Bakterie w ochronie roślin przed agrofagami – znaczenie gospodarcze i biotechnologia

• Autorzy: Sobiczewski P.

Warianty tytułu

EN

Bacteria in plant protection against agrophages – economic importance and biotechnology

• Języki publikacji: PL

Abstrakty

EN

Bacteria are one of the most important components of plant environment. Most of bacteria colonizing rhizosphere, rhizoplane and phylloplane are the commensals. Among mutualistic bacteria the microsymbionts of leguminous plant and other bacteria promoting plant growth and development are distinguished. Their activity leads to an increase in bioavailability of nutrients, production of substances improving plant growth (e.g. phytohormones) and/or control of pathogens and other deleterious organisms. Strains representing various genera are utilized as active compounds in biopreparations against diseases, pests and weeds. Their commercial application is very perspective especially in greenhouses and storages. The development of technology production of biopreparations consists of several stages including selection of effective strain performed in laboratory and field conditions, mass cultivation and formulation of final product.

Słowa kluczowe

PL

agrofagi; bakterie; biologiczne metody ochrony roslin; biopreparaty; choroby zakazne; choroby odglebowe; ochrona roslin; szkodniki roslin; wrogowie naturalni; zastosowanie; zwalczanie chwastow

EN

agrophage; bacteria; biological plant protection; biopreparation; infectious disease; soil-borne disease; plant protection; plant pest; natural enemy; application; weed control

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Progress in Plant Protection
• Rocznik: 2010
• Tom: 50
• Numer: 3
• Opis fizyczny: s.1064-1073,bibliogr.

Twórcy

autor

Sobiczewski P.

• Instytut Sadownictwa i Kwiaciarstwa im. Szczepana Pieniążka, ul.Pomologiczna 18, 96-100 Skierniewice

Bibliografia

• Boucias D., Pendland J.C. 1998. Bacillus thuringiensis. p. 178–216, 217–257. In: „Principles of Insect Pathology” (D. Boucias, J.C. Pendland, eds.). Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA.
• Boyetchko S., Pedersen E., Punja Z., Reddy M. 1998. Formulations of biopesticides. p. 487–508. In: „Biopesticides: Use and Delivery” (Methods in Biotechnology, 5) (F.R. Hall, J.W. Barry, eds.). Humana Press, Totowa N.J.
• Bryk H., Dyki B., Sobiczewski P. 2004. Inhibitory effect of Pseudomonas spp. on the development of Botrytis cinerea and Penicillium expansum. Plant Protection Sci. 40 (4): 128–134.
• Catska V. 1993. Fruit tree replant problem and microbial antagonism in soil. Acta Hort. 324: 23–33.
• Dubois C., Keel C., Hass D. 2007. Dialogues of root-colonizing biocontrol pseudomonads. Eur. J. Plant Pathol. 119: 311–328.
• De Luna L., Stubbs T.L., Kennedy A.C., Kremer R.J. 2005. Deleterious bacteria in the rhizosphere. p. 233–261. In: „Roots and Soil Management: Interactions between Roots and the Soil” (R.W. Zobel, S.F. Wright, eds.). Agronomy Monograph No. 48. ASA. Madison, WI.
• Garczynski S.F., Siegel J.P. 2007. Bacteria. p. 175–197. W: „Field Manual of Technigues in Invertebrate Pathology” (L.A. Lacey, H.K. Kaya, eds.). Springer Dortrecht, The Netherlands.
• Janisiewicz W.J., Korsten L. 2002. Biological control of postharvest disease of fruits. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 40: 411–441.
• Kremer R.J. 2006. Applications of soil and rhizosphere microorganisms in sustaiable weed management. p. 533–547. In: „Hanbook of Sustainable Weed Management” (H.P. Singh, D.R. Batish, R.K. Kohli, eds.). The Haworth Press, Binghamton, NY.
• Lonc E., Andrzejak S. 2005. Bioróżnorodność toksyn Bacillus thuringiensis i ich zastosowanie. Postępy Mikrobiologii 44 (3): 253–263.
• Mazzola M. 2004. Assessment and management of soil microbial community structure for disease suppression. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 42: 35–59.
• Montesinos E. 2003. Development, registration and commercialization of microbial pesticides for plant protection. International Microbiology 6: 245–252.
• Nester E., Thomashow L., Metz M., Gordon M. 2002. 100 Years of Bacillus thuringiensis, a Paradigm for Producing Transgenic Organisms: A critical assessment. wwwasmusa.org.
• Russell P.E. 2006. The development of commercial disease control. Plant Pathol. 55 (5): 585–594.
• Saniewska A., Sobiczewski P., Orlikowski L.B. 1993. Antagonism of Bacillus sp. S13 against Stagonospora curtissi and other fungi pathogens of ornamental plants. Phytopath. Pol. 6 (17): 31–38.
• Sobiczewski P., Berczyński S., Ciechanowska M., Karczewski J., Łubisz K., Majdziak K., Szczepaniak J., Filip A., Sedlaczek L. 1995. Sposób wytwarzania biopreparatu do ochrony korzeni podkładek drzew owocowych i róży przed guzowatością korzeni. PAT. 167547.
• Sobiczewski P., Bryk H. 1999. Możliwości i ograniczenia biologicznej ochrony jabłek bakteriami Pantoea agglomerans i Pseudomonas sp. przed szarą pleśnią i mokrą zgnilizną. Prog. Plant Protection/Post. Ochr. Roślin 39 (1): 139–147.
• Sobiczewski P., Mikiciński A., Berczyński S. 2007. Biologiczna ochrona jabłoni i grusz przed zarazą ogniową Erwinia amylovora – szanse i ograniczenia. Prog. Plant Protection/Post. Ochr. Roślin 47 (2): 330–337.
• Sobiczewski P. 2009. Bakterie wykorzystywane w produkcji roślinnej. s. 172–213. W: „Biotechnologia Roślin”. Podręcznik akademicki pod redakcją S. Malepszego. PWN, Warszawa.
• Weissmann R., Uggla C., Gerhardson B. 2003. Field performance of weed-suppressing Serratia plymuthica strain applied with conventional spraying equipment. Biocontrol 48: 725–742.
• Weller D.M. 1988. Biological control of soilborne plant pathogens. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 26: 379–407.
• Weller D.M. 2007. Pseudomonas biocontrol agents of soilborne pathogens: looking back over 30 years. Phytopathology 97: 250–256.