Phytophthora infestans’a Karşı Entomopatojenik Fungusların In Vitro Antagonistik Aktivitesi

Year 2023, , 96 - 102, 30.10.2023

Işılay Akça Şerife Acar Zeliha Çağla Tarakçı Ali Sevim

https://doi.org/10.30708/mantar.1333405

Abstract

Patates mildiyösü Phytophthora infestans (Mont.) de Bary adı verilen bir fungus tarafından oluşturulan başta patates ve domates olmak üzere Solanaceae familyasına ait diğer kültür ve yabani bitkileri de görülen bir hastalıktır. Bu fungus hem ekonomik hem de tarihsel açıdan oldukça önemlidir. Salgın durumunda patateste tam mahsul bozulmasına veya ciddi kayıplara neden olabilmektedir. Hastalığın mücadelesinde genellikle kültürel ve kimyasal mücadele yöntemleri kullanılmakla beraber bu konuda spesifik bir biyolojik mücadele yöntemi bulunmamaktadır. Entomopatojenik funguslar ise zararlı böceklerle mücadelede biyolojik mücadele etmeni olarak yaygın bir şekilde kullanılmaktadır. Son zamanlarda ise bu fungusların çeşitli kültür bitkileri üzerinde endofitik olarak yaşayabildiğini ve birlikte yaşadığı bitkilere faydalı özellikler sağladığına dair birçok çalışma bulunmaktadır. Bu çalışmada ise daha önceden patates tarlalarından izole edilen ve moleküler yöntemlerle tanımlanan çeşitli entomopatojenik fungusların P. infestans’a karşı in vitro antagonistik etkilerinin belirlenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Daha önce yapılan çalışmada bu fungusların Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Say, 1824) üzerinde öldürücü etkiye sahip olduğu belirlenmiştir. Antagonistik aktivite testleri “direct opposition method” yöntemine göre yapılmış ve yüzde (%) aktivite değerleri hesaplanmıştır. Testler sonucunda en etkili izolatların Beauveria sp. SK-14 (%75.23) ve Metarhizium sp. SK-24 (%76.23) olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Elde edilen sonuçların patatesteki hastalık ve zararlılarının biyolojik mücadelesine katkı sağlayacağı düşünülmektedir.activities of various entomopathogenic fungi previously isolated from potato fields and identified by molecular methods against P. infestans. Earlier work determined that these fungi had a lethal effect on Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Say, 1824). Antagonistic activity tests were performed according to the "direct opposition method" and percentage (%) activity values were calculated. As a result of the tests, the most effective isolates were found to be Beauveria sp. SK-14 (75.23%) and Metarhizium sp. SK-24 (76.23%). It is thought that the results obtained will contribute to the biological control of diseases and pests in potatoes.

Keywords

Entomopatojenik fungus, Patates mildiyösü, Antagonistik aktivite, Biyolojik mücadele

Project Number

1919B012104468

In Vitro Antagonistic Activity of Entomopathogenic Fungi Against Phytophthora infestans

Abstract

Potato downy mildew is a disease caused by a fungus called Phytophthora infestans (Mont.) de Bary, which is mainly seen in potatoes and tomatoes, but also in other culture and wild plants belonging to the Solanaceae family. This fungus is quite important both from an economic and historical point of view. In case of an epidemic, it can cause full crop deterioration or serious losses in potatoes. Although cultural and chemical control methods are generally used in the control of the disease, there is no specific biological control method in this regard. Entomopathogenic fungi (EPFs) are generally used as biological control agents in the control of insect pests. Recently, there are many studies showed that these fungi can live endophytically on various cultivated plants and provide beneficial properties to the plants they live with. In this study, it was aimed to determine the in vitro antagonistic activities of different entomopathogenic fungi previously isolated from potato fields and identified by molecular methods against P. infestans. Earlier work determined that these fungi had a lethal effect on Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Say, 1824). Antagonistic activity tests were performed according to the "direct opposition method" and percentage (%) activity values were calculated. As a result of the tests, the most effective isolates were found to be Beauveria sp. SK-14 (75.23%) and Metarhizium sp. SK-24 (76.23%). It is thought that the results obtained will contribute to the biocontrol of diseases and pests in potatoes.

