<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>Enhancement of the resistance level in plants by rhizobacteria has been proven in several pathosystems. This study investigated the ability of four rhizobacteria strains (<italic>Pseudomonas putida</italic> BTP1 and <italic>Bacillus subtilis</italic> Bs2500, Bs2504 and Bs2508) to promote the growth in three barley genotypes and protect them against <italic>Cochliobolus sativus</italic>. Our results demonstrated that all tested rhizobacteria strains had a protective effect on barley genotypes Arabi Abiad, Banteng and WI2291. However, <italic>P. putida</italic> BTP1 and <italic>B. subtilis</italic> Bs2508 strains were the most effective as they reduced disease incidence by 53 and 38% (mean effect), respectively. On the other hand, there were significant differences among the rhizobacteria-treated genotypes on plant growth parameters, such as wet weight, dry weight, plant height and number of leaves. <italic>Pseudomonas putida</italic> BTP1 strain was the most effective as it significantly increased plant growth by 15-32%. In addition, the susceptible genotypes Arabi Abiad and WI2291 were the most responsive to rhizobacteria. This means that these genotypes have a high potential for increase of their resistance against the pathogen and enhancement of plant growth after the application of rhizobacteria. Consequently, barley seed treatment with the tested rhizobacteria could be considered as an effective biocontrol method against <italic>C. sativus</italic>.</p></abstract>

Enhancement of the resistance level in plants by rhizobacteria has been proven in several pathosystems. This study investigated the ability of four rhizobacteria strains (Pseudomonas putida BTP1 and Bacillus subtilis Bs2500, Bs2504 and Bs2508) to promote the growth in three barley genotypes and protect them against Cochliobolus sativus. Our results demonstrated that all tested rhizobacteria strains had a protective effect on barley genotypes Arabi Abiad, Banteng and WI2291. However, P. putida BTP1 and B. subtilis Bs2508 strains were the most effective as they reduced disease incidence by 53 and 38% (mean effect), respectively. On the other hand, there were significant differences among the rhizobacteria-treated genotypes on plant growth parameters, such as wet weight, dry weight, plant height and number of leaves. Pseudomonas putida BTP1 strain was the most effective as it significantly increased plant growth by 15-32%. In addition, the susceptible genotypes Arabi Abiad and WI2291 were the most responsive to rhizobacteria. This means that these genotypes have a high potential for increase of their resistance against the pathogen and enhancement of plant growth after the application of rhizobacteria. Consequently, barley seed treatment with the tested rhizobacteria could be considered as an effective biocontrol method against C. sativus.

Effect of rhizobacteria strains on the induction of resistance in barley genotypes against <italic>Cochliobolus sativus</italic>

Department of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology

Hellenic Plant Protection Journal

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Effect of rhizobacteria strains on the induction of resistance in barley genotypes against 

Enhancement of the resistance level in plants by rhizobacteria has been proven in several pathosystems. This study investigated the ability of four...

Effect of rhizobacteria strains on the induction of resistance in barley genotypes against Cochliobolus sativus

Online veröffentlicht: 18. Apr. 2020

Seitenbereich: 83 - 92

Eingereicht: 27. Nov. 2017

Akzeptiert: 04. März 2020

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/hppj-2020-0009

Schlüsselwörter
Biocontrol, ISR, PGPR, spot blotch

© 2020 A. Adam, published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Effect of rhizobacteria strains on the induction of resistance in barley genotypes against Cochliobolus sativus

Online veröffentlicht: 18. Apr. 2020

Seitenbereich: 83 - 92

Eingereicht: 27. Nov. 2017

Akzeptiert: 04. März 2020

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/hppj-2020-0009

SchlüsselwörterBiocontrol, ISR, PGPR, spot blotch

© 2020 A. Adam, published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Schlüsselwörter
Biocontrol, ISR, PGPR, spot blotch