Paper · 2012 · Phytopathology

Pathogen Variation and Urea Influence Selection and Success of Streptomyces Mixtures in Biological Control

L. K. Otto-Hanson; Z. Grabau; C. Rosen; et al.

8
claims
15
verbatim quotes
38
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Success in biological control of plant diseases remains inconsistent in the field. A collection of well-characterized Streptomyces antagonists (n = 19 isolates) was tested for their capacities to inhibit pathogenic Streptomyces scabies (n = 15 isolates). There was significant variation among antagonists in ability to inhibit pathogen isolates and among pathogens in their susceptibility to inhibition. Only one antagonist could inhibit all pathogens, and antagonist-pathogen interactions were highly specific, highlighting the limitations of single-strain inoculum in biological control. However, the collection of pathogens could be inhibited by several combinations of antagonists, suggesting the potential for successful antagonist mixtures. Urea generally increased effectiveness of antagonists at inhibiting pathogens in vitro (increased mean inhibition zones) but its specific effects varied among antagonist-pathogen combinations. In greenhouse trials, urea enhanced the effectiveness of antagonist mixtures relative to individual antagonists in controlling potato scab. Although antagonist mixtures were frequently antagonistic in the absence of urea, all n= 2 and n = 3 antagonist-isolate combinations were synergistic in the presence of urea. This work provides insights into the efficacy of single- versus multiple-strain inocula in biological control and on the potential for nutrients to influence mixture success.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 8

Observationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Antagonists varied significantly in ability to inhibit pathogen isolates.

Interactor
pathogen isolatese0pathogen
Outcome
ability to inhibit pathogen isolatese0
Direction
variatione0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum tuberosum
Solanum tuberosum · TaxonScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“There was significant variation among antagonists in ability to inhibit pathogen isolates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 255–344 · show in text ↑
t0

“controlling potato scab”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1055–1078 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Pathogen isolates varied significantly in susceptibility to inhibition.

Interactor
pathogense0pathogen
Outcome
pathogens in their susceptibility to inhibitione0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum tuberosum
Solanum tuberosum · TaxonScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“among pathogens in their susceptibility to inhibition”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 349–402 · show in text ↑
t0

“controlling potato scab”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1055–1078 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Only one antagonist inhibited every pathogen isolate.

Interactor
pathogense0pathogen
Outcome
inhibit all pathogense0
Value
onee0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum tuberosum
Solanum tuberosum · TaxonScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Only one antagonist could inhibit all pathogens”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 404–451 · show in text ↑
t0

“controlling potato scab”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1055–1078 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Several antagonist combinations inhibited the pathogen collection.

Interactor
pathogense0pathogen
Outcome
pathogens could be inhibitede0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum tuberosum
Solanum tuberosum · TaxonScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the collection of pathogens could be inhibited by several combinations of antagonists”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 599–684 · show in text ↑
t0

“controlling potato scab”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1055–1078 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Urea generally increased antagonist inhibition zones in vitro, with combination-specific variation.

Treatment
Ureae0
Interactor
pathogense0pathogen
Outcome
mean inhibition zonese0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum tuberosum
Solanum tuberosum · TaxonScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Urea generally increased effectiveness of antagonists at inhibiting pathogens in vitro (increased mean inhibition zones) but its specific effects varied among antagonist-pathogen combinations.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 747–939 · show in text ↑
t0

“controlling potato scab”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1055–1078 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In greenhouse trials urea made antagonist mixtures more effective than individual antagonists against potato scab.

Treatment
ureae0
Outcome
controlling potato scabe0
Direction
enhancede0
Comparator
individual antagonistse0
Setting
greenhouse trialse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum tuberosum
Solanum tuberosum · TaxonScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In greenhouse trials, urea enhanced the effectiveness of antagonist mixtures relative to individual antagonists in controlling potato scab.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 940–1079 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Without urea antagonist mixtures were frequently antagonistic.

Outcome
antagonist mixtures were frequently antagonistice0
Qualifier
absence of ureae0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum tuberosum
Solanum tuberosum · TaxonScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“antagonist mixtures were frequently antagonistic in the absence of urea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1089–1160 · show in text ↑
t0

“controlling potato scab”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1055–1078 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

With urea all two- and three-isolate antagonist combinations were synergistic.

Outcome
antagonist-isolate combinations were synergistice0
Qualifier
presence of ureae0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum tuberosum
Solanum tuberosum · TaxonScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“all n= 2 and n = 3 antagonist-isolate combinations were synergistic in the presence of urea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1162–1253 · show in text ↑
t0

“controlling potato scab”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1055–1078 · show in text ↑

nitrogen · disease · Solanum tuberosum (potato)Positive and negative results

16 papers: 12 positive, 4 negative or no effect

11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

12 papers more in this group

See all 16 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.