Keywords

Entomopathogenic fungi, Potato downy mildew, Antagonistic activity, Biological control

Supporting Institution

TUBİTAK

Project Number

1919B012104468

Thanks

We would like to thank TUBİTAK for financial support under the project application number of 1919B012104468

References

• Bamisile, B.S., Siddiqui, J.A., Akutse, K.S., Ramos Aguila, L.C. and Xu, Y. (2021) General limitations to endophytic entomopathogenic fungi use as plant growth promoters. pests. and pathogens biocontrol agents. Plants. 10(10): 2119. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10102119
• Barra-Bucarei, L., France Iglesias, A., Gerding González, M., Silva Aguayo, G., Carrasco-Fernández, J., Castro, J. F. and Ortiz Campos, J. (2019). Antifungal activity of Beauveria bassiana endophyte against Botrytis cinerea in two Solanaceae crops. Microorganisms. 8(1). 65. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms8010065
• Dennis, C. and Webster, J. (1971). Antagonistic properties of species groups of Trichoderma III. hyphal interaction. Transactions of the British Mycological Society. 57. 363-369.
• Dharmaputra, O. (2003). Antagonistic effect of three fungal isolates to aflatoxin-producing spergiY/HS/JavHS. Biotropia. 21. 19-31. https://doi.org/10.11598/btb.2003.0.21.186
• Goettel, M.S., Eilenberg, J. and Glare, T. (2005). Entomopathogenic Fungi and Their Role in Regulation of Insect Populations. In L.I. Gilbert. K. Iatrou. S.S. Gill (Eds.). Comprehensive Molecular Insect Science (pp. 361-405). Elsevier. Amsterdam.
• Hubbard, M., Germida, J.J. and Vujanovic, V. (2013). Fungal endophytes enhance wheat heat and drought tolerance in terms of grain yield and second-generation seed viability. Journal of Applied Microbiology. 116. 109-122. https://doi.org/10.1111/jam.12311
• Jaber, L.R. and Alananbeh, K.M. (2018). Fungal entomopathogens as endophytes reduce several species of Fusarium causing crown and root rot in sweet pepper (Capsicum annuum L.). Biological Control. 126. 117-126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2018.08.007.
• Jaber, R.L., (2018). Seed inoculation with endophytic fungal entomopathogens promotes plant growth and reduces crown and root rot (CRR) caused by Fusarium culmorum in wheat. Planta. 248. 1525-1535. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00425-018-2991-x
• Jones, G.D. (1998). The Epidemiology of Plant Diseases. 3rd Edition. Kluwer Academic Publishes. London. pp 371- 388.
• Kang, B.R., Han, J.H., Kim, J.J. and Kim, Y.C. (2018). Dual biocontrol potential of the entomopathogenic fungus. Isaria javanica. for both aphids and plant fungal pathogens. Mycobiology. 21. 46(4). 440-447. https://doi.org/10.1080/12298093.2018.1538073.
• Kassa, B. and Hiskias, Y. (1996). Tuber Yield Loss Assessment of Potato Cultivars with Different Levels of Resistance to Late Blight. In E. Bekele. A. Abdulahi and A. Yemane (Eds.). Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Conference of Crop Protection Society of Ethiopia (pp. 149-152). CPSE. Addis Abeba. Ethiopia.
• Keçili, S., Bakır, A., Kutalmış, A., Çelik, T. and Sevim, A. (2022). Soil isolation. identification. and virulence testing of Turkish entomopathogenic fungal strains: A potential native isolate of Beauveria bassiana for the control of Leptinotarsa decemlineata. BioControl 67. 593–603. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10526-022-10156-4
• Landum, M.C., Felix, M.R., Alho, J., Garcia, R., Cabrita, M.J., Rei, F. and Varanda, C.M.R. (2016). Antagonistic activity of fungi of Olea europaea L. against Colletotrichum acutatum. Microbiological Research. 183. 100-108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micres.2015.12.001
• Larran, S., Perello, A., Simo, M.R. and Moreno, V. (2007). The endophytic fungi from wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). World Journal of Microbiology and Biotecnology. 23. 565-572. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11274-006-9266-6
• Latijnhouwers, M., Ligterink, W., Vleeshouwers, V.G., VanWest, P. and Govers, F. (2004). A Gα subunit controls zoospore mobility and virulence in the potato late blight pathogen Phytophthora infestans. Molecular Microbiology. 51: 925-936. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2958.2003.03893.x
