| Literature DB >> 32182971 |
Raja Asad Ali Khan1, Saba Najeeb1, Zhenchuan Mao1, Jian Ling1, Yuhong Yang1, Yan Li1, Bingyan Xie1.
Abstract
Losses in crops caused by plant pathogenic bacteria and parasitic nematode are increasing because of a decrease in efficacy of traditional management measures. There is an urgent need to develop nonchemical and ecofriendly based management to control plant diseases. A potential approach of controlling plant disease in the crops is the use of biocontrol agents and their secondary metabolites (SMs). Luckily fungi and especially the genus Trichoderma comprise a great number of fungal strains that are the potential producer of bioactive secondary metabolites. In this study secondary metabolites from ten Trichoderma spp. were evaluated for their antibacterial and nematicidal potential against phytopathogenic bacteria Ralstonia solanacearum, Xanthomonas compestris and plant parasitic nematode Meloidogyne incognita. Five different growth media were evaluated for the production of SMs. It was shown that SMs of different Trichoderma spp. obtained on different growth media were different in the degree of their bioactivity. Comparison of five growth media showed that SMs produced on solid wheat and STP media gave higher antibacterial activity. SMs of T. pseudoharzianum (T113) obtained on solid wheat media were more effective against the studied bacteria followed by SMs from T. asperelloides (T136), T. pseudoharzianum (T129) and T. pseudoharzianum (T160). Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was further conducted to observe the effect of SMs on bacterial cell morphology. As evident from the SEM, SMs produced severe morphological changes, such as rupturing of the bacterial cell walls, disintegration of cell membrane and cell content leaking out. SMs from T. viridae obtained on liquid STP and solid wheat media showed the highest percent of M. incognita juveniles (J2s) mortality and inhibition in egg hatching of M. incognita. The results of our study suggest that T. pseudoharzianum (T113) and T. viridae could be selected as an effective candidate for SMs source against phytopathogenic bacteria and M. incognita respectively.Entities:
Keywords: Trichoderma spp.; phytopathogenic bacteria; root-knot nematode; secondary metabolites
Year: 2020 PMID: 32182971 PMCID: PMC7143365 DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms8030401
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microorganisms ISSN: 2076-2607
Growth inhibition (mm) of R. solanacearum affected by SMs (obtained on different growth media) of Trichoderma spp. evaluated through the well diffusion method.
| Growth Media | Control | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Solid | STP | MOF | MMK2 | SuM | Ampicillin | Methanol | |
| 21.8 ± 0.4a | 14.3 ± 0.4c | 12.2 ± 0.8d | 0.0s | 9.0 ± 0.9hij | 22.3 ± 0.5a | 0.0s | |
| 9.7 ± 0.5gh | 7.1 ± 0.3m | 8.4 ± 0.2ijk | 0.0s | 4.2 ± 0.1qr | 22.0 ± 0.5a | 0.0s | |
| 15.1 ± 0.2bc | 0.0s | 7.0 ± 0.4mn | 0.0s | 7.8 ± 0.1klm | 22.2 ± 0.3a | 0.0s | |
| 14.2 ± 0.5c | 0.0s | 10.5 ± 0.1fg | 0.0s | 9.0 ± 0.1hij | 22.4 ± 0.2a | 0.0s | |
| 15.3 ± 0.7b | 11.2 ± 0.3ef | 0.0s | 6.1 ± 0.1no | 6.0 ± 0.1o | 21.6 ± 0.2a | 0.0s | |
| 0.0s | 0.0s | 0.0s | 0.0s | 0.0s | 21.8 ± 0.3a | 0.0s | |
| 8.2 ± 0.1jkl | 5.2 ± 0.2op | 7.0 ± 0.0mn | 0.0s | 7.3 ± 0.5lm | 22.3 ± 0.2a | 0.0s | |
| 5.2 ± 0.2op | 4.5 ± 0.1pq | 6.1 ± 0.2no | 0.0s | 3.3 ± 0.1r | 22.5 ± 0.1a | 0.0s | |
| 0.0s | 0.0s | 0.0s | 0.0s | 0.0s | 21.7 ± 0.2a | 0.0s | |
|
| 9.2 ± 0.1hi | 12.1 ± 0.1de | 0.0s | 0.0s | 4.4 ± 0.1pq | 22.2 ± 0.1a | 0.0s |
Values are the mean of three replicates ± SD (Standard deviation). Those mean values having the same lettering in a row or column are statistically not significant (p ≤ 0.05) from each other (Fisher’s protected LSD test). LSD = 0.92 in Fisher’s protected LSD test.
