ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Control of postharvest decay of apple fruit with Trichoderma virens isolates and induction of defense responses
 
More details
Hide details
1
Department of Plant Protection, College of Abourayhan, University of Tehran P.O. Box 11365/4117, Pakdasht, Tehran, Iran
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Etebarian Hassan Reza
Department of Plant Protection, College of Abourayhan, University of Tehran P.O. Box 11365/4117, Pakdasht, Tehran, Iran
 
Journal of Plant Protection Research 2010;50(2):146–152
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
The biocontrol activity of two isolates of Trichoderma virens against blue mould of apple fruits caused by Penicillium expansum and their ability to induce biochemical defense responses in apple tissue were investigated. Apple fruit (Malus domestica) wounds were inoculated with 20μl antagonist suspension (107 conidia/ml) of T. virens and 4 h later with 20 μl of conidial suspension of P. expansum (105 conidia/ml). The apples were then incubated at 20°C for 8 days. Lesion diameters were measured 4 and 8 days after inoculation with the pathogen. Two isolates of T. virens were effective in controlling decay of apple fruits caused by P. expansum. Six days after treatment peroxidase activity increased by more than three-fold in apple treated fruit in combination of antagonist and pathogen, in comparison with in wounded, non-inoculated control tissue. Catalase (CAT) activity increased in inoculated fruits in combination of T. virens and P. expansum in comparison with healthy control at all days and maximum activity level was noted at 6 days after inoculation. The results indicated that T6 and T8 isolates of T. virens caused the increase in β-1,3-glucanase activity that reached maximum levels 4 and 6 days after inoculation with pathogen, respectively. The increase in β-1,3-glucanase activity was triggered by wounding although the level of increase was markedly lower than detected in treated fruits. Phenolic compounds accumulation showed the highest levels 2–4 days after inoculation and then decreased. The ability of T. virens to increase the activity of peroxidase, catalase, β-1,3-glucanase and levels of phenolic compounds may be one of mechanisms responsible for its biocontrol activity.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors have declared that no conflict of interests exist.
 
REFERENCES (45)
1.
Abeles F.B., Forrence L.E. 1979. Temporal and hormonal control β-1,3-glucanase in Phaseolus vulgaris L. Plant Physiol. 45: 395–400.
 
2.
Brennan T., Frenkel C. 1977. Involvement of hydrogen peroxide in the regulation of senecence in pear. Plant Physiol. 59: 411–416.
 
3.
Barbosa M.A.G., Rehn K.G., Menezes M., Mariano R.D.L.R. 2001. Antagonism of Trichoderma species on Cladosporium herbarum and their enzamatic characterization. Braz. J. Microbiol. 32: 98–104.
 
4.
Benitez T., Rincon A.M., Limon M.C., Condon A.C. 2004. Biocontrol mechanisms of Trichoderma strains. Int. Microbiol. 7: 249–260.
 
5.
Bradford M.M. 1976. A rapid sensitive method for the quantification of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal. Biochem. 72: 248–254.
 
6.
Cao J., Jiang W., He H. 2005. Induced resistance in Yali Pear (Pyrus bretschneideri Rehd.) fruit against infection by Penicillium expansum by postharvest infiltration of Acibenzolar-S–methyl. J. Phytopathol. 153: 640–646.
 
7.
Chan Z., Tian S. 2006. Induction of H2O2-metabolizing enzymes and total protein synthesis by antagonistic yeast and salicylic acid in harvested sweet cherry fruit. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 39: 314–320.
 
8.
Chand-Goyal T., Spotts R.A. 1997. Biological control of postharvest diseases of apple and pear under semicommercial and commercial conditions using three saprophytic yeasts. Biol. Control 10: 199–206.
 
9.
Collinge B., Kragh K.M., Mikkelsen J.D., Nielsen K.K., Rasmussen U., Vad K. 1993. Plant chitinases. Plant J. 3: 31–40.
 
