Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-30T10:03:02.111Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Isolation, screening and identification of endophytic antagonistic bacteria to Potato ring rot bacteria

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2007

Tian Hong-Xian
Affiliation:
Institute of High Altitude Crops, Shanxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Datong 037008, China
Wang Rui-Xia
Affiliation:
Institute of High Altitude Crops, Shanxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Datong 037008, China
Li Yin-Fan*
Affiliation:
Institute of High Altitude Crops, Shanxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Datong 037008, China
Wang Xiong
Affiliation:
Institute of High Altitude Crops, Shanxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Datong 037008, China
Sun Fu-Zai
Affiliation:
Institute of Plant Protection, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100094, China
Yuan Jun
Affiliation:
Institute of Plant Protection, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100094, China
*
*Corresponding author: Email Liyinfan@126.com

Abstract

Two hundred and forty bacterial strains were isolated from three potato (Solanum tuberosum) cultivars from eight different sources. On the basis of antagonistic bacteria examination in vitro, greenhouse and field tests, 22.9% of isolated bacteria were endophytic and antagonistic. Three strains, namely A-10', T3 (Bacillus sp.) and H1-6 (Pseudomonas fluorescens), were chosen for their suppressive effect on bacterial ring rot (Clavibacter michiganensis subsp. sepedonicus) and their growth promotion. The strain A-10' was an endophytic bacterium with the effects of colonization, plant growth promotion and suppression of the pathogenic bacteria, showing good prospects for commercial use.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © China Agricultural University and Cambridge University Press 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agela, RD, La Cruz, E, Poplawsky, AR and Wiese, MV (1992) Biological suppression of potato ring rot by Pseudomonas. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 58: 19861991.Google Scholar
Bacteria Category Group, Microbe Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences (1978) Regular Appraisal Method for Common Bacteria. Beijing: Science Press.Google Scholar
Brooks, DS (1998) Isolation and evaluation of endophytic bacteria from live oaks for in vitro inhibition to Ceratocystis fragacearum and colonization of oak trees. Phytopathology 78: 626.Google Scholar
Chen, C (1995) Biological control of Fusarium wilt on cotton by use of endophytica bacteria. Biological Control 5: 8391.Google Scholar
Chen, TQ (1991) Potato Cutural Technique. Beijing: Jingdong Publishing House, pp. 117121.Google Scholar
Deboer, SH, Boer, DE and Copeman, RJ (1974) Endophytic bacterial flora in Solanum tuberosum and its significance in bacterial ring rot diagnosis. Plant Science 54: 115122.Google Scholar
Hollis, JP (1951) Bacteria in healthy potato tissue. Phytopathology 41: 350365.Google Scholar
Mukhopadhyay, K, Garrison, NK, Hinton, DM et al. , (1996) Identification and characterization of bacterial endophytes of rice. Mycopatholokgia 134: 151159.Google Scholar
Noel, RK (1984) Bergey's Manual of Systematic Bacteriology. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.Google Scholar
Pratella, GC, Pratella, M, Guizzardi, MM and Folchi, A (1993) Preliminary studies on the efficiency of endophytes in the biological control of postharvest pathogens Monilinia laxa and Rhizopus stolonifer in stone fruit. Postharvest Biology and Technology 3: 361368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ren, XZ (1994) Category and Appraisal for Pathogenic Bacteria of Plants. Beijing: China Agricultural Publishing House.Google Scholar
Tabacchioni, S (1993) Characteristics of two rhizosphere isolates of Pseudomonas cepacia and their plant growth promoting activity. Microbe Release 2: 161168.Google Scholar