• Lozano-Tovar, M.D., Garrido-Jurado, I., Quesada-Moraga, E., Raya-Ortega, M.C. and Trapero-Casas, A. (2017) Metarhizium brunneum and Beauveria bassiana release secondary metabolites with antagonistic activity against Verticillium dahliae and Phytophthora megasperma olive pathogens. Crop Protection. 100. 186-195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2017.06.026.
• Mantzoukas, S. and Eliopoulos, P.A. (2020) Endophytic entomopathogenic fungi: A valuable biological control tool against plant pests. Applied Sciences. 10(1): 360. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10010360
• Matson, M.E., Small, I.M., Fry, W.E. and Judelson, H.S. (2015). Metalaxyl resistance in Phytophthora infestans: Assessing role of RPA190 gene and diversity within clonal lineages. Phytopathology. 105(12).1594-600. https://doi.org/10.1094/PHYTO-05-15-0129-R
• Quesada Moraga, E. (2020). Entomopathogenic fungi as endophytes: Their broader contribution to IPM and crop production. Biocontrol Science and Technology. 30(9). 864-877. https://doi.org/10.1080/09583157.2020.1771279
• Rath, A.C. (2000). The use of entomopathogenic fungi for control of termites. Biocontrol Science and Technology. 10. 563-581. https://doi.org/10.1080/095831500750016370
• Roberts, D.W. (1989). Word picture of biological control of insects by fungi. Memorias do Instituto. Oswaldo Cruz. 84. 89-100.
• Royse, D. and Ries, S. (1977). The influence of fungi isolated from peach twigs on the pathogenicity of Cytospora cincta. Pyhtopathology. 68. 603-607.
• Sesli, E., Asan, A. ve Selçuk, F. (edlr.) Abacı Günyar, Ö., Akata, I., Akgül, H., Aktaş, S., Alkan, S., Allı, H., Aydoğdu, H., Berikten, D., Demirel, K., Demirel, R., Doğan, H.H., Erdoğdu, M., Ergül, C.C., Eroğlu, G., Giray, G., Halikî Uztan, A., Kabaktepe, Ş., Kadaifçiler, D., Kalyoncu, F., Karaltı, İ., Kaşık, G., Kaya, A., Keleş, A., Kırbağ, S., Kıvanç, M., Ocak, İ., Ökten, S., Özkale, E., Öztürk, C., Sevindik, M., Şen, B., Şen, İ., Türkekul, İ., Ulukapı, M., Uzun, Ya., Uzun, Yu., Yoltaş, A. (2020). Türkiye Mantarları Listesi. İstanbul: Ali Nihat Gökyiğit Vakfı Yayınları.
• Sevim, A., Sevim, E. and Demirbağ, Z. (2015). Entomopatojenik fungusların genel biyolojileri ve türkiye’de zararlı böceklerin mücadelesinde kullanılma potansiyelleri. Erzincan University Journal of Science and Technology. 8(1). 115-147. https://doi.org/ 10.18185/eufbed.33883
• Sharma, R. and Sharma, P. (2021). Fungal entomopathogens: A systematic review. Egyptian Journal of Biological Pest Control. 31. 57. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41938-021-00404-7
• T.C. Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. (2017). Tarımsal Araştırmalar ve Politikalar Genel Müdürlüğü. Bitki Sağlığı Araştırmaları Daire Başkanlığı. Zirai Mücadele Teknik Talimatları. Cilt III.
• Ting, A.S.Y., Chaverri, P. and Edrada-Ebel, R.A. (2021). Editorial: Endophytes and their biotechnological applications. Frontiers in Bioengineering Biotechnology. 2(9). 795174. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2021.795174
• Tomilova, O. G., Shaldyaeva, E. M., Kryukova, N. A., Pilipova, Y. V., Schmidt, N. S., Danilov, V. P., Kryukov, V. Y. and Glupov, V. V. (2020). Entomopathogenic fungi decrease Rhizoctonia disease in potato in field conditions. Peer J. 8. e9895. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.9895
• Vega, F.E. (2018). The use of fungal entomopathogens as endophytes in biological control: A review. Mycologia. 110(1). 4-30. https://doi.org/10.1080/00275514.2017.1418578
• Vega, F.E., Posada, F., Aime, M.C., Pava-Ripoll, M., Infante, F. and Rehner, S.A. (2008). Entomopathogenic fungal endophytes. Biological Control. 46(1). 72-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2008.01.008
• Watts, D., Palombo, E.A., Jaimes Castillo, A. and Zaferanloo, B. (2023). Endophytes in agriculture: Potential to improve yields and tolerances of agricultural crops. Microorganisms. 12. 11(5). 1276. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms11051276
• Wilson, D. (1995). Endophyte: The evolution of a term. and clarification of its use and definition. Oikos. 73. 274-276. https://doi.org/10.2307/3545919