3.8 Article

Efficiency and delivery methods of Trichoderma harzianum on biological control against southern blight in sweet pepper

出版社

UNIV FEDERAL RURAL PERNAMBUCO
DOI: 10.5039/agraria.v17i2a1884

关键词

antagonism; biocontrol agent; Capsicum annuum; Sclerotium rolfsii

类别

资金

  1. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior CAPES [001]
  2. Fundacao de Apoio ao Desenvolvimento do Ensino, Ciencia e Tecnologia do Estado de Mato Grosso do Sul -FUNDECT [390 23/200.657/2012 -SIAFEM 26112]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluated the biocontrol effect of Trichoderma harzianum on southern blight and found that it inhibits the growth and germination of the pathogen. However, using Trichoderma harzianum alone did not completely prevent plant mortality, but it has potential for use in integrated management programs.
Soilborne pathogens are difficult to control with limited options, and it is important to seek effective alternatives for management. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of Trichoderma harzianum on the biological control of southern blight. The commercial product Trichodermil, containing the antagonist, was used for in vitro antagonism evaluation, followed by in vivo assays, with different forms of biocontrol application in Capsicum annuum seedlings inoculated with Sclerotium rolfsii. The biocontrol conditions used in the tests were: 1) without inoculation of the pathogen; 2) furrow spraying; 3) foliar spraying; 4) immersion of roots in spore suspension; 5) without biocontrol. The T harzianum isolate tested produces antifungal metabolites that reduce mycelial growth and germination of the pathogen. In the in vivo tests, an effect of the application in the sowing furrow on the root mass of the plants was observed. However, none of the treatments prevented plant mortality. The biocontrol agent T harzianum does not work as a stand-alone strategy for management of southern blight, but has potential for use in integrated management programs.

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

3.8
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