4.4 Review

Weapons hidden underneath: bio-control agents and their potentials to activate plant induced systemic resistance in controlling crop Fusarium diseases

期刊

JOURNAL OF PLANT DISEASES AND PROTECTION
卷 126, 期 3, 页码 177-190

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s41348-019-00222-y

关键词

Fusarium spp; Beneficial microbes; Bio-control; Induced systemic resistance (ISR)

资金

  1. NSFC [31671702, 31471508]
  2. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2016YFD0101002]
  3. Technology Foundation for Selected Overseas Chinese Scholar, Ministry of Personnel of China [G0101500090]
  4. Innovation Team Program for Jiangsu Universities

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fusarium is a genus among the major pathogens affecting cereals production worldwide. At present, the control of Fusarium diseases in farm largely relies on the use of chemical fungicides, which are persistent in environments and harmful to human health. To reduce the risk of using chemical compounds, it becomes urgent to find an alternative strategy, such as bio-agents to control Fusarium diseases. Beneficial microorganisms underground have been well known for their activity to trigger induced systemic resistance (ISR) against pathogens, existing either in the soil or aboveground. Despite numerous studies suggesting various beneficial microorganisms, also recognized as bio-control agents (BCAs), including Bacillus spp., Trichodema spp., Pseudomomas spp. and others, as capable of suppressing diverse crop diseases, the function and mechanisms underlying ISR triggered by these beneficial microbes in controlling Fusarium diseases remain to be systemically understood. In this review, we summarize the roles of diverse beneficial microbes in limiting crop Fusarium diseases and also discuss the possible involvement of ISR with associated signaling pathways employed in Fusarium disease control. Finally, we consider the practical application of diverse BCAs with ISR activity for ecological and sustainable crop production.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据