4.5 Article

Efficacy of Trichoderma longibrachiatum in the control of Heterodera avenae

期刊

BIOCONTROL
卷 59, 期 3, 页码 319-331

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10526-014-9566-y

关键词

Trichoderma longibrachiatum; Heterodera avenae; Biological control; Phenylalanine ammonia lyase; Polyphenol oxidase; Peroxidase

资金

  1. Plant Protection Department of Gansu Agricultural University
  2. Key Laboratory of Grassland Ecosystems, the Ministry of Education of China
  3. Sino-U.S. Centers for Grazingland Ecosystems Sustainability
  4. Gansu Hall of Province Farming Herd Biology Technology
  5. Project of Education Department of Gansu Province
  6. Grassland ecological System of Ministry of Education Ministry Key Laboratory Project [CY-GG-2006-013]
  7. Gansu Hall of Province Farming Herd Biology Technology [GNSW-2009-04]
  8. Project of Education Department of Gansu Province [042-03]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Trichoderma longibrachiatum can be used for the control of Heterodera avenae in crops, but the effectiveness and possible mechanisms are unknown. Here we determined the efficacy and the mechanism responsible for the nematode control in spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Wheat seedlings inoculated with T. longibrachiatum at the concentrations from 1.5 x 10(4) to 1.5 x 10(8) spores ml(-1) significantly increased plant height, root length, and plant biomass; decreased H. avenae infection in both rhizospheric soil and roots; and enhanced chlorophyll content, root activity, and the specific activities of resistance-related enzymes (peroxidase, polyphenol oxidase and phenylalanine ammonia lyase), compared to the control. Those reactions occurred soon after T. longibrachiatum inoculation and the effect reached the maximum 7-9 days after inoculation. Promoting competitive plant growth and inducing enzyme-trigged resistance serve as the main mechanism responsible for T. longibrachiatum against H. avenae. T. longibrachiatum can be considered an effective biocontrol agent against H. avenae in wheat.

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

4.5
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