4.7 Article

Preventative Approach to Microbial Control of Capnodis tenebrionis by Soil Application of Metarhizium brunneum and Beauveria bassiana

期刊

INSECTS
卷 11, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/insects11050319

关键词

Mediterranean flat-headed root-borer; microbiological control; entomopathogenic fungi; fungal efficacy; soil application; fungal survival

资金

  1. Israeli Ministry of Agriculture [20-13-0027]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Management of the Mediterranean flat-headed root-borer, Capnodis tenebrionis, is critical due to the larvae's root localization. Neonate larvae can be exposed to natural enemies before penetrating the roots. Application of Metarhizium brunneum strain Mb7 and Beauveria bassiana strain GHA formulations on rice granules was investigated for their efficacy against C. tenebrionis larvae. Mb7 application, evaluated on apricot twigs, significantly and dose-dependently reduced colonization rates of neonates, with highest mortality at 10(8) conidia/g soil. Neonate susceptibility to Mb7 and GHA was evaluated on potted rootstocks (GF677 almond x peach, 2729 plum) planted in entomopathogenic fungi (EPF)-premixed soil (1.3-1.6 x 10(5) conidia/cm(3) soil) or in EPF-free soil surface-treated with 5 g Mb7 fungal granules (1.25 x 10(9) conidia). Larval colonization rates were reduced 7.4-fold in 2729 by both fungi; only Mb7 completely prevented colonization of GF677 by larvae. Larvae inside plant galleries exhibited mycosis with EPF-treated soils and both fungi proliferated on larval frass. Mb7 conidia germinated in the rhizosphere of GF677, and conidia of both fungi remained viable throughout the trial. Galleria baiting technique was used on EPF-treated soil to evaluate EPF infectivity over time; Mb7 and GHA persisted 180 and 90 days post inoculation, respectively. The formulation (fungus-covered rice grains), delivery method (mixing with soil) and persistence (3-6 months) of Mb7 and GHA are feasible for potential field application to control C. tenebrionis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据