Screening of Biocontrol Bacteria Against Tobacco Bacterial Wilt and Evaluation of the Field Control Effect

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2020-0027

Abstract

Abstract:

To screen out the biocontrol bacteria that can effectively control tobacco bacterial wilt, a strain 69-1 with obvious antagonism was isolated from the tobacco rhizosphere soil by dilution coating method, and the strain was identified as Streptomyces spectabilis and used for field control experiments of tobacco bacterial wilt. The results showed that compared with the control, the stem circumference, effective leaf number, maximum leaf width, maximum leaf length, single leaf dry weight, maximum leaf area, and yield of tobacco leaves treated with strain 69-1 increased significantly. The relative control effect on tobacco bacterial wilt reached 60.42%. At the same time, the chemical composition of the flue-cured tobacco leaves of different treatment groups was analyzed and found that the tobacco quality under strain 69-1 treatment was better than that of control. The bacterial agent treatment of the strain can not only enhance the control effect of tobacco plants against tobacco bacterial wilt, but also improve the quality and yield of tobacco leaves, and the study can provide a certain reference for the biological control of tobacco bacterial wilt.

Key words: biocontrol bacteria, Streptomyces spectabilis, tobacco bacterial wilt, field efficacy, tobacco quality

CLC Number:

S435.72

Zhang Jiemei, Zhang Renjun, Yao Zhengping, Wu Jinhu, Wang Liang, Hou Zhengxue, Yang Zhuang, Yin Honghui, Chen Suiyun. Screening of Biocontrol Bacteria Against Tobacco Bacterial Wilt and Evaluation of the Field Control Effect[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(28): 131-136.

Figures/Tables 7

References 29

[1]	李碧德. 两种生防菌(Paenibacillus polymyxa与Pseudomonas fluorescens)防控烟草青枯病的特性研究[D]. 重庆:西南大学, 2018.
[2]	Huet G. Breeding for resistances to Ralstonia solanacearum[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2014,5:1-5.
[3]	朱圣杰, 丁克坚, 檀根甲. 植物细菌性青枯病的生物防治研究进展[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2003(4):606-607.
[4]	黎妍妍, 冯吉, 王林, 等. 中国烟草青枯菌遗传多样性和致病力分析[A].中国植物病理学会2016年学术年会[C]. 南京, 2016.
[5]	黄勤清, 林国宪, 董德臻, 等. 青枯病生物杀菌剂天禾2000菌株筛选和分类研究[J]. 武夷科学, 2003,19(1):33-38.
[6]	毕涛. 山东省烟草青枯病病原鉴定及化学药剂和生防菌株的筛选[D]. 泰安:山东农业大学, 2014.
[7]	钟贵, 郑常格, 汤历, 等. 茄科作物青枯病生物防治研究进展[J]. 广东农业科学, 2005(2):55-57.
[8]	Baker R. Mechanisms of Biological Control of Soil-Borne Pathogens[J]. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 1968,6(1):263-294.
[9]	Mandal S, Kar I., Mukherjee A K, et al. Elicitor-Induced Defense Responses in Solanum lycopersicum against Ralstonia solanacearum[J]. The Scientific World Journal, 2013: 1-9. doi: 10.1100/tsw.2002.1 URL pmid: 29973775
[10]	刘晓姣, 丁伟, 徐小洪, 等. 4种生物防治菌对烟草青枯病防治的研究进展[J]. 植物医生, 2013,26(4):46-48.
[11]	Anuratha C S, Gnanamanickam S S. Biological control of bacterial wilt caused by Pseudomonas solanacearum in India with antagonistic bacteria[J]. Plant and Soil, 1990,124(1):109-116.
[12]	张薇. 烟草青枯菌拮抗放线菌的筛选、鉴定及发酵条件研究[D]. 泰安:山东农业大学, 2009.
[13]	Chen D, Li C, Wu K, et al. A phcA- marker-free mutant of Ralstonia solanacearum as potential biocontrol agent of tomato bacterial wilt[J]. Biological Control, 2015(80):96-102.
[14]	张伏军, 林立鹏, 唐婧. 一株烟草青枯菌拮抗细菌的筛选及鉴定[J]. 西南大学学报:自然科学版, 2007(9):97-100.
[15]	Oku S, Nishiyama M, Takao Y. Selective isolation of bacteria from soil with hydrophobic materials[J]. World Journal of Microbiology & Biotechnology, 2011,27(8):1941-1945.
[16]	李伟杰, 姜瑞波. 番茄青枯病拮抗菌的筛选[J]. 微生物学杂志, 2007(1):5-8.
[17]	张仁军, 魏刚, 杨兆忠, 等. 几种生物菌剂防治烟草青枯病药效试验[J]. 现代农业科技, 2019(6):79-81.
[18]	刘国顺. 烟草栽培学[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2003.
[19]	肖协忠. 烟草化学[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 1990.
[20]	Abyad M S, Sayed M A, Shanshoury A R, et al. Towards the biological control of fungal and bacterial diseases of tomato using antagonistic Streptomyces spp.[J]. Plant and Soil, 1993,149(2):185-195.
[21]	陆铮铮, 彭丽娟, 丁海霞, 等. 烟草青枯菌拮抗放线菌的筛选及鉴定[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2013,34(2):54-58.
[22]	张立帆. 烟草青枯病拮抗放线菌的分离鉴定及其生防效果的研究[D]. 南京:南京农业大学, 2017.
[23]	李威, 肖熙鸥, 李可, 等. 娄彻氏链霉菌XL-6的抑菌活性及对茄子幼苗的防病促生效应[J]. 中国生物防治学报, 2017,33(4):531-536.
[24]	董昆明, 陈亮, 周晓见, 等. 1株抑烟草青枯病生防菌的筛选·鉴定及其活性物质研究[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2011,39(31):19172-19175.
[25]	Genin S, Denny T P. Pathogenomics of the Ralstonia Solanacearum Species Complex[J]. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 2012,50(1):67-89.
[26]	郭坚华, 王玉菊, 李瑾, 等. 抑菌圈–定殖力双重测定法筛选青枯病生防细菌[J]. 植物病理学报, 1996(1):51-56.
[27]	杨兵, 刘慧美, 龙章富. 微生物防治烟草黑胫病的研究进展[J]. 农药, 2015,54(9):629-634.
[28]	吕建林. 烟草青枯病生防菌的筛选、定殖与应用研究[D]. 长沙:湖南农业大学, 2010.
[29]	王正浩, 王维超, 毋彦彬, 等. 烟草黑胫病绿色防控技术研究进展[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2019,47(10):18-21.

