Paper · 2023 · Frontiers in Plant Science

Stenotrophomonas rhizophila Ep2.2 inhibits growth of Botrytis cinerea through the emission of volatile organic compounds, restricts leaf infection and primes defense genes

Aida Raio; Federico Brilli; Luisa Neri; et al.

6
claims
10
verbatim quotes
25
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

The bacterium Stenotrophomonas rhizophila is known to be beneficial for plants and has been frequently isolated from the rhizosphere of crops. In the present work, we isolated from the phyllosphere of an ornamental plant an epiphytic strain of S. rhizophila that we named Ep2.2 and investigated its possible application in crop protection. Compared to S. maltophilia LMG 958, a well-known plant beneficial species which behaves as opportunistic human pathogen, S. rhizophila Ep2.2 showed distinctive features, such as different motility, a generally reduced capacity to use carbon sources, a greater sensitivity to fusidic acid and potassium tellurite, and the inability to grow at the human body temperature. S. rhizophila Ep2.2 was able to inhibit in vitro growth of the plant pathogenic fungi Alternaria alternata and Botrytis cinerea through the emission of volatile compounds. Simultaneous PTR-MS and GC-MS analyses revealed the emission, by S. rhizophila Ep2.2, of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) with well-documented antifungal activity, such as furans, sulphur-containing compounds and terpenes. When sprayed on tomato leaves and plants, S. rhizophila Ep2.2 was able to restrict B. cinerea infection and to prime the expression of Pti5 , GluA and PR1 plant defense genes.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 6

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Ep2.2 differed from S. maltophilia in motility, carbon use, chemical sensitivity and temperature growth.

Taxon
ornamental plantt0
Outcome
different motility, a generally reduced capacity to use carbon sources, a greater sensitivity to fusidic acid and potassium tellurite, and the inability to grow at the human body temperaturee0
Comparator
S. maltophilia LMG 958e0

Verbatim

e0

“Compared to S. maltophilia LMG 958, a well-known plant beneficial species which behaves as opportunistic human pathogen, S. rhizophila Ep2.2 showed distinctive features, such as different motility, a generally reduced capacity to use carbon sources, a greater sensitivity to fusidic acid and potassium tellurite, and the inability to grow at the human body temperature.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 340–709 · show in text ↑
t0

“the phyllosphere of an ornamental plant”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 181–220 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Ep2.2 inhibited in vitro Alternaria alternata growth through volatiles.

Taxon
ornamental plantt0
Interactor
Alternaria alternataAlternaria alternatae0pathogen
Second interactor
S. rhizophila Ep2.2Stenotrophomonas rhizophilae0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
growth of the plant pathogenic fungi Alternaria alternatae0
Direction
inhibite0

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

Alternaria alternata
Alternaria alternata · Interactor · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryMarta Hiromi Taniwaki, Secretaria de Agricultura e Abastecimento · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“S. rhizophila Ep2.2 was able to inhibit in vitro growth of the plant pathogenic fungi Alternaria alternata and Botrytis cinerea through the emission of volatile compounds.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 710–881 · show in text ↑
t0

“the phyllosphere of an ornamental plant”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 181–220 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Ep2.2 inhibited in vitro Botrytis cinerea growth through volatiles.

Taxon
ornamental plantt0
Interactor
Botrytis cinereaBotrytis cinereae0pathogen
Second interactor
S. rhizophila Ep2.2Stenotrophomonas rhizophilae0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
growth of the plant pathogenic fungi Alternaria alternata and Botrytis cinereae0
Direction
inhibite0

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

Botrytis cinerea
Botrytis cinerea · InteractorRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“S. rhizophila Ep2.2 was able to inhibit in vitro growth of the plant pathogenic fungi Alternaria alternata and Botrytis cinerea through the emission of volatile compounds.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 710–881 · show in text ↑
t0

“the phyllosphere of an ornamental plant”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 181–220 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Ep2.2 emitted volatile compounds with documented antifungal activity.

Taxon
ornamental plantt0
Interactor
S. rhizophila Ep2.2Stenotrophomonas rhizophilae0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) with well-documented antifungal activitye0

Verbatim

e0

“S. rhizophila Ep2.2, of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) with well-documented antifungal activity, such as furans, sulphur-containing compounds and terpenes.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 947–1105 · show in text ↑
t0

“the phyllosphere of an ornamental plant”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 181–220 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sprayed Ep2.2 restricted B. cinerea infection of tomato.

Treatment
sprayed on tomato leaves and plants, S. rhizophila Ep2.2e0
Interactor
B. cinereaBotrytis cinereae0pathogen
Second interactor
S. rhizophila Ep2.2Stenotrophomonas rhizophilae0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
B. cinerea infectione0
Direction
restricte0

Not reportedComparator

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Botrytis cinerea
Botrytis cinerea · InteractorRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“When sprayed on tomato leaves and plants, S. rhizophila Ep2.2 was able to restrict B. cinerea infection”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1106–1209 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sprayed Ep2.2 primed tomato Pti5, GluA and PR1 defence gene expression.

Treatment
sprayed on tomato leaves and plants, S. rhizophila Ep2.2e0
Interactor
S. rhizophila Ep2.2Stenotrophomonas rhizophilae0biocontrol_agent
Gene
Pti5 , GluA and PR1e0
Outcome
expression of Pti5 , GluA and PR1 plant defense genese0
Direction
primee0

Not reportedComparator

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“When sprayed on tomato leaves and plants, S. rhizophila Ep2.2 was able to restrict B. cinerea infection and to prime the expression of Pti5 , GluA and PR1 plant defense genes.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1106–1281 · show in text ↑

application · molecular: expression · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

15 papers: 14 positive, 1 negative or no effect

13 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

11 papers more in this group

See all 15 papers →

application · Botrytis cinerea · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

23 papers: 21 positive, 2 negative or no effect

20 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. positive

19 papers more in this group

See all 23 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.