Skip to main content

Effect of fusaric acid and phytoanticipins on growth of rhizobacteria and Fusarium oxysporum

Buy Article:

$50.00 plus tax (Refund Policy)


Suppression of soilborne diseases by biocontrol agents involves complex interactions among biocontrol agents and the pathogen and between these microorganisms and the plant. In general, these interactions are not well characterized. In this work, we studied (i) the diversity among strains of fluorescent Pseudomonas spp., Bacillus spp., and Paenibacillus sp. for their sensitivity to fusaric acid (FAc) and phytoanticipins from different host plants, (ii) the diversity of pathogenic and nonpathogenic Fusarium oxysporum isolates for their sensitivity to phytoanticipins, and (iii) the influence of FAc on the production of pyoverdine by fluorescent Pseudomonas spp. tolerant to this compound. There was a great diversity in the response of the bacterial strains to FAc; however, as a group, Bacillus spp. and Paenibacillus macerans were much more sensitive to FAc than Pseudomonas spp. FAc also affected production of pyoverdine by FAc-tolerant Pseudomonas spp. strains. Phytoanticipins differed in their effects on microbial growth, and sensitivity to a phytoanticipin varied among bacterial and fungal strains. Biochanin A did not affect growth of bacteria, but coumarin inhibited growth of Pseudomonas spp. strains and had no effect on Bacillus circulans and P. macerans. Conversely, tomatine inhibited growth of B. circulans and P. macerans. Biochanin A and tomatine inhibited growth of three pathogenic isolates of F. oxysporum but increased growth of three nonpathogenic F. oxysporum isolates. Coumarin inhibited growth of all pathogenic and nonpathogenic F. oxysporum isolates. These results are indicative of the complex interactions that can occur among plants, pathogens, and biological control agents in the rhizosphere and on the root surface. Also, these results may help to explain the low efficacy of some combinations of biocontrol agents, as well as the inconsistency in achieving disease suppression under field conditions.Key words: biocontrol, pyoverdines, fluorescent Pseudomonas spp., Bacillus spp., Paenibacillus spp., plant–microbe interactions.

L'élimination des infections transmises par le sol par l'utilisation d'agents de biocontrôle suppose des interactions complexes entre les agents de biocontrôle et le pathogène et entre ces microorganismes et la plante-hôte. De façon générale, ces interactions ne sont pas bien caractérisées. Notre étude a porté sur : (i) la diversité parmi des souches de Pseudomonas spp. fluorescentes, de Bacillus spp. et de Paenibacillus sp. provenant de différentes plantes-hôtes quant à leur sensibilité à l'acide fusarique (FAc) et les phytoanticipines, (ii) les différences de sensibilité aux phytoanticipines d'isolats de Fusarium oxysporum pathogènes ou non-pathogènes et (iii) l'influence de FAc sur la production de pyoverdine par les Pseudomonas spp. fluorescents tolérants à ce composé. On a noté une grande différence dans la réponse des souches bactériennes à la FAc mais, comme groupes, les Bacillus spp. et Paenibacillus macerans étaient beaucoup plus sensibles à la FAc que les Pseudomonas spp. La FAc affectait aussi la production de pyoverdine chez les souches de Pseudomonas spp. tolérantes à la FAc. Les phytoanticipines avaient des effets différents sur la croissance microbienne et la sensibilité à ces phytoanticipines variait entre les souches bactériennes et fongiques. La biochanine A n'affectait pas la croissance des bactéries mais la coumarine inhibait la croissance des souches de Pseudomonas spp. et par contre n'avait pas d'effet sur Bacillus circulans et P. macerans. À l'inverse, la tomatine inhibait la croissance de B. circulans et de P. macerans. La biochanine A et la tomatine inhibaient la croissance de trois isolats pathogènes de F. oxysporum, mais favorisaient la croissance de trois isolats de F. oxysporum non-pathogènes. La coumarine inhibait la croissance de tous les isolats de F. oxysporum pathogènes ou non-pathogènes. Les résultats de cette étude confirment la complexité des interactions qui peuvent survenir entre les plantes, les pathogènes et les agents de contrôle biologique dans la rhizosphère et à la surface des racines. Ces résultats pourraient aussi aider à expliquer la faible efficacité de certaines combinaisons d'agents de biocontrôle et le manque de réussite dans l'&e

Keywords: Pseudomonas spp; biocontrol; biocontrôle; fluorescent Pseudomonas spp; pyoverdines

Document Type: Research Article

Publication date: 2002-11-01

More about this publication?
  • Published since 1954, this monthly journal contains new research in the field of microbiology including applied microbiology and biotechnology; microbial structure and function; fungi and other eucaryotic protists; infection and immunity; microbial ecology; physiology, metabolism and enzymology; and virology, genetics, and molecular biology. It also publishes review articles and notes on an occasional basis, contributed by recognized scientists worldwide.
  • Information for Authors
  • Submit a Paper
  • Subscribe to this Title
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Sample Issue
  • Reprints & Permissions
  • Ingenta Connect is not responsible for the content or availability of external websites
  • Access Key
  • Free content
  • Partial Free content
  • New content
  • Open access content
  • Partial Open access content
  • Subscribed content
  • Partial Subscribed content
  • Free trial content
Cookie Policy
Cookie Policy
Ingenta Connect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more