Interaction between a peat carrier and bacterial seed treatments evaluated for biological control of the take-all diseases of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)

Huber, D. M.; El-Nasshar, H.; Moore, Larry F.; Mathre, D. E.; Wagner, J.

doi:10.1007/bf00257761

Cited by 16 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A plethora of factors such as soil pH, soil nutrient status, soil moisture, and ecology of other competitive soil microbes can affect the ability of organisms to survive in the rhizosphere (Ghini and Morandi 2006;Marschner et al 2004;Taylor and Harman 1990;Weller 1988). In our field trials, alkaline soil pH may have been an important contributing factor, because this has been shown to inhibit biological seed treatment organisms (Huber et al 1989;Marshall 1982). The two agents tested in the field trials, B. pumilus and B. subtilis GB03, were able to multiply in desi and kabuli chickpea seed exudates.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

The influence of biological and fungicidal seed treatments on chickpea (Cicer arietinum) damping off

Leisso

Miller

Burrows

2009

Canadian Journal of Plant Pathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Damping off of chickpea (Cicer arietinum) can lead to stand loss and yield reduction. Fungicide seed treatments are able to successfully control chickpea damping off, but the effectiveness of many commercially available biological seed treatments has not been well tested. The objective of this study was to test the effect of commercially available biological and fungicide seed treatments on damping off of cultivars of kabuli and desi chickpea types. The biological seed treatments Bacillus pumilus GB34 (Yield Shield), Bacillus subtilis GB03 (Kodiak), B. subtilis MBI 600 (Subtilex), Streptomyces lydicus WYEC 108 (Actinovate), Streptomyces griseoviridis K61 (Mycostop), Trichoderma harzianum Rifai strain KRL-AG2 (T-22 Planter Box), the fungicide treatments fludioxonil (Maxim) and mefenoxam (Apron XL LS), as well as combined biological and fungicide seed treatments were tested in greenhouse and field experiments. The desi cultivar exhibited lower incidence of damping off in greenhouse and field trials than the kabuli cultivar. Several biological seed treatments inhibited germination and growth of the kabuli cultivar in the absence of pathogens in greenhouse experiments but not in field trials. In greenhouse experiments where soil was artificially infested with the damping off pathogen Pythium ultimum, the kabuli cultivar emergence was increased by the application of mefenoxam but not by biological seed treatments. Mefenoxam was the most effective seed treatment in field trials at three locations in Montana in the spring of 2007. Biological seed treatments were ineffective for reducing damping off and increasing plant growth measurements above untreated controls, even in combination with fungicides. These results indicate the use of mefenoxam is critical for controlling Pythium damping off in Montana and that biological seed treatments are not effective. 46Résumé : La fonte des semis chez le pois chiche (Cicer arietinum) peut toucher de grandes superficies et réduire les rendements. Les traitements fongicides des semences peuvent efficacement contrer la fonte des semis chez le pois chiche, mais l'efficacité de plusieurs traitements biologiques vendus commercialement n'a pas été testée en profondeur. Cette étude a pour but de vérifier les effets des traitements biologiques et fongicides vendus commercialement sur la fonte des semis chez les cultivars des pois chiches de types kabuli et desi. Les traitements biologiques Bacillus pumilus GB34 (Yield Shield), Bacillus subtilis GB03 (Kodiak), B. subtilis MBI 600 (Subtilex), Streptomyces lydicus WYEC 108 (Actinovate), Streptomyces griseoviridis K61 (Mycostop) et Trichoderma harzianum Rifai strain KRL-AG2 (T-22 Planter Box); les traitements fongicides fludioxonil (Maxim) et méfénoxam (Apron XL LS), ainsi que des associations de traitements biologiques et fongiques, ont été testés au cours d'expériences effectuées en serre et au champ. Le cultivar de type desi a affiché une plus faible incidence à la fonte des semis, en serre et au champ, que celui de type kabuli. Lors des exp...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

The influence of biological and fungicidal seed treatments on chickpea (Cicer arietinum) damping off

Leisso

Miller

Burrows

2009

Canadian Journal of Plant Pathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is suspected that mode of application may play a significant role in determining the ability of these potential biocontrol agents to remain viable and colonize plant roots, and so place themselves in the best position for effecting disease control. However, caution may need to be exercised in the use of certain carriers as in one study a peat carrier was shown to induce a predisposition to take-all (Huber et al, 1989).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of Pseudomonas fluorescens isolates to wheat as potential biological control agents against take‐all

Capper

Higgins

1993

Plant Pathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two isolates of Pseudomonas fluorescens (2–79 and 13–79) from the USA were evaluated in the UK as biological control agents against Gaeumannomyces graminis var. tritici, the cause of take‐all in wheat. Biological control agents were applied as seed coatings in carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) to seven wheat trials sown in 1987 and 1988 on fen peat and clay soils, and as peat‐based and microgranule formulations in one of these trials. In a trial of spring wheat on fen peat, all treatments with biological control agents reduced the percentage take‐all infection of crown roots and seminal roots, but the effects of only one isolate were statistically significant (P<0·05). Effects of biological control agents on infection rates in five other trials were not significant. In the trial in which application methods were compared, peat‐based inoculum initially appeared most effective but none of the treatments reduced take‐all significantly throughout the season. Application of biological control agents was associated with yield increases in several trials; these were not consistently associated with effects on take‐all. These results suggest that the isolates of P. fluorescens have potential to reduce take‐all and increase yields of wheat in the UK, but the beneficial effects are inconsistent. There is a need to develop isolates which reliably control severe take‐all in a variety of soil types.

show abstract

“…and is also useful for soil applications and seed coating of biocontrol agents. Huber et al (1989) used fine-ground peat with a methylcellulose sticker for wheat seed treatment with bacteria for control of Gaeumannomyces graminis. Alder bark has been used as a carrier to apply T. flavus to potato seed pieces (Keinath et al 1990).…”

Section: Carriers and Adjuvant Used In Microbial Formulationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Formulation Technology of Biocontrol Agents: Present Status and Future Prospects

Keswani

Bisen

Singh

et al. 2016

Bioformulations: For Sustainable Agriculture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interaction between a peat carrier and bacterial seed treatments evaluated for biological control of the take-all diseases of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)

Cited by 16 publications

References 12 publications

The influence of biological and fungicidal seed treatments on chickpea (Cicer arietinum) damping off

The influence of biological and fungicidal seed treatments on chickpea (Cicer arietinum) damping off

Application of Pseudomonas fluorescens isolates to wheat as potential biological control agents against take‐all

Formulation Technology of Biocontrol Agents: Present Status and Future Prospects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About