Paper · 2022 · BIO Web of Conferences

The use of a microbiological preparation based on Bacillus subtilis in organic viticulture

Elena Ostroukhova; Irina Peskova; Svetlana Levchenko; et al.

12
claims
27
verbatim quotes
3
citations
4
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

In organic farming, microbiological preparations are an alternative to chemical pesticides and mineral fertilizers. The article summarizes the experience of a three-year use of the biofungicide Extrasol in combination with colloidal sulfur in the vineyards of the Crimea. The use of the biofungicides makes it possible to control the development of powdery mildew of grape at the level of chemical plant protection products, including during the years of epiphytoties: on the cv. Bastardo magarachskiy grapes – 7.1–14.7 %, on the Italy grape cultivar – up to 5.2%. The degree of influence of the biofungicide Extrasol on the phenolic and oxidase complex of grapes depends on the background level of development of Uncinula necator and the biological effectiveness of the treatment. In comparison with chemical means of protection, the smallest effect of processing cv. Bastardo magarachskiy grapes with a biological product in relation to the accumulation of phenolic compounds was observed at a level of powdery mildew development of 30-50 %; the maximum increase in the technological reserve of phenolic compounds was 59 %, anthocyanins – 12 %; the activity of polyphenol oxidase increased 1.1–3.3 times. The use of the biofungicide Extrasol on Italian grape cultivar led to an increase in the weight of the bunch by an average of 11 %, yield – by 25.6 %, titratable acids – by 9.6 % relative to chemicals; improved the aroma, taste and texture of the berry.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 12

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Biofungicides controlled grape powdery mildew at a level comparable to chemical protection.

Taxon
grapee0
Treatment
biofungicidese0
Interactor
Uncinula necatorErysiphe necatore1
Outcome
powdery mildew of grapee0
Direction
controle0
Comparator
chemical plant protection productse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Erysiphe necator
Erysiphe necator · Interactor · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryBenjamin Vanegtern · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The use of the biofungicides makes it possible to control the development of powdery mildew of grape at the level of chemical plant protection products”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 272–423 · show in text ↑
e1

“Uncinula necator”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 714–730 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Powdery mildew in Bastardo magarachskiy grape was 7.1–14.7% under biofungicide protection.

Taxon
grapese0
Material
cv. Bastardo magarachskiye0
Interactor
Uncinula necatorErysiphe necatore1
Outcome
powdery mildew of grapee2
Value
7.1–14.7 %e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Erysiphe necator
Erysiphe necator · Interactor · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryBenjamin Vanegtern · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“on the cv. Bastardo magarachskiy grapes – 7.1–14.7 %”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 469–521 · show in text ↑
e1

“development of Uncinula necator”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 699–730 · show in text ↑
e2

“powdery mildew of grape”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 349–372 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Powdery mildew in Italy grape was up to 5.2% under biofungicide protection.

Taxon
grapee0
Material
Italy grape cultivare0
Interactor
Uncinula necatorErysiphe necatore1
Outcome
powdery mildew of grapee2
Value
up to 5.2%e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Erysiphe necator
Erysiphe necator · Interactor · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryBenjamin Vanegtern · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“on the Italy grape cultivar – up to 5.2%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 523–563 · show in text ↑
e1

“development of Uncinula necator”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 699–730 · show in text ↑
e2

“powdery mildew of grape”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 349–372 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The effect of Extrasol on grape phenolic and oxidase traits depended on mildew development and treatment effectiveness.

Taxon
grapese0
Treatment
biofungicide Extrasole0
Interactor
Uncinula necatorErysiphe necatore0
Outcome
phenolic and oxidase complexe0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Erysiphe necator
Erysiphe necator · Interactor · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryBenjamin Vanegtern · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The degree of influence of the biofungicide Extrasol on the phenolic and oxidase complex of grapes depends on the background level of development of Uncinula necator and the biological effectiveness of the treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 565–780 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The smallest effect on phenolic accumulation in Bastardo magarachskiy occurred at 30-50% mildew development relative to chemicals.

Taxon
grapese0
Material
cv. Bastardo magarachskiye0
Treatment
biological producte0
Interactor
Uncinula necatorErysiphe necatore1
Outcome
accumulation of phenolic compoundse0
Direction
smalleste0
Value
30-50 %e0
Comparator
chemical means of protectione0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Erysiphe necator
Erysiphe necator · Interactor · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryBenjamin Vanegtern · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In comparison with chemical means of protection, the smallest effect of processing cv. Bastardo magarachskiy grapes with a biological product in relation to the accumulation of phenolic compounds was observed at a level of powdery mildew development of 30-50 %”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 782–1042 · show in text ↑
e1

“Uncinula necator”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 714–730 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The maximum phenolic compound reserve increase was 59%.

