生防菌ANTI-8098A对青枯雷尔氏菌不同致病力菌株抑制作用的差异性

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 采用共培养法测定了生防菌ANTI-8098A对青枯雷尔氏菌强致病力菌株F-01-V和无致病力菌株F.1.3-010602-01-A的抑制作用，并以链霉素作参照。结果表明，生防菌ANTI-8098A对F-01-V的抑制作用较强，抑制率与生防菌培养液菌体数成正相关；对F.1.3-010602-01-A的抑制作用则较弱，菌体数为20.0×108 cfu/ml的生防菌液对F.1.3-010602-01-A的抑制率为14.7%，而对F-01-V的抑制率高达99.5%。链霉素对F-01-V和F.1.3-010602-01-A都具有较强的抑制作用，抑制率与浓度成正相关，但是对F.1.3-010602-01-A的抑制作用更强：浓度为0.25 U/ml的链霉素溶液，对F.1.3-010602-01-A的抑制率为50.0%，而对F-01-V的抑制率仅为3.3%。应用生防菌ANTI-8098制剂进行田间防治茄子青枯病的试验结果表明，生防菌制剂的防治效果达92.11%，显著地比农用链霉素的防效（72.81%）高。研究结果为阐述生防菌ANTI-8098对青枯雷尔氏菌的致弱现象提供了依据。

关键词: 科技进步, 科技进步, 西部农业, 可持续发展

Abstract: The inhibitions of the biocontrol bacterium strain ANTI-8098A (Bacillus cereus) against Ralstonia solanacearum virulent strain F-01-V and avirulent strain F.1.3-010602-01-A were investigated and streptomycin was used as control. The results showed that the inhibition of strain ANTI-8098A against strain F-01-V was strong. There was a positive correlation between the inhibiting rate and the bacteria number of strain ANTI-8098A. The inhibition of strain ANTI-8098A against strain F.1.3-010602-01-A was weak. The inhibiting rates of the culture of strain ANTI-8098A with the bacteria number 20.0×108 cfu/ml against strain F-01-V and strain F.1.3-010602-01-A were 99.5% and 14.7%, respectively. Streptomycin could inhibit the growth of strains F-01-V and F.1.3-010602-01-A. There was a positive correlation between the inhibiting rate and the concentration of streptomycin. But the inhibition of streptomycin against strain F.1.3-010602-01-A was greater than the inhibition against strain F-01-V. The inhibiting rates of streptomycin with the concentration of 0.25 U/ml against strain F-01-V and strain F.1.3-010602-01-A were 3.3% and 50.0%, respectively. The field experiment on controlling the bacterial wilt disease of eggplant indicated that the strain ANTI-8098 reduced eggplant wilt severity by 92.11%, which was significantly higher than that with 72.81% using streptomycin. The results provided evidences for explaining the attenuation of strain ANTI-8098A against R. solanacearum.

中图分类号:

S 436.412.1+5

葛慈斌,林抗美,朱育菁,苏明星,刘波. 生防菌ANTI-8098A对青枯雷尔氏菌不同致病力菌株抑制作用的差异性[J]. 中国农学通报, 2006, 22(10): 293-293.

Ge Cibin, Lin Kangmei, Zhu Yujing, Su Mingxing, Liu Bo. Study on the Differences between the Inhibitions of Biocontrol Bacterium Strain ANTI-8098A (Bacillus cereus) against Ralstonia solanacearum-Virulent and Avirulent Strains[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2006, 22(10): 293-293.