Growth inhibition (mm) of X. compestris affected by SMs (obtained on different growth media) of Trichoderma spp. evaluated through the well diffusion method.
| Growth Media | Control | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Solid | STP | MOF | MMK2 | SuM | Ampicillin | Methanol | |
| 21.3 ± 0.1b | 0.0n | 16.8 ± 0.2c | 0.0n | 10.3 ± 0.5e | 21.9 ± 0.5ab | 0.0n | |
| 7.8 ± 0.3gh | 7.1 ± 0.1ij | 9.5 ± 0.1f | 0.0n | 4.5 ± 0.2m | 22.2 ± 0.1a | 0.0n | |
| 14.8 ± 0.3d | 0.0n | 7.1 ± 0.1ij | 0.0n | 6.2 ± 0.4k | 21.7 ± 0.4ab | 0.0n | |
| 15.2 ± 0.2d | 0.0n | 9.2 ± 0.1f | 0.0n | 6.4 ± 0.1k | 21.7 ± 0.2ab | 0.0n | |
| 15.5 ± 0.2d | 9.7 ± 0.1ef | 0.0n | 7.4 ± 0.2hi | 5.2 ± 0.2lm | 22.3 ± 0.1a | 0.0n | |
| 0.0n | 0.0n | 0.0n | 0.0n | 0.0n | 21.8 ± 0.4ab | 0.0n | |
| 9.5 ± 0.2f | 4.9 ± 0.1lm | 6.5 ± 0.2jk | 0.0n | 9.3 ± 0.1f | 22.0 ± 0.4a | 0.0n | |
| 5.2 ± 0.1lm | 4.8 ± 0.1m | 5.5 ± 0.1l | 0.0n | 4.9 ± 0.3lm | 22.2± 0.1a | 0.0n | |
| 0.0n | 0.0n | 0.0n | 0.0n | 0.0n | 21.8 ± 0.4ab | 0.0n | |
|
| 8.4 ± 0.2g | 9.5 ± 0.1f | 0.0n | 0.0n | 4.9 ± 0.3lm | 22.1 ± 0.2a | 0.0n |
Values are the mean of three replicates ± SD (Standard deviation). Those mean values having the same lettering in a row or column are statistically not significant (p ≤ 0.05) from each other (Fisher’s protected LSD test). LSD = 0.67 in Fisher’s protected LSD test.
Figure 1Zone of bacterial growth inhibition (mm) produced by secondary metabolites (SMs) of T. pseudoharzianum (T113) obtained on different growth media (1) Solid; (2) STP; (3) MOF; (4) MMK2; (5) SuM; (6) negative control, methanol; (7) positive control, ampicillin; (A) well diffusion method: (A1) R. solanacearum; (A2) X. compestris; (B) disc diffusion method: (B1) R. solanacearum; (B2) X. compestris.
Figure 2Growth inhibition (mm) of bacteria affected by SMs (obtained on different growth media) of Trichoderma spp. evaluated through the disc diffusion method. (A) Growth inhibition of R. solanacearum; (B) growth inhibition of X. compestris. Each value is a mean of three replicates. The bar represents the mean with standard deviation. Missing columns for some treatments indicated their 0.0 mm growth inhibition (or no activity). Treatments having similar lettering on the bar cha show no significant (p ≥ 0.05) difference according to Fisher’s protected LSD test.
Figure 3SEM micrograph of (a1) untreated normal R. solanacearum cells; (a2) treated R. solanacearum cells with SMs of T. pseudoharzianum (T113) obtained solid media; (b1) untreated normal X. compestris cells; (b2) treated X. compestris cells with T. pseudoharzianum (T113).
Figure 4Effect of SMs of Trichoderma spp. obtained on different growth media on egg hatching of M. incognita. Values are the mean of three replicates. The bar represents the mean with standard deviation. Missing columns for some treatments indicated their 0.0% egg hatch inhibition (or no activity). Treatments having similar lettering on the bar chart show no significant (p ≥ 0.05) difference according to Fisher’s protected LSD test.
Figure 5Effect of SMs of Trichoderma spp. obtained on different growth media on M. incognita juveniles (J2s) mortality of M. incognita. Values are the mean of three replicates. (A) T. pseudoharzianum (T113); (B) T. koningiopsis (T84); (C) T. asperelloides (T136); (D) T. pseudoharzianum (T129); (E) T. pseudoharzianum (T160); (F) T. afroharzianum (32233); (G) T. acitrinoviride (T130); (H) T. hamatum (T21); (I) T. afroharzianum (T52); (J) T. viridae. The bar represents the mean with standard deviation. Missing columns for some treatments indicated their 0.0% mortality (or no activity). Treatments having similar lettering on the bar chart show no significant (p ≥ 0.05) difference according to Fisher’s protected LSD test.
Figure 6Morphological variations in M. incognita J2s treated with SMs of T. viridae obtained on different growth media. (A) Abamectin (positive control); (B) STP; (C) Solid; (D) MOF; (E) MMK2; (F) SuM; (G) methanol; (H) water (negative control). Bar = 300 μm.