10.
Conrath U., Pieterse C.M.J., Mauch–Mani B. 2002. Priming in plant–pathogen interactions. Trends Plant Sci. 7: 210–216.
 
11.
Dixon R.A., Paiva N.L. 1995. Stress-induced phenylpropanoid metabolism. Plant Cell 7: 1085–1097.
 
12.
Droby S., Chalutz E. 1994. Mode of action of biocontrol agents for postharvest diseases. p. 63–75 In: “Biological Control of Postharvest Diseases of Fruits and Vegetables – Theory and Practice” (C.L. Wilson, M.E. Wisniewski, eds.). CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
 
13.
Droby S., Vinokur V., Weiss B., Cohen L., Daus A., Goldschmidt E.E., Porat R. 2002. Induction of resistance to Penicillium digitatum in grapefruit by the yeast biocontrol agent Candida oleophila. Phytopathology 92: 393–399.
 
14.
Droby S., Wisniewski M., Ei-Ghaouth A., Wilson C. 2003. Biological control of postharvest diseases of fruit and vegetables: current achievements and future challenges. Acta Hort. 628: 703–713.
 
15.
Du Z., Bramlage W.J. 1994. Superoxide dismutase activities in senescing apple fruit (Malus domestica Borkh.). J. Food Sci. 59: 581–584.
 
16.
El-Ghaouth A., Wilson C., Wisniewski M. 1998. Ultrastructural and cytochemical aspect of the biocontrol activity of Candida saitoana in apple fruit. Phytopathology 88: 282–291.
 
17.
Friendrich L., Lawton K., Ruess W., Masner P., Specker N., Gut Rella M., Meier B., Dincher S., Staub T., Uknes S., Métraux J-P., Kessmann H., Ryals J. 1996. A benzothiadiazole derivative induces systemic acquired resistance in tobacco. The Plant J. 10: 61–70.
 
18.
Gogoi R., Singh D.V., Sivastava K.D. 2001. Phenolic as a biochemical basis of resistance in wheat against karnal bunt. Plant Pathol. 50: 470–476.
 
19.
Gorin N., Heidema F.T. 1976. Peroxidase activity in Golden Delicious apples as a possible parameter of ripening and senescence. J. Agric. Food Chem. 24: 200–201.
 
20.
Gong Y., Toivonen P., Lau O.L., Wiersma P.A. 2001. Antioxidant system level in `Braeburn` apple is related to its browning disorder. Bot. Bull. Acad. Sin. 42: 259–264.
 
21.
Guleria S., Kumar A. 2006. Azadirachta indica leaf extract induces resistance in sesame against Alternaria leaf spot diseases. J. Cell Mol. Biol. 5: 81–86.
 
22.
Hancock J.T., Desikan R., Charke A., Hurst R.D., Neill S.J. 2002. Cell signaling following plant/pathogen interactions involves the generation of reactive oxygen and reactive nitrogen species. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 40: 611–617.
 
23.
Honty K., Hevesi M., Toth M., Stefanovits-Banyai E. 2005. Some biochemical changes in pear fruit tissue induced by Erwinia amylovora. Proc. of the 8th Hungarian Congress on Plant Physiology and the 6th Hungarian Conference on Photosynthesis. Acta Biol. Szegediensis 49: 127–129.
 
24.
Huckelhoven R., Fodor J., Preis C., Kogel K.H 1999. Hypersensitive cell death and papilla formation in barley attacked by the powdery mildew fungus are associated with hydrogen peroxide but not with salicylic acid accumulation. Plant Physiol. 19: 1251–1260.
 
25.
Ippolito A., El-Ghaouth A., Wilson C.L., Wisniewski M. 2000. Control of postharvest decay of apple fruit by Aureobasidium pullulans and induction of defense responses. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 19: 265–272.
 
26.
Janisiewicz W.J., Korsten L. 2002. Biological control of postharvest diseases of fruits. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 40: 411–441.
 