Taxon
grapese1
Material
cv. Bastardo magarachskiye1
Treatment
biofungicide Extrasole2
Outcome
technological reserve of phenolic compoundse0
Direction
increasee0
Value
59 %e0
Comparator
chemical means of protectione3

Verbatim

e0

“the maximum increase in the technological reserve of phenolic compounds was 59 %”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1044–1124 · show in text ↑
e1

“processing cv. Bastardo magarachskiy grapes”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 854–897 · show in text ↑
e2

“biofungicide Extrasol on the phenolic”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 596–633 · show in text ↑
e3

“chemical means of protection”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 801–829 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Anthocyanins increased 12% under the biological product.

Taxon
grapese1
Material
cv. Bastardo magarachskiye1
Treatment
biofungicide Extrasole2
Outcome
anthocyaninse0
Value
12 %e0
Comparator
chemical means of protectione3

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“anthocyanins – 12 %”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1126–1145 · show in text ↑
e1

“processing cv. Bastardo magarachskiy grapes”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 854–897 · show in text ↑
e2

“biofungicide Extrasol on the phenolic”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 596–633 · show in text ↑
e3

“chemical means of protection”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 801–829 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Polyphenol oxidase activity increased 1.1–3.3 times.

Taxon
grapese1
Material
cv. Bastardo magarachskiye1
Treatment
biofungicide Extrasole2
Gene
polyphenol oxidasee0
Outcome
activity of polyphenol oxidasee0
Direction
increasede0
Value
1.1–3.3 timese0
Comparator
chemical means of protectione3

Verbatim

e0

“the activity of polyphenol oxidase increased 1.1–3.3 times”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1147–1205 · show in text ↑
e1

“processing cv. Bastardo magarachskiy grapes”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 854–897 · show in text ↑
e2

“biofungicide Extrasol on the phenolic”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 596–633 · show in text ↑
e3

“chemical means of protection”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 801–829 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Extrasol raised Italian grape bunch weight by an average of 11% relative to chemicals.

Taxon
grapee0
Material
Italian grape cultivare0
Treatment
biofungicide Extrasole0
Outcome
weight of the bunche0
Direction
increasee0
Value
11 %e0
Comparator
chemicalse0

Verbatim

e0

“The use of the biofungicide Extrasol on Italian grape cultivar led to an increase in the weight of the bunch by an average of 11 %, yield – by 25.6 %, titratable acids – by 9.6 % relative to chemicals”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1207–1407 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Extrasol raised Italian grape yield by 25.6% relative to chemicals.

Taxon
grapee0
Material
Italian grape cultivare0
Treatment
biofungicide Extrasole0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
increasee0
Value
25.6 %e0
Comparator
chemicalse0

Verbatim

e0

“The use of the biofungicide Extrasol on Italian grape cultivar led to an increase in the weight of the bunch by an average of 11 %, yield – by 25.6 %, titratable acids – by 9.6 % relative to chemicals”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1207–1407 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Extrasol raised Italian grape titratable acids by 9.6% relative to chemicals.

Taxon
grapee0
Material
Italian grape cultivare0
Treatment
biofungicide Extrasole0
Outcome
titratable acidse0
Direction
increasee0
Value
9.6 %e0
Comparator
chemicalse0

Verbatim

e0

“The use of the biofungicide Extrasol on Italian grape cultivar led to an increase in the weight of the bunch by an average of 11 %, yield – by 25.6 %, titratable acids – by 9.6 % relative to chemicals”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1207–1407 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Extrasol improved Italian grape berry aroma, taste and texture.

Taxon
grapee0
Material
Italian grape cultivare0
Treatment
biofungicide Extrasole0
Outcome
aroma, taste and texture of the berrye0
Direction
improvede0
Comparator
chemicalse0

Verbatim

e0

“The use of the biofungicide Extrasol on Italian grape cultivar led to an increase in the weight of the bunch by an average of 11 %, yield – by 25.6 %, titratable acids – by 9.6 % relative to chemicals; improved the aroma, taste and texture of the berry”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1207–1459 · show in text ↑

biocontrol · yield · VitisResults agree

4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 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.