Pichia membranefaciens Hansen and Candida guilliermondii (Cast) Langeronet Guerra are two antagonists of R. stolonifer on harvested nectarine and peach fruits. In this study, β-1,3-glucanase and chitinase activities of the antagonists were
induced in vitro and in vivo. The highest β-1, 3-glucanase activity was detected in Lilly-Barnett minimal salt medium supplemented with glucose in combination
with CWP of R. stolonifer as a carbon source. The β-1,3-glucanase activity of P. membranefaciens reached the maximum level, being 114.0 SU (specific activity unit), and that of C. guilliermondii reached 103.2 SU. The lowest β-1,3-glucanase activity was observed in the medium containing glucose as sole carbon source.
P. membranefaciens was able to produce significantly higher levels of chitinase (exochitinase and endochitinase) in vitro than C. guilliermondii grown in Czapeck minimal medium. An increase in β-1,3-glucanase and chitinase activity was also triggered by wounding, adding
of carbon sources and yeast cells. The results showed that both β-1,3-glucanase and chitinase from P. membranefaciens and C. guilliermondii exhibited some effects on controlling R. stolonifer, and might have a synergistic activity against R. stolonifer.
"The use of biocontrol yeasts to manage decay of fruits has been studied in order to reduce or replace the use of synthetic fungicides (Droby et al., 2009; Wilson and Wisniewski, 1989; Liu et al., 2013). Mechanisms that have been reported to play a significant role in the biocontrol activity of non-Saccharomyces yeasts against fungi include: competition for nutrients and space (Bencheqroun et al., 2007; Droby et al., 1989; Liu et al., 2013), production of laminarinases and chitinases (Fan et al., 2002; Grevesse et al., 2003; Masih and Paul, 2002), induction of host resistance (Droby et al., 2002; El-Ghauth et al., 2003), reduction in spore germination and decreased germ tube length (Zheng et al., 2005), and inhibition of fungal mycelial growth by diffusible and volatile metabolites (Huang et al., 2011; Lutz et al., 2013). However, there are few reports about antifungal mechanisms of non-Saccharomycesagainst fungi isolated from viticultural environments (Castoria et al., 2001; Rabosto et al., 2006) and there are no reports at all regarding the mechanisms of action of Saccharomyces biofungicides against fungi isolated from grapes. "
"Hashem et al. (2008) screened 22 yeast strains for their efficacy in suppression of M. incognita on grapevines and found that the highest percentage of nematode mortality was achieved by application of Pichia guilliermondii , Pachytrichospora transvaalensis, Candida albicans and Geotrichum terrestre. Utilization of antagonistic yeasts as an alternative appears to be a promising technology (Fan et al., 2002). However there is a little information about using of cyanobacteria to inhibit the nematode population (Kumar et al.,1993; Dhanam et al., 1994; Khan et al., 2005, 2007), Flores and Wolk (1986) mentioned that some filamentous cyanobacteria secrete antibiotics that kill other strains of cyanobacteria. "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The nematicidal effect of Pseudomonas fluorescens, Paecilomyces lilacinus, Pichia guilliermondii and Calothrix parietina singly or in combination was tested against root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne incognita. Treatments with P. fluorescens and P. lilacinus caused mortality of M. incognita as 45% and 30% of juveniles after 48 h of exposures, respectively compared to water control in vitro. Under greenhouse conditions, all treatments reduced the disease severity and enhanced plant growth compared to untreated control. Application of P. fluorescens, P. lilacinus and P. guilliermondii Moh 10 was more effective compared to C parietina. There was a negative interaction between C. parietina and either P. lilacinus or P. guilliermondii. Fresh and dry weight of shoots and roots of plants were significantly reduced as a result of infection with M. incognita, however application of biocontrol agents singly or in mix recovered this reduction. Moreover, they enhanced the growth parameters compared with the control. Our results proved that application of different biocontrol agents (P fluorescens, P. lilacinus and P guilliermondii) not only has a lethal effect on nematode, but also enhances the plant growth, supplying many nutritional elements and induction the systemic resistance in plants. Presence of C. parietina as a soil inhabitant cyanobacterium could antagonize biocontrol agents leading to the reduction of their practical efficiency in soil. (c) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
"Compared to the controls, the yeast treatment also significantly enhanced the activities of chitinase and b-1,3-glucanase and the accumulation of capsidiol phytoalexin in chili tissue (Nantawanit et al. 2010). Induction of disease resistance was also reported in avocardo, citrus, peach, and pineapple fruits (Prusky et al. 1994; Rodov et al. 1994; Arras 1996; Fan et al. 2002). Microbial antagonist-induced disease resistance in fruits was also manifested by the production phenylalanine ammonia-lyase activity as in grapefruit (Droby et al. 2001, 2003) and chili (Nantawanit et al. 2010) and the accumulation of phytoalexine such as scoparone and scopoletin in orange fruits (Arras et al. 1998). "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Postharvest diseases cause considerable losses to harvested fruits, vegetables, roots, and tubers during transportation from farmers’ field to market and in storage. Synthetic fungicides are the primary means to control postharvest diseases. However, microbial control has emerged as one of the most promising alternatives to chemical fungicides. Several microbial agents have been widely investigated for use on different postharvest pathogens. The efficacy of the microbial antagonist(s) can be enhanced if they are used with low doses of fungicides, salt additives, and plant products. At the international level, different microbial antagonists such as Candida sake, Candida oleophila, Cryptococcus laurentii, and Debaryomyces hansenii are being used. Biocontrol products such as Aspire, BioSave, and Shemer have also been developed and registered. Although the results of this technology are encouraging, the formulation and application methods are key issues for the efficacy and successful outcome of the commercial product.
Bioaugmentation, Biostimulation and Biocontrol, Edited by Ajay Singh, Nagina Parmar, Ramesh C. Kuhad, 01/2011: chapter 13: pages 311-355; Springer Berlin Heidelberg., ISBN: 1613-3382
Note: This list is based on the publications in our database and might not be exhaustive.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.