Abstract
Pseudomonas fluorescens F113 and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia W81 protect sugar beet from Pythium ‐mediated damping‐off through production of the antifungal secondary metabolite 2,4‐diacetylphloroglucinol and extracellular proteolytic activity, respectively. In this study, the two biocontrol strains were combined in a consortium, with the objective of improving upon the level of protection achieved when using each strain singly. Growth and in vitro production of 2,4‐diacetylphloroglucinol by F113 and extracellular lytic enzymes by W81 were not affected when inoculated in combination. The abilities of W81 and F113 to colonize the rhizosphere of sugar beet were essentially similar when the two strains were applied singly or coinoculated onto seeds in a 1 : 1 ratio, both in natural soil microcosms and under field conditions. Concomitantly, single inoculation with W81 or F113 effectively prevented colonization of sugar beet seeds by Pythium spp. in soil microcosms, without the necessity for combining both strains. However, this parity was not reflected in seed emergence where the combination of W81 and F113 significantly enhanced final sugar beet stands (to the level achieved with chemical pesticides) under microcosm conditions at 28 days after sowing. In a field experiment, the only inoculation treatment capable of conferring effective protection of sugar beet was that in which W81 and F113 were coinoculated, and this treatment proved equivalent to the use of chemical fungicides. In conclusion, when compared with single inoculations of either biocontrol strain, the combined use of a phloroglucinol‐producing P. fluorescens and a proteolytic S. maltophilia improved protection of sugar beet against Pythium ‐mediated damping‐off.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 7
Claim · model-written summary
Combined inoculation did not alter F113 growth or production of 2,4-diacetylphloroglucinol.
- Treatment
- inoculated in combinatione0
- Interactor
- F113e0biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- Growth and in vitro production of 2,4‐diacetylphloroglucinol by F113e0
- Direction
- not affectede0
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“Growth and in vitro production of 2,4‐diacetylphloroglucinol by F113 and extracellular lytic enzymes by W81 were not affected when inoculated in combination”
Claim · model-written summary
Combined inoculation did not alter extracellular lytic enzyme production by W81.
- Treatment
- inoculated in combinatione0
- Interactor
- W81e0biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- extracellular lytic enzymes by W81e0
- Direction
- not affectede0
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“Growth and in vitro production of 2,4‐diacetylphloroglucinol by F113 and extracellular lytic enzymes by W81 were not affected when inoculated in combination”
Claim · model-written summary
W81 and F113 colonized the sugar beet rhizosphere similarly when applied alone or together.
- Taxon
- sugar beet
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0 - Treatment
- coinoculated onto seeds in a 1 : 1 ratioe0
- Interactor
- W81e0biocontrol_agent
- Second interactor
- F113e0biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- colonize the rhizospheree0
- Direction
- essentially similare0
- Comparator
- applied singlye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The abilities of W81 and F113 to colonize the rhizosphere of sugar beet were essentially similar when the two strains were applied singly or coinoculated onto seeds in a 1 : 1 ratio, both in natural soil microcosms and under field conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Single inoculation with W81 prevented Pythium colonization of sugar beet seeds.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Treatment
- single inoculation with W81e0
- Second interactor
- W81e0biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- colonization of sugar beet seeds by Pythium spp.e0
- Direction
- preventede0
.jpg?width=60){kind=small}
PythiumNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“single inoculation with W81 or F113 effectively prevented colonization of sugar beet seeds by Pythium spp. in soil microcosms”
Claim · model-written summary
Single inoculation with F113 prevented Pythium colonization of sugar beet seeds.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Treatment
- F113e0
- Second interactor
- F113e0biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- colonization of sugar beet seeds by Pythium spp.e0
- Direction
- preventede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“single inoculation with W81 or F113 effectively prevented colonization of sugar beet seeds by Pythium spp. in soil microcosms”
Claim · model-written summary
The combined strains enhanced final sugar beet stands in microcosms at 28 days.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Treatment
- combination of W81 and F113e0
- Outcome
- final sugar beet standse0
- Direction
- enhancede0
- Qualifier
- at 28 days after sowinge0
- Comparator
- chemical pesticidese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the combination of W81 and F113 significantly enhanced final sugar beet stands (to the level achieved with chemical pesticides) under microcosm conditions at 28 days after sowing”
Claim · model-written summary
Only combined W81 and F113 inoculation effectively protected sugar beet in the field, equivalently to fungicides.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Treatment
- W81 and F113 were coinoculatede0
- Outcome
- effective protection of sugar beete0
- Direction
- equivalente0
- Comparator
- chemical fungicidese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the only inoculation treatment capable of conferring effective protection of sugar beet was that in which W81 and F113 were coinoculated, and this treatment proved equivalent to the use of chemical fungicides”
The same questions in other papers
inoculation · physiology: enzyme activity · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
inoculation · yield · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 25 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
23 papers more in this group
See all 27 papers →inoculation · Pythium · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results agree
3 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.