Paper · 2016 · Journal of Applied Microbiology

Biocontrol activity and patulin-removal effects of Bacillus subtilis, Rhodobacter sphaeroides and Agrobacterium tumefaciens against Penicillium expansum

Y. Wang; Y. Yuan; B. Liu; et al.

5
claims
8
verbatim quotes
30
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

AIMS: This study was conducted to evaluate the biocontrol potential of Bacillus subtilis CICC 10034, Rhodobacter sphaeroides CGMCC 1.2182 and Agrobacterium tumefaciens CGMCC 1.2554 against patulin (PAT)-producer Penicillium expansum and their ability to remove PAT. METHODS AND RESULTS: reduction in colony number of P. expansum on apples. Survival of antagonists on apple wounds revealed their tolerance to PAT. Furthermore, both live and autoclaved cells of three strains efficiently adsorbed artificially spiked PAT from medium. CONCLUSIONS: The selected antagonists could be applied before harvesting to control apple infection by PAT-producing fungi and also during processing to act as PAT detoxifiers. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: Since little information related to the capability of R. sphaeroides and A. tumefaciens to inhibit P. expansum is currently available, the results of this study provide some new perspectives to the biocontrol field.

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 5

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Antagonist strains reduced colony number of P. expansum on apples.

Treatment
Bacillus subtilis CICC 10034, Rhodobacter sphaeroides CGMCC 1.2182 and Agrobacterium tumefaciens CGMCC 1.2554e0
Interactor
P. expansumPenicillium expansume1pathogen
Second interactor
Bacillus subtilis CICC 10034Bacillus subtilise0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
colony number of P. expansume1
Direction
reductione1

Not reportedComparator

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

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Penicillium expansum
Penicillium expansum · InteractorH.J. Larsen, Bugwood.org · CC BY 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Bacillus subtilis
Bacillus subtilis · Second interactorY tambe (original uploader) · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the biocontrol potential of Bacillus subtilis CICC 10034, Rhodobacter sphaeroides CGMCC 1.2182 and Agrobacterium tumefaciens CGMCC 1.2554 against patulin (PAT)-producer Penicillium expansum”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 43–232 · show in text ↑
e1

“reduction in colony number of P. expansum on apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 287–338 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Survival of the antagonists on apple wounds revealed their tolerance to PAT.

Organ / stage
apple woundse2
Compound
PATe2
Outcome
tolerance to PATe2

Not reportedDirection

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

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e2

“Survival of antagonists on apple wounds revealed their tolerance to PAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 340–411 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Live and autoclaved cells of three strains efficiently adsorbed artificially spiked PAT from medium.

Treatment
live and autoclaved cellse3
Compound
PATe3
Outcome
adsorbed artificially spiked PAT from mediume3
Qualifier
efficientlye3

Not reportedDirection

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

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e3

“both live and autoclaved cells of three strains efficiently adsorbed artificially spiked PAT from medium”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 426–530 · show in text ↑
e4

“The selected antagonists could be applied before harvesting to control apple infection by PAT-producing fungi”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 545–654 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The selected antagonists could be applied before harvesting to control apple infection by PAT-producing fungi.

Treatment
applied before harvestinge4
Interactor
PAT-producing fungie4pathogen
Outcome
control apple infection by PAT-producing fungie4

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

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e4

“The selected antagonists could be applied before harvesting to control apple infection by PAT-producing fungi”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 545–654 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The selected antagonists could be applied during processing to act as PAT detoxifiers.

Treatment
during processinge5
Compound
PATe5
Outcome
act as PAT detoxifierse5

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

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e4

“The selected antagonists could be applied before harvesting to control apple infection by PAT-producing fungi”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 545–654 · show in text ↑
e5

“during processing to act as PAT detoxifiers”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 664–707 · show in text ↑

schema checkedfield values found in the cited quotesPermalinkReport an issue

Bacillus subtilis · Penicillium expansum · Malus domestica (apple)Results agree

4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 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.