27.
Kogel K., Gregor L. 2005. Induced disease resistance and gene expression in cereals. Cell Microbiol. 7: 1555–1564.
 
28.
Kuc J. 1990. Immunization for the control of plant disease. p. 355–366. In: “Biological Control of Soil-borne Plant Pathogens” (D. Hornby, ed.). CAB International, 496 pp.
 
29.
Kuc J. 2001. Concepts and direction of induced systemic resistance in plants and its application. Eur. J. Plant Pathol. 107: 7–12.
 
30.
Little T.M., Hills F.J. 1978. Agricultural experimentation design and analysis. John Wiley and Sons, New York, USA, 368 pp.
 
31.
Low P.S., Merida J.R., 1996. The oxidative burst in plant defense: function and signal transduction. Physiol. Plant. 96: 533–542.
 
32.
Ryalls J., Neuenschwander U., Willits M., Molina A., Steiner H.Y., Hunt M. 1996. Systemic acquired resistance. Plant Cell 8: 1809–1819.
 
33.
Mari M., Guizzardi M. 1998. The postharvest phase: emerging technologies for the control of fungal diseases. Phytoparasitica 26: 59–66.
 
34.
Nigro F., Finetti Sialer M.M., Gallitelli D. 1999. Transformation of Metschnikowia pulcherrima 320, biocontrol agent of storage rot, with the green fluorescent protein gene. J. Plant Pathol. 81: 205–208.
 
35.
Schlumbaum A., Mauch F., Vogeli U., Boller T. 1986. Plant chitinases are potent inhibitors of fungal growth. Nature 324: 365–367.
 
36.
Sela-Buurlage M.B., Ponstein A.S., Bres-Vloemans B., Melchers L.O., Van Den Lzen P., Cornelissen B.J.C. 1993. Only specific tobacco chitinases and β-1,3-glucanase exhibit antifungal activity. Plant Physiol. 101: 857–863.
 
37.
Sivakumar D., Wilson Wijeratnam R.S., Wijesundera R.L.C., Abeyeskere M. 2000. Antagonistic effect of Trichoderma harzianum on postharvest pathogens of rambutan (Nephelium lappaceum). Phytoparasitica 28 (3): 240–247.
 
38.
Sticher L., Mauch-Mani B., Metraux J.P. 1997. Systemic acquired resistance. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 35: 235–270.
 
39.
Ton J., Jakab G., Toquin V., Flors V., Iavicoli A., Maeder M.M., Métraux J-P., Mauch-Mani B. 2005. Dissecting the B-aminobutyric acid-induced priming phenomenon in arabidopsis. Plant Cell 17: 987–999.
 
40.
Van Loon L.C., Bakker P.A., Pieterse C.M. 1998. Systemic resistance induced by rhizophere bacteria. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 36: 453–483.
 
41.
Vetter J.L., Steinberg M.P., Nelson A.I. 1958. Quantitative determination of peroxidase in sweet corn. J. Agric. Food Chem. 6: 39–41.
 
42.
Wang Y., Tian S. 2004. Changes in the activities of pro- and antioxidant enzyme in peach fruit inoculated with Cryptococcus laurentii or Penicillium expansum at 0 or 20°C. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 34: 21–28.
 
43.
Wantoch-Rekowski R. 2004. Pflanzenschutz-antagonisten zu bodenbürtigen krankheiten (2). Deutscher. Gartenbau 50, p. 38.
 
44.
Wilson G.L., Ei-Ghaouth A., Chalutz E., Droby S., Stevens G., Lu J.Y., Khan V., Arul J. 1994. Potential of induced resistance to control postharvest diseases of fruits and vegetables. Plant Dis.78: 837–844.
 
45.
Yamomoto H., Hokin H., Tany T., Kadota G. 1977. Phenylalanine ammonia-lyase in relation to the corn rust resistance of oat leaves. Phytopathology 90: 203–211.
 
eISSN:1899-007X
ISSN:1427-4345