Journals / Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi / 2022 / Cilt: 17 - Sayı: 2

Screening of Antagonist Bacteria with Antifungal Activity Against Postharvest Diseases on Lemon (Citrus limon (L.) Burm.f.)

Limon’da (Citrus limon (L.) Burm. f.) Hasat Sonrası Hastalıklara Karşı Antifungal Aktiviteye Sahip Antagonist Bakterilerin Taranması

Pages
139–147
Publication Date
2022-12-06
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

For this purpose, isolations were made from diseased lemon fruits, as a result of isolations three different fungal species were isolated, pathogenicity tests were carried out and according to the results of molecular diagnosis, these isolates were found to be Alternaria alternata (ET 119), Colletotrichum gleosporoides (ET 120) and Penicillium chrysogenum (ET 121).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study was carried out in vitro conditions to determine the bacteria biological control agents of against different fungal agents causing postharvest losses in lemon fruit.
📊
Key Findings & Data:For this purpose, isolations were made from diseased lemon fruits, as a result of isolations three different fungal species were isolated, pathogenicity tests were carried out and according to the results of molecular diagnosis, these isolates were found to be Alternaria alternata (ET 119), Colletotrichum gleosporoides (ET 120) and Penicillium chrysogenum (ET 121).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:More detailed studies should be carried out in the future under controlled conditions with the most effective antagonist bacterial isolates.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Antifungal aktivite · Bacillus subtilis · antagonist bakteri

Abstract

This study was carried out in vitro conditions to determine the bacteria biological control agents of against different fungal agents causing postharvest losses in lemon fruit. For this purpose, isolations were made from diseased lemon fruits, as a result of isolations three different fungal species were isolated, pathogenicity tests were carried out and according to the results of molecular diagnosis, these isolates were found to be Alternaria alternata (ET 119), Colletotrichum gleosporoides (ET 120) and Penicillium chrysogenum (ET 121). Percent inhibition rate of thirty-six antagonist bacterial isolates belonging to eight different genera against pathogenic fungus isolates was determined by dual culture test according to a randomized plot experiment design with 3 replications. According to the results obtained, the highest effect against the three pathogen isolates was detected in TV 53D (67.46%: Brevibacillus choshinensis), this isolate was followed by TV 16F (66.27%: Bacillus subtilis) and FDG 37 (62.30%: Pseudomonas fluorescens) isolates, respectively. More detailed studies should be carried out in the future under controlled conditions with the most effective antagonist bacterial isolates.

Özet

Bu çalışma, limon meyvesinde hasat sonrası kayıplara neden olan farklı fungal etmenlere karşı biyolojik mücadele etmeni olabilecek bakterileri belirlemek amacıyla in vitro koşullarda yürütülmüştür. Bu amaçla, hastalıklı limon meyvelerinden izolasyonlar yapılmış, izolasyonlar sonucu üç farklı cinse ait fungus türü izole edilmiş, patojenite testleri yapılmış ve moleküler tanı sonuçlarına göre bu izolatların Alternaria alternata (ET 119), Colletotrichum gleosporoides (ET 120) ve Penicillium chrysogenum (ET 121) olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Patojen fungus izolatlarına karşı sekiz farklı cinse ait otuz altı adet antagonist bakteri izolatının yüzde engelleme oranları ikili kültür testi ile tesadüf parselleri deneme desenine göre 3 tekerrürlü olarak belirlenmiştir. Elde edilen sonuçlara göre üç patojen izolata karşı en yüksek etki TV 53D (%67.46: Brevibacillus choshinensis) izolatında saptanırken, bu izolatı sırasıyla TV 16F (%66.27: Bacillus subtilis) ve FDG 37 (%62.30: Pseudomonas fluorescens) izolatları takip etmiştir. En etkili sonuç alınan antagonist bakteri izolatları ile gelecekte kontrollü şartlarda daha detaylı çalışmaların yürütülmesi gerekmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

TEKİNER, N., TOZLU, E., KOTAN, R. (2022). Screening of Antagonist Bacteria with Antifungal Activity Against Postharvest Diseases on Lemon (Citrus limon (L.) Burm.f.). Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 17 - Sayı: 2, 139–147. https://ajindex.com/articles/865783

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Ab Rahman, S. F. S., Singh, E., Pieterse, C. M., & Schenk, P. M. (2018). Emerging microbial biocontrol strategies for plant pathogens. Plant Science, 267, 102-111.
  2. Akgün, C. (2006). Turunçgiller sektör profili. Dış Ticaret Servisi Uygulama Şubesi, Türkiye. Erişim adresi http:///20684676Turuncgillersektorprofili.html.
  3. Akimitsu, K., Peever, T. L., & Timmer, L. W. (2003). Molecular, ecological and evolutionary approaches to understanding Alternaria diseases of citrus. Molecular Plant Pathology, 4(6), 435-446.
  4. Aktaş, S. (2015). Domates öz nekrozuna neden olan etmenlere karşı PGPR ve biyoajan bakterileri kullanılarak kontrollü koşullarda biyolojik mücadele imkânlarının araştırılması. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Atatürk Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü. Anonim, (2020).
  5. Tarım ve Orman Bakanlığı, Limon. Erişim adresi https://arastirma.tarimorman.gov.tr/tepge.
  6. Barkai-Golan, R. (2001). Postharvest diseases of fruits and vegetables: Development and control. Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands. Benli, M. (2003). Hasat sonrası fungal hastalıklarla kimyasal ve biyolojik mücadele. Orlab On Line Mikrobiyoloji Dergisi, 01(08), 1-25.
  7. Bonaterra, A., Badosa, E., Cabrefiga, J., Francés, J., & Montesinos, E. (2012). Prospects and limitations of microbial pesticides for control of bacterial and fungal pomefruit tree diseases. Trees, 26(1), 215-226.
  8. Brown, G. E., & Eckert, J. W. (2000). Postharvest Fungal Diseases, in: Timmer LW, Garnsey SM, Graham JH (eds.), Compendium of Citrus Diseases (2nd) (pp. 37-45).
  9. APS Press,
  10. Saint Paul, Minnesota. Chandel, S., Allan, E. J., & Woodward, S. (2010). Biological control of Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. lycopersici on tomato by Brevibacillus brevis. Journal of phytopathology, 158(7‐8), 470-478.
  11. Couillerot, O., Prigent-Combaret, C., Caballero-Mellado, J., & Moënne-Loccoz, Y. (2009). Pseudomonas fluorescens and closely-related fluorescent Pseudomonads as biocontrol agents of soil-borne phytopathogens. Letters in Applied Microbiology, 48(5), 505-512.
  12. Dadaşoğlu, F., & Şahin, F. (2010). Bakterilerin yüzük kelebeği Malacosoma neustria L. (Lepidoptera: Lasiocampidae)’nın biyolojik mücadelesinde kullanımı. Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 41(2), 97-104.
  13. Droby, S., Wisniewski, M., Teixidó, N., Spadaro, D., & Jijakli, M. H. (2016). The science, development, and commercialization of postharvest biocontrol products. Postharvest Biology and Technology, 122, 22-29.
  14. Dukare, A. S., Prasanna, R., Dubey, S. C., Chaudhary, V., Nain, L., Singh, R., & Saxena,