ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Effect of Trichoderma isolates, delivery systems and host genotype on biological control of cotton seedlings disease
1
Agricultural Research Center, Plant Pathology Research Institute
Cotton Diseases Section, Giza, Egypt
Corresponding author
Asran-Amal Abdel-Mongy
Agricultural Research Center, Plant Pathology Research Institute Cotton Diseases Section, Giza, Egypt
Agricultural Research Center, Plant Pathology Research Institute Cotton Diseases Section, Giza, Egypt
Journal of Plant Protection Research 2007;47(3):339-356
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Six isolates of Trichoderma spp. (belonging to species; Trichoderma harzianum and T. longibrachiatum) were applied as seed or soil treatments to suppress damping-off of seedlings of ten cotton cultivars under greenhouse conditions. In most cases, cultivar x isolate interaction was a highly significant (p < 0.01) source of variation in the tested seedling growth parameters: incidence of disease, seedling height, and seedling dry weight. This interaction implies that a single isolate of Trichoderma can be highly effective in controlling the disease on a cotton cultivar but may have minimal efficiency in controlling the disease on another cultivar. It was also found that, in most cases, cultivar x isolate x application method was a highly significant source of variation (p < 0.01) in the tested growth parameters. Cotton cultivars showed differences in the disease reaction to the biocontrol agents. In the experiments evaluating the Trichoderma antagonists and their effect on seedling disease, a highly significant (p < 0.01) experimental treatment interaction was found. This interaction suggests that the outcome of cultivar x isolate interaction is markedly affected by the application method. Thus, the
application method should be chosen to maximize the outcome of this interaction. The degree of the control of seedling disease in cotton differed according to the isolates of antagonists, the application method and cultivars.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors have declared that no conflict of interests exist.
REFERENCES (31)
1.
Asran-Amal A., Abd-Elsalam K.A., Omar M.R., Aly A.A. 2005. Antagonistic potential of Trichoderma spp. against Rhizoctonia solani and use of M13 Minisatellite-primed PCR to evaluate of the antagonist genetic variation. J. Plant Dis. Prot. 112: 550–561.
2.
Batta Y.A. 2004. Postharvest biological control of apple gray mold by Trichoderma harzianum Rifai formulated in an invert emulsion. Crop Prot. 23: 19–26.
3.
Bell A.A. 1999. Diseases of cotton. p. 553–560. In “Cotton: Origin, History, Technology, and Production (C.W. Smith, J.T. Cothren, eds.). Wiley, New York.
4.
Bell D.K., Wells H.D., Markham C.R. 1982. In vitro antagonism of Trichoderma species against six fungal plant pathogens. Phytopathology 72: 379–382.
5.
Budge S.P., Whipps J.M. 1991. Glasshouse trials of Coniothyrium minitans and Trichoderma species for the biological control of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum in celery and lettuce. Pl. Pathol. 40: 59–66.
6.
Deacon J.W. 1991. Significance of ecology in the development of biocontrol agents against soil-borne pathogens. Biocontrol Sci. Technol. 1: 5–20.
7.
Elad Y. 2000. Biological control of foliar pathogens by means of Trichoderma harzianum and potential modes of action. Crop Prot. 19: 709–714.
8.
Harman G.E., Backman, P.A., Turner J.T., Fillatti T., Mccall C., Comai I., Kiser J., Mcbride J., Stalker D., Foudin A.S., Shantharam S. 1989. Symposium: biocontrol and biotechnological methods for controlling cotton pests. p. 15–20. In: “Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Production Research Conferences” (J.M. Brown, D.A. Richter, eds.). Memphis, Tennessee, USA.
9.
Harman G.E. Howell C.R., Viterbo A., Chet I., Lorito M. 2004. Trichoderma species-opportunistic, avirulent plant symbionts. Nature Rev. 2: 43–56.
10.
Hillocks R.J. 1992. Seedling diseases. p. 1–17. In: “Cotton Diseases” (R.J. Hillocks, ed.). CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK.
11.
Hoitink H.A.J., Madden L.V., Dorrance A.E. 2006. Systemic resistance induced by Trichoderma spp.: Interactions between the host, the pathogen, the biocontrol agent, and soil organic matter quality. Phytopathology 96: 186–189.
12.
Howell C.R. 1982. Effect of Gliocladium virens on Pythium ultimum, Rhizoctonia solani and damping-off of cotton seedlings. Phytopathology 72: 496–498.
13.
