Paper · 2023 · European Journal of Plant Pathology

Molecular characterization of Aureobasidium spp. strains isolated during the cold season. A preliminary efficacy evaluation as novel potential biocontrol agents against postharvest pathogens

R. Cignola; A. Boato; A. Sadallah; et al.

9
claims
11
verbatim quotes
11
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Abstract Several Aureobasidium spp. strains isolated from wild environments during winter 2022 were characterized by sequence analysis of the internal transcribed spacer (ITS), the translation elongation factor EF-1α gene (EF1), and part of the elongase gene (ELO). The variability in the EF1 and ELO loci are higher than in the ITS. All strains but one (UC14), were identified as A. pullulans . To assess the effectiveness of the characterized strains as biocontrol agents (BCAs) of diseases occurring during postharvest storage, a selection of the strains was evaluated by in vitro and in vivo assays. On average, the reduction of Monilinia spp. colony growth was more marked for non-volatile metabolites than for volatile (VOCs). Strain UC14 provided the strongest mycelial growth reduction of Monilinia fructicola by VOCs (66%). According to the in vivo results , all strains were effective in controlling brown rot during cold storage and remarkably in restricting the growth of Monilinia polystroma . In particular, VB23 was the most effective in controlling brown rot incidence, by 80%, 60%, 100%, and severity, by 79.5%, 72.7% and 100%, for Monilinia laxa, M. fructicola, and M. polystroma, respectively.

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 9

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

EF1 and ELO loci were more variable than ITS in the isolated strains.

Gene
EF1 and ELO locie0
Outcome
variabilitye0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
ITSe0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“The variability in the EF1 and ELO loci are higher than in the ITS”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 266–332 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

All but UC14 strains were identified as A. pullulans.

Taxon
A. pullulansAureobasidium pullulanse0
Material
UC14e0
Outcome
identified as A. pullulanse0

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

Aureobasidium pullulans
Aureobasidium pullulans · TaxonThis image was created by user Tom Volk (TomVolk) at Mushroom Observer , a source for mycological images. You can contact this user here . · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“All strains but one (UC14), were identified as A. pullulans”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 334–393 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Non-volatile metabolites reduced Monilinia colony growth more than volatile metabolites.

Taxon
Monilinia spp.Moniliniae0
Treatment
non-volatile metabolitese0
Outcome
Monilinia spp. colony growthe0
Direction
reductione0
Comparator
volatile (VOCs)e0

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

Monilinia
Monilinia · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryShuhrataxmedov · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the reduction of Monilinia spp. colony growth was more marked for non-volatile metabolites than for volatile (VOCs)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 616–731 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

UC14 volatile compounds reduced M. fructicola mycelial growth by 66%.

Taxon
Monilinia fructicolaMonilinia fructicolae0
Material
UC14e0
Treatment
VOCse0
Outcome
mycelial growthe0
Direction
reductione0
Value
66%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Monilinia fructicola
Monilinia fructicola · TaxonMary Ann Hansen · CC BY 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Strain UC14 provided the strongest mycelial growth reduction of Monilinia fructicola by VOCs (66%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 733–831 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

All tested strains controlled brown rot during cold storage.

Treatment
Aureobasidium spp. strainst0
Outcome
brown rote0
Direction
controllinge0
Setting
cold storagee0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“all strains were effective in controlling brown rot during cold storage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 868–939 · show in text ↑
t0

“Aureobasidium spp. strains”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 30–56 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The strains restricted M. polystroma growth in vivo.

Taxon
Monilinia polystromaMonilinia polystromae0
Treatment
Aureobasidium spp. strainst0
Outcome
growth of Monilinia polystromae0
Direction
restrictinge0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“remarkably in restricting the growth of Monilinia polystroma”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 944–1004 · show in text ↑
t0

“Aureobasidium spp. strains”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 30–56 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

VB23 reduced M. laxa brown rot incidence by 80% and severity by 79.5%.

Taxon
Monilinia laxaMonilinia laxae0
Material
VB23e0
Treatment
VB23e0
Outcome
brown rot incidencee0
Direction
controllinge0
Value
80%e0
Qualifier
79.5%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Monilinia laxa
Monilinia laxa · TaxonArthuc01 · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“VB23 was the most effective in controlling brown rot incidence, by 80%, 60%, 100%, and severity, by 79.5%, 72.7% and 100%, for Monilinia laxa, M. fructicola, and M. polystroma, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1022–1211 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

VB23 reduced M. fructicola brown rot incidence by 60% and severity by 72.7%.

Taxon
M. fructicolaMonilinia fructicolae0
Material
VB23e0
Treatment
VB23e0
Outcome
brown rot incidencee0
Direction
controllinge0
Value
60%e0
Qualifier
72.7%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Monilinia fructicola
Monilinia fructicola · TaxonMary Ann Hansen · CC BY 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“VB23 was the most effective in controlling brown rot incidence, by 80%, 60%, 100%, and severity, by 79.5%, 72.7% and 100%, for Monilinia laxa, M. fructicola, and M. polystroma, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1022–1211 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

VB23 reduced M. polystroma brown rot incidence and severity by 100% each.

Taxon
M. polystromaMonilinia polystromae0
Material
VB23e0
Treatment
VB23e0
Outcome
brown rot incidencee0
Direction
controllinge0
Value
100%e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“VB23 was the most effective in controlling brown rot incidence, by 80%, 60%, 100%, and severity, by 79.5%, 72.7% and 100%, for Monilinia laxa, M. fructicola, and M. polystroma, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1022–1211 · show in text ↑

volatile organic compound · disease · Monilinia fructicolaResults agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 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.