 suppressed fire blight in all five trials in which the pathogen was applied as lyophilized cells but in none of the trials in which the pathogen was applied as freshly harvested cells. In contrast, Pseudomonas fluorescens A506 reduced disease significantly in only one trial. A mixture of the two strains also suppressed fire blight, but the magnitude of disease suppression over all field trials (averaging 32%) was less than that attained by C9-1 alone (42%). The two biological control agents did not antagonize one another on blossom surfaces, and application of the mixture of A506 and C9-1 to blossoms resulted in a greater proportion of flowers having detectable populations of at least one bacterial antagonist than the application of individual strains. Therefore, the mixture of A506 and C9-1 provided less disease control than expected based upon the epiphytic population sizes of the antagonists on blossom surfaces. We speculate that the biocontrol mixture was less effective than anticipated due to incompatibility between the mechanisms by which A506 and C9-1 suppress disease.

Fire blight, caused by Erwinia amylovora, is the most serious bacterial disease of pear and apple trees. Biological control with strains of Pantoea agglomerans (syn. Erwinia herbicola) may provide an effective disease management strategy for fire blight. Most strains of P. agglomerans evaluated for suppression of fire blight produce compounds that inhibit the growth of E. amylovora in culture. The role of these inhibitory compounds in fire blight suppression in orchard environments has not been studied. In seven field trials in Oregon, we compared the population dynamics and disease suppression with P. agglomerans Eh252, a strain that produces a single antibiotic, with its near-isogenic antibiotic-deficient derivative, strain 10:12. Water or suspensions of Eh252 or 10:12 (1 x 10(8) CFU/ml) were applied at 30 and 70% bloom to pear or apple trees. Aqueous suspensions of freeze-dried cells of E. amylovora (3 x 10(5) CFU/ml) were applied at full bloom. Additional trees were treated with streptomycin or oxytetracycline at 30 and 70% bloom and in some experiments, 1 day after application of the pathogen. Population sizes of Eh252 or 10:12 on pear blossoms were estimated by spreading dilutions of blossom washes on culture media. Average population sizes of Eh252 and 10:12 on blossoms ranged from 10(5) to 10(7) CFU, and in five of six trials, the relative area under the population curve of Eh252 was not significantly different than that of its derivative 10:12. Both Eh252 and 10:12 reduced the growth of the pathogen on blossoms compared with inoculated water-treated controls. Eh252 significantly decreased the incidence of fire blight in six of seven field trials compared with the incidence on water-treated trees, and 10:12 similarly reduced the incidence of fire blight in four of seven trials. In three of seven field trials, trees treated with Eh252 had a significantly lower incidence of fire blight compared with trees treated 3 with 10:12. Overall,3 Eh252 reduced the incidence of fire blight by 55 +/- 8%, 10:12 by 30 +/- 6%, streptomycin by 75 +/- 4%, and oxytetracycline by 16 +/- 14%. The effectiveness of strain 10:12 compared with water treatment indicates that other mechanisms (e.g., competitive exclusion or habitat modification) also contribute to disease suppression by P. agglomerans. The increased suppression of fire blight by the parental strain Eh252 compared with the antibiotic-deficient mutant 10:12 indicates that antibiosis is an important mechanism of biological control of fire blight.

Mixtures of biological control agents can be superior to individual agents in suppressing plant disease, providing enhanced efficacy and reliability from field to field relative to single biocontrol strains. Nonetheless, the efficacy of combinations of Pseudomonas fluorescens A506, a commercial biological control agent for fire blight of pear, and Pantoea vagans strain C9-1 or Pantoea agglomerans strain Eh252 rarely exceeds that of individual strains. A506 suppresses growth of the pathogen on floral colonization and infection sites through preemptive exclusion. C9-1 and Eh252 produce peptide antibiotics that contribute to disease control. In culture, A506 produces an extracellular protease that degrades the peptide antibiotics of C9-1 and Eh252. We hypothesized that strain A506 diminishes the biological control activity of C9-1 and Eh252, thereby reducing the efficacy of biocontrol mixtures. This hypothesis was tested in five replicated field trials comparing biological control of fire blight using strain A506 and A506 aprX::Tn5, an extracellular protease-deficient mutant, as individuals and combined with C9-1 or Eh252. On average, mixtures containing A506 aprX::Tn5 were superior to those containing the wild-type strain, confirming that the extracellular protease of A506 diminished the biological control activity of C9-1 and Eh252 in situ. Mixtures of A506 aprX::Tn5 and C9-1 or Eh252 were superior to oxytetracycline or single biocontrol strains in suppressing fire blight of pear. These experiments demonstrate that certain biological control agents are mechanistically incompatible, in that one strain interferes with the mechanism by which a second strain suppresses plant disease. Mixtures composed of mechanistically compatible strains of biological control agents can suppress disease more effectively than individual biological control agents.