2013
DOI: 10.1590/s1982-56762013000500004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Antifungal compounds as a mechanism to control Hemileia vastatrix by antagonistic bacteria

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
20
1
5

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
2
20
1
5
Order By: Relevance
“…Specific strains of the bacteria Pseudomonas putida , Bacillus megaterium and B. thuringiensis , together with two Fusarium sp. isolates, provide promising levels of antagonism (Haddad et al ., ; Silva et al ., ).…”
Section: Disease Controlmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Specific strains of the bacteria Pseudomonas putida , Bacillus megaterium and B. thuringiensis , together with two Fusarium sp. isolates, provide promising levels of antagonism (Haddad et al ., ; Silva et al ., ).…”
Section: Disease Controlmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several in planta experiments on C. arabica grown under controlled conditions (growth chamber and greenhouse) confirmed the capacity of several bacterial antagonists to decrease the spore germination, the disease severity, and the sporulation of H. vastatrix (Shiomi et al, 2006;Bettiol et al, 2007;Silva et al, 2008Silva et al, , 2012Haddad et al, 2013Haddad et al, , 2014Culliao and Barcelo, 2015). Some authors underlined the fact that the treatment was more efficient when applied before the pathogen inoculation (Shiomi et al, 2006;Silva et al, 2012;Haddad et al, 2014), and other studies also demonstrated that the simultaneous applications of some bacterial isolates were as efficient as copper hydroxide in reducing CLR severity (Haddad et al, 2013).…”
Section: Potential Uses As Biocontrol Agentsmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…Another approach that was extensively employed to highlight the biocontrol capacity of bacterial and fungal isolates involved the confrontation of the pathogen either directly with the antagonist (dual culture method) or with the compounds secreted in the culture medium (agar diffusion method). This strategy was successfully employed to demonstrate the ability of some biocontrol agents to inhibit the development of some of the major coffee diseases such as the CLR caused by the fungal pathogen H. vastatrix (Shiomi et al, 2006;Bettiol et al, 2007;Silva et al, 2008Silva et al, , 2012Daivasikamani and Rajanaika, 2009;Haddad et al, 2013) or the coffee wilt disease (CWD) also known as tracheomycosis caused by the fungal pathogen Gibberella xylarioides (Muleta et al, 2007;Mulaw et al, 2010Mulaw et al, , 2013Tiru et al, 2013). This methodology was also used to reveal the microorganisms biocontrol potential toward numerous other phytopathogens including Alternaria alternata, A. solani, Ambrosiella macrospora, Botrytis cinereal, Colletotrichum gloeosporioides, C. coffeicola, Fusarium oxysporum, F. solani, F. verticillioides, Glomerella sp., Macrophomina phaseolina, Myrothecium roridum, Pestalotia longisetula, Phoma sp., Phytophthora capsici, P. meadii, Pythium aphanidermatum, Rhizoctonia solani, and Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Nair et al, 2002;Mulaw et al, 2013;Bongiorno et al, 2016;Kejela et al, 2016;Monteiro et al, 2017;Ranjini and Raja, 2019;Hoang et al, 2020;Duong et al, 2021) but also some pests such as the coffee berry borer Hypothenemus hampei (Vega et al, 2008), the root knot nematode Meloidogyne incognita (Mekete et al, 2009;Hoang et al, 2020), the burrowing nematode Radopholus duriophilus, and the root lesion nematode Pratylenchus coffeae (Duong et al, 2021), as well as some toxigenic fungi including Aspergillus carbonarius, A. flavus, A. niger, A. ochraceus, and A. westerdijkiae (Masoud and Kaltoft, 2006;Ramos et al, 2010;Djossou et al, 2011;…”
Section: Potential Uses As Biocontrol Agentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…• biological control based on Hemileia vastatrix natural enemies, e.g. mycoparasites such as Lecanicillium lecanii [12,40], or antagonistic bacteria such as Pseudomonas putida P286 and Bacillus thuringiensis B157 [16,17]; it can also rely on natural allies of the crop such as benefic endophytes [33,34].…”
Section: Control Of Clrmentioning
confidence: 99%