处理组	株高/cm	茎围/cm	有效叶片数	最大叶宽/cm	最大叶长/cm
CK0	98.79±4.39a	10.14±0.84d	15.10±1.10d	26.61±1.81b	75.24±2.44d
CK1	87.6±10.02b	11.67±1.08ab	17.20±1.23ab	25.90±1.49b	79.69±2.59b
T1	84.41±6.87b	11.77±0.64ab	15.30±0.82cd	29.41±2.26a	82.29±1.47a
T2	81.89±8.59b	11.15±0.48c	15.80±1.87cd	26.18±3.56b	76.95±2.97cd
T3	84.75±6.50b	11.81±0.77ab	16.30±0.82bc	29.04±0.90a	78.64±2.95bc
T4	105.00±3.29a	12.25±0.81a	17.90±1.10a	30.90±0.97a	83.15±1.99a

处理组	株高/cm	茎围/cm	有效叶片数	最大叶宽/cm	最大叶长/cm
CK0	98.79±4.39a	10.14±0.84d	15.10±1.10d	26.61±1.81b	75.24±2.44d
CK1	87.6±10.02b	11.67±1.08ab	17.20±1.23ab	25.90±1.49b	79.69±2.59b
T1	84.41±6.87b	11.77±0.64ab	15.30±0.82cd	29.41±2.26a	82.29±1.47a
T2	81.89±8.59b	11.15±0.48c	15.80±1.87cd	26.18±3.56b	76.95±2.97cd
T3	84.75±6.50b	11.81±0.77ab	16.30±0.82bc	29.04±0.90a	78.64±2.95bc
T4	105.00±3.29a	12.25±0.81a	17.90±1.10a	30.90±0.97a	83.15±1.99a

处理组	上部烟叶		中部烟叶		下部烟叶
处理组	单叶鲜重	单叶干重	单叶鲜重	单叶干重	单叶鲜重	单叶干重
CK0	43.4±1.53e	9.50±0.53e	64.45±2.94e	7.30±0.45c	50.30±0.72d	6.10±0.14b
CK1	84.35±1.49a	13.00±0.59b	64.00±1.70e	7.15±0.42cd	52.65±0.72c	6.40±0.22b
T1	66.75±1.43d	11.40±0.38c	88.15±2.33a	6.60±0.29de	49.65±0.60d	6.05±0.21b
T2	65.00±3.75d	9.95±0.48de	68.50±1.21d	8.15±0.52b	58.80±1.29b	6.95±0.41a
T3	83.2±2.58ab	10.55±0.48d	73.45±1.55c	6.25±0.40e	50.40±0.91d	6.30±0.21b
T4	80.50±2.09c	14.30±0.57a	77.45±1.22b	8.75±0.47a	60.50±1.24a	7.05±0.41a

处理组	上部烟叶		中部烟叶		下部烟叶
处理组	单叶鲜重	单叶干重	单叶鲜重	单叶干重	单叶鲜重	单叶干重
CK0	43.4±1.53e	9.50±0.53e	64.45±2.94e	7.30±0.45c	50.30±0.72d	6.10±0.14b
CK1	84.35±1.49a	13.00±0.59b	64.00±1.70e	7.15±0.42cd	52.65±0.72c	6.40±0.22b
T1	66.75±1.43d	11.40±0.38c	88.15±2.33a	6.60±0.29de	49.65±0.60d	6.05±0.21b
T2	65.00±3.75d	9.95±0.48de	68.50±1.21d	8.15±0.52b	58.80±1.29b	6.95±0.41a
T3	83.2±2.58ab	10.55±0.48d	73.45±1.55c	6.25±0.40e	50.40±0.91d	6.30±0.21b
T4	80.50±2.09c	14.30±0.57a	77.45±1.22b	8.75±0.47a	60.50±1.24a	7.05±0.41a

处理组	发病率/%	病情指数	相对防效/%
CK0	34.00±3.46a	29.26±1.81a	—
CK1	25.33±2.31b	21.48±1.03b	26.54±1.13d
T1	22.67±1.15bc	19.70±0.64c	32.58±1.96c
T2	21.33±1.15c	18.67±0.59c	36.08±3.47c
T3	17.33±2.31d	14.82±0.68d	49.06±1.37b
T4	14.67±1.51e	11.56±0.59e	60.42±2.82a