Howell C.R., DeVay J.E., Garber R.H., Batson W.E. 1997. Field control of cotton seedling diseases with Trichoderma virens in combination with fungicide seed treatments. J. Cotton Sci. 1: 15–20.
14.
Howell C.R. 2002. Cotton seedling preemergence damping-off incited by Rhizopus oryzae and Pythium spp. and its biological control with Trichoderma spp. Phytopathology 92: 177–180.
15.
Howell C.R., Puckhaber L.S. 2005. Study of the characteristics of “P” and “Q” strains of Trichoderma virens to account for differences in biological control efficacy against cotton seedling diseases. Biol. Cont. 33: 217–222.
16.
Kamalakannan A., Mohan L., Harish S., Radjacommare R., Amutha G., Chiara K., Karuppiah R., Mareeswari P., Rajinimala N., Angayarkanni T. 2004. Biocontrol agents induce disease resistance in Phyllanthus niruri Linn against damping-off disease caused by Rhizoctonia solani. Phytopathol. Mediterr. 43: 187–194.
17.
Kredics L., Antal Z., Manczinger L., Szekeres A., Kevei F., Nagy E. 2003. Influence of environmental parameters on Trichoderma strains with biocontrol potential. Food Technol. Biotechnol. 41: 37–42.
18.
Kubicek C.P., Harman, G.E. 1998. Trichoderma and Gliocladium, Basic Biology, Taxonomy and Genetics Vol. 1. Taylor and Francis, London, 278 pp.
19.
Larkin R.P., Roberts D.P., Gracia-Garza J.A. 1998. Biological control of fungal diseases p. 141–191. In: “Fungicidal Activity-Chemical and Biological Approaches to Plant Protection” (D. Hutson, J. Miyamoto, eds.). Wiley, New York, NY.
20.
Larkin R.P., Fravel D.R. 2002. Effects of varying environmental conditions on biological control of Fusarium wilt of tomato by nonpathogenic Fusarium spp. Phytopathology 92: 1160–1166.
21.
Mao W., Lewis J.A., Hebbar P.K., Lumsden R.D. 1997. Seed treatment with a fungal or a bacterial antagonist for reducing corn damping-off caused by species of Pythium and Fusarium. Plant Dis. 81: 450–454.
22.
McBeath J.H., Gay P.A., Yokogi T. 2001. Biological control of pink rot by Trichoderma atroviride. Phytopathology 91: S5 (Abstract).
23.
McQuilken M.P., Budge S.P., Whipps J.M. 1997. Effects of culture media and environmental factors on conidial germination, pycnidial production and hyphal extension of Coniothyrium minitans. Mycol. Res. 101: 11–17.
24.
Moubasher A.H., Mazen M.B., Abdel-Hafez A.I. 1984. Studies on the genus Fusarium in Egypt. Mycopathologia 85: 161–165.
25.
Omar M.R. 1999. Studies on susceptibility of cotton to Macrophomina phaseolina. M. Sc. Thesis, Al-Azhar Univ. Cairo, 139 pp.
26.
Papavizas G.C., Dunn M.T., Lewis J.A., Beaggle-Ristaino J. 1984. Liquid fermentation technology for experimental production of biocontrol fungi. Phytopathology 74: 1171–1175.
27.
Ryan A.D., Kinkel L.L., Janet L.S. 2004. Effect of pathogen isolate, potato cultivar, and antagonist strain on potato scab severity and biological control. Biocontrol Sci. Technol. 14: 301–311.
28.
Schisler D.A., Slininger P.J., Hanson L.E., Loria R. 2000. Potato cultivar, pathogen isolate, and antagonist cultivation medium, influence the efficacy and ranking of bacterial antagonists of Fusarium dry rot. Biocontrol Sci. Technol. 10: 267–279.
29.
Sreenivasaprasad S., Manibhushanrao K. 1990. Biocontrol potential of fungal antagonists Gliocladium virens and Trichoderma longibrachiatum. J. Plant Dis. Prot. 97: 570–579.
30.
Wells H.D., Bell D.K.1983. Antagonism in vitro between isolates of Trichoderma harzianum and Rhizoctonia solani AG4. Phytopathology 73, p. 507.
31.
Youssef Y.A., Mankarios A.T. 1974. Studies on the rhizosphere mycoflora of broad bean and cotton, IV. The influence of the rhizosphere fungi on plant growth. Mycopath. Mycol. Appl. 54: 173–180.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| eISSN: | 1899-007X |
| ISSN: | 1427-4345 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
