4.5 Article

Biocontrol potential of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) against Sclerotiorum rolfsii diseases on sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.)

期刊

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pmpp.2022.101829

关键词

Sugar beet; Sclerotium rolfsii; Biological control; Antagonistic bacteria; Root rot

资金

  1. Phytopathology Unit of the Department of Plant Protection (ENA-Meknes, Morocco) under Phytoclinic

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bacterial isolates from the sugar beet rhizosphere in Morocco showed inhibitory activity against the pathogenic fungus and promoted plant growth.
A total of 49 bacterial isolates were collected from the sugar beet rhizosphere in two regions of Morocco (Kenitra and Meknes). These bacteria were tested for their inhibitory activity against Sclerotium rolfsii Sacc., the causative pathogen of damping-off and root rot of sugar beet. Ten isolates showed a high ability to inhibit the mycelial growth of the pathogenic fungus in dual culture bioassays. The molecular identification based on 16S ribosomal DNA gene revealed that these isolates belong to the Bacillus genus. In addition, these bacterial isolates have also been characterized in terms of the production of certain antifungal products as well as for their capacities as plant growth-promoting traits. Under greenhouse conditions, sugar beet seeds treated with the each bacterium showed significant reduction in damping-off disease. Plants from treated seeds showed significant increases in both the length of shoots and roots, and the plant fresh and dry weight. Iinterestingly, these selected bacterial isolates displayed high antagonistic activity against S. rolfsii, and significantly reduced the severity and incidence of root rot disease. Therefore, these results highlighted that the soil harbors antagonistic bacteria offering several plant growth-promoting (PGP) traits, which can be exploited as a powerful growth promoter and/or biological control agent in sugar beet plants.

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

4.5
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