参考文献

1 郭坚华,孙平华.植物细菌性青枯病的生物防治机制和途径[J].中国生物防治,1997,13(1):42~45
2 江忠明,张玉瑞,顾刚.石硫合剂防治烟草青枯病初探[J].烟草科技,2000,(2):47~48
3 Anuratha C S, Gnanamanickam S S. Biological control of bacterial wilt caused by Pseudomonas solanacerum in India with antagonistic bacteria[J].Plant and soil,1990,124:109~116
4 郭坚华,潘登明.抗青枯生防菌拮抗物质的实质研究[J].南京农业大学学报,1995,18(2):59~62
5 何礼远,康耀卫.利用青枯菌无毒菌株和荧光假单胞菌诱导花生产生抗病性[J].植物保护学报,1990,17(2):113~116
6 靳绍菊,钟士传.用荧光假单孢杆菌防治番茄青枯病[J].农业新技术新方法,1997(1):27~28
7 El Abyad, M.S.,M.A. El Sayed,A.R. El Shanshoury,et al.Inhibitory effects of UV mutants of Streptomyces corchorusii and Streptomyces spiroverticillatus on bean and banana wilt pathogens[J].Canidian Journal of Botany,1993,71(8):1080~1086
8 Hsu S T, Chang M L. Effect of soil amendments on survival of Pseudomonas solanacerum[J].Plant Protection Bulletin, Taiwan,1989,31:21~33
9 蔡燕飞,廖宗文,章家恩,等.生态有机肥对番茄青枯病及土壤微生物多样性的影响[J].应用生态学报,2003,14(3):349~353
10 刘波,朱育菁,曹宜,等.青枯病生防菌ANTI-8098A的鉴定[J].中国生物防治,2003,19(S):5~8
11 刘波,林营志,朱育菁,等.青枯病生防菌ANTI-8098A的对青枯雷尔氏菌的抑菌作用[J].中国生物防治,2003,18(S):22~27
12 刘波,林营志,朱育菁,等.青枯雷尔氏菌不同致病力菌株对生防菌ANTI-8098A敏感性差异的研究[J].中国生物防治,2003,18(S):28~32
13 Kelman A. The relationship of pathogenicity in P. solanacearum to colony appearance on a tetrazolium medium[J].Phytopathology,1954,44:693~695
14 葛慈斌,刘波,朱育菁,等.青枯雷尔氏菌致病力的番茄组培苗鉴定方法研究[J].武夷科学,2004,20(1):13~16
15 方中达.植病研究方法(第三版)[M].北京:中国农业出版社,1998.183~192,135
16 黄乃秀.几种不同抗生素对培养桉树青枯菌的影响[J].广西林业科学,1998,27(1):25~26
17 姚旺家,周本国,陈其峰.不同药剂防治烟草青枯病的药效试验[J].安徽农业科学,2000,28(2):209
18 卢洪兴,曾军,邱志丹,等.烟草青枯病发生与药剂防治研究[J].福建农科院学报,1996,11(3):41~45
19 刘波,林营志,朱育菁,等.生防菌对青枯雷尔氏菌的致弱特性[J].农业生物技术学报,2004,12(3):322~329
20 帅正彬,苏家烈,罗小波.成都番茄青枯菌生理分化和品种抗性鉴定[J].中国蔬菜,1997,17(3):16~18
21 Trigalet A, Demery D. Invasiveness in tomato plant of Tn5-induced avirulent mutants of Pseudomonas salanacerum [J]. Physiological and Molecular Plant Pathology,1986,28:423~432
22 Trigalet A, Demery D. Use of avirulent mutants of Pseudomonas solanacearum for the biological control of bacterial wilt of tomato plants[J].Physiological and Molecular Plant Pathology,1990,36:27~38

[1]	黄国勤. 论长江经济带农业绿色发展[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(30): 154-164.
[2]	贾新平, 唐玲, 梅雪莹, 罗海蓉, 贾俊丽, 易能, 刘华周. 基于SWOT-PEST分析的江苏省休闲农业可持续发展研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(12): 151-157.
[3]	黄国勤. 江西广昌传统莲作文化系统的特征与价值[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(10): 48-53.
[4]	赵哲,刘雨,陈建成,白羽萍,苗毅. 我国生态草牧业政策梳理及评价[J]. 中国农学通报, 2019, 35(9): 132-137.
[5]	刘宏元,邢磊,杨世琦,王惟帅,高悦. 海南省不同区域农业可持续发展评价研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2019, 35(19): 150-156.
[6]	蒋哲姝,陈红磊,蒋高中. 世界文化遗产的可持续保护与精准扶贫有机结合的成功实践[J]. 中国农学通报, 2018, 34(23): 160-164.
[7]	栗兴,郭青霞. 基于能值的黄土梁峁丘陵区农业生态系统可持续发展研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2018, 34(21): 91-100.
[8]	黄国勤,钱晨晨. 长江中下游地区循环农业的发展[J]. 中国农学通报, 2018, 34(12): 151-156.
[9]	杨世琦,邢磊,刘宏元,梅旭荣. 基于欧氏距离理论的农业可持续发展评价方法与实证研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2018, 34(12): 157-164.
[10]	谷雨,刘琼峰,吴海勇,李明德,吴金水,肖和艾,崔新卫. “水稻/牧草-肉牛-有机肥-蔬菜/茶叶”循环农业模式能值分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2017, 33(32): 81-86.
[11]	黄国勤,孙丹平. 中国多熟种植的发展现状与研究进展[J]. 中国农学通报, 2017, 33(3): 35-43.
[12]	罗其友,唐曲,刘洋,高明杰,马力阳. 中国农业可持续发展评价指标体系构建及研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2017, 33(27): 158-164.
[13]	甘阳英,苏柱华,肖广江,张金鸽. 广东连平县生态农业发展规划研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2017, 33(17): 146-152.
[14]	黄艳丽,苏辉,黄鹏飞,张春杰. 基于生态足迹的河南省2000—2010年可持续测度与分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2016, 32(8): 78-84.
[15]	陈绪敖,何家理. 秦巴山区、武陵山区集中连片扶贫调查及可持续发展模式比较研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2015, 31(8): 266-272.