Abstract
Bacterial wilt is an important soil borne disease that threatens potato production. It is difficult to control due to the large number of hosts, high genetic and phenotypic variability of the pathogen, systemic localization of the pathogen, and lack of chemical control. Use of antagonistic microorganisms is critical due to their role in suppressing pathogenic infection. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of three rhizobacteria isolates in suppressing of bacterial wilt on potato (cv. Tigoni and clone 387164.4). Potatoes were planted under controlled condition in complete randomized block design with 11 treatments: Azoctobacter, Bacillus and Pseudomonas as single, double and triplicate combinations, three organic amendments of poultry, cattle and compost manure and untreated control. Except for single Azoctobacter treatment all the microbial treatments and poultry manure suppressed bacterial wilt infection, reducing area under the disease progress curve by 13-40 compared to control with 53. Triple inoculation of Pseudomonas+Bacillus+Azoctobacter and duo inoculants of Bacillus+ Azoctobacter and Pseudomonas+ Azoctobacter had significantly (P<0.05) higher tuber weight of 362-418g compared to control with 143g. Apparently healthy tubers from Pseudomonas+Bacillus+Azoctobacter in clone 387164.4 were free from latent infection. There was however, no effect of the microbial inoculants and organic amendments on small and medium tuber grades and on tuber phosphorus content. These microbial inoculants were effective as biocontrols under controlled condition but more studies need to be undertaken to ascertain their effectiveness.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Microbial treatments other than single Azoctobacter suppressed bacterial wilt and reduced disease progress area relative to control.
- Taxon
- potato
Solanum tuberosume1 - Treatment
- microbial treatmentse0
- Outcome
- area under the disease progress curvee0
- Direction
- reducinge0
- Value
- 13-40e0
- Qualifier
- Except for single Azoctobacter treatmente0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Except for single Azoctobacter treatment all the microbial treatments and poultry manure suppressed bacterial wilt infection, reducing area under the disease progress curve by 13-40 compared to control with 53”
e1“bacterial wilt on potato (cv. Tigoni and clone 387164.4)”
Claim · model-written summary
Poultry manure suppressed bacterial wilt and reduced disease progress area relative to control.
- Taxon
- potatoSolanum tuberosume1
- Treatment
- poultry manuree0
- Outcome
- area under the disease progress curvee0
- Direction
- reducinge0
- Value
- 13-40e0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“all the microbial treatments and poultry manure suppressed bacterial wilt infection, reducing area under the disease progress curve by 13-40 compared to control with 53”
e1“bacterial wilt on potato (cv. Tigoni and clone 387164.4)”
Claim · model-written summary
Triple Pseudomonas+Bacillus+Azoctobacter inoculation yielded significantly higher tuber weight than control.
- Taxon
- potatoSolanum tuberosume1
- Treatment
- Triple inoculation of Pseudomonas+Bacillus+Azoctobactere0
- Outcome
- tuber weighte0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 362-418ge0
- Qualifier
- 143ge0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Triple inoculation of Pseudomonas+Bacillus+Azoctobacter and duo inoculants of Bacillus+ Azoctobacter and Pseudomonas+ Azoctobacter had significantly (P<0.05) higher tuber weight of 362-418g compared to control with 143g”
e1“bacterial wilt on potato (cv. Tigoni and clone 387164.4)”
Claim · model-written summary
Duo Bacillus+Azoctobacter inoculation yielded significantly higher tuber weight than control.
- Taxon
- potatoSolanum tuberosume1
- Treatment
- Bacillus+ Azoctobactere0
- Outcome
- tuber weighte0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 362-418ge0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“duo inoculants of Bacillus+ Azoctobacter and Pseudomonas+ Azoctobacter had significantly (P<0.05) higher tuber weight of 362-418g compared to control with 143g”
e1“bacterial wilt on potato (cv. Tigoni and clone 387164.4)”
Claim · model-written summary
Duo Pseudomonas+Azoctobacter inoculation yielded significantly higher tuber weight than control.
- Taxon
- potatoSolanum tuberosume1
- Treatment
- Pseudomonas+ Azoctobactere0
- Outcome
- tuber weighte0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 362-418ge0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Pseudomonas+ Azoctobacter had significantly (P<0.05) higher tuber weight of 362-418g compared to control with 143g”
e1“bacterial wilt on potato (cv. Tigoni and clone 387164.4)”
Claim · model-written summary
Apparently healthy clone 387164.4 tubers under triple inoculation lacked latent infection.
- Taxon
- potatoSolanum tuberosume1
- Material
- clone 387164.4e0
- Treatment
- Pseudomonas+Bacillus+Azoctobactere0
- Outcome
- free from latent infectione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Apparently healthy tubers from Pseudomonas+Bacillus+Azoctobacter in clone 387164.4 were free from latent infection”
e1“bacterial wilt on potato”
Claim · model-written summary
Microbial inoculants and organic amendments had no reported effect on small and medium tuber grades or tuber phosphorus content.
- Taxon
- potatoSolanum tuberosume1
- Treatment
- microbial inoculants and organic amendmentse0
- Outcome
- small and medium tuber grades and on tuber phosphorus contente0
- Direction
- no effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“no effect of the microbial inoculants and organic amendments on small and medium tuber grades and on tuber phosphorus content”
e1“bacterial wilt on potato”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors call for further studies to establish inoculant effectiveness.
- Taxon
- potatoSolanum tuberosume1
- Outcome
- more studies need to be undertaken to ascertain their effectivenesse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“more studies need to be undertaken to ascertain their effectiveness”
e1“bacterial wilt on potato”
The same questions in other papers
Pseudomonas · yield · Solanum tuberosum (potato)Results agree
5 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →organic · nutrient: content · Solanum tuberosum (potato)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →inoculation · nutrient: content · Solanum tuberosum (potato)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 30 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
28 papers more in this group
See all 32 papers →fertilization · disease · Solanum tuberosum (potato)Positive and negative results
32 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
44 papers more in this group
See all 48 papers →inoculation · yield · Solanum tuberosum (potato)Positive and negative results
79 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
89 papers more in this group
See all 93 papers →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.