CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 67Postharvest Quality and Shelf Life ManagementFungal Plant Pathogen ControlYeasts and Rust Fungi Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The shelf life and effectiveness of granular formulations of Metschnikowia pulcherrima and Pichia guilliermondii yeast isolates that control postharvest decay of citrus fruit

Kinay, Pervin, Yildiz, Mehmet·2008·Biological Control
DOI 10.1016/j.biocontrol.2008.03.001
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Our overall objectives were to prepare commercially acceptable formulations of the postharvest biological control yeasts, Metschnikowia pulcherrima and Pichia guilliermondii, which have a long storage life and to determine the effectiveness of these formulations to control postharvest green and blue moulds on citrus fruit. Yeasts, grown on a cane molasses-based medium, were combined with talc or kaolin carriers and various adjuvants and the viability of yeast in 12 formulations was determined over a 6 month period. Formulation no. 11, containing talc, sodium alginate, sucrose, and yeast extract, for both yeasts had a significantly higher viable yeast cell content over a 6 month storage period. Among the formulations, three formulations (formulations no. 5, 6, and 11) were selected for additional in vivo testing because they had higher levels of viability amongst yeast cell populations during storage and were easier to resuspend remained in suspension more easily. These formulations were tested on Satsuma mandarin and grapefruit to control green and blue moulds. Formulations no. 5, 6, and 11 for both yeasts effectively controlled green mould, while only formulation no. 11 with either yeast isolate M. pulcherrima (isolate M1/1) or P. guilliermondii (isolate P1/3) effectively controlled both blue and green moulds.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.biocontrol.2008.03.001

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 33

  1. Abadias, 2001, Effect of freeze drying and protectants on viability of the biocontrol yeast Candida sake, International Journal of Food Microbiology, 65, 173, 10.1016/S0168-1605(00)00513-4 · DOI
  2. Abadias, 2003, Liquid formulation of the postharvest biocontrol agent Candida sake CPA-1 in isotonic solutions, Phytopathology, 93, 436, 10.1094/PHYTO.2003.93.4.436 · DOI
  3. Bora, 2004, Biological control of Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. melonis by wettable powder formulations of the two strains of Pseudomonas putida, Journal of Phytopathology, 152, 471, 10.1111/j.1439-0434.2004.00877.x · DOI
  4. Brown, 1996, Evaluation of biological products for the control of postharvest diseases of Florida citrus, Proceedings of the Florida State Horticultural Society, 109, 278
  5. Chalutz, 1990, Postharvest biocontrol of green and blue mould and sour rot of citrus fruit by Debaryomyces hansenii, Plant Disease, 74, 134, 10.1094/PD-74-0134 · DOI
  6. Connick, 1991, Formulation of mycoherbicides using a pasta-like process, Biological Control, 1, 281, 10.1016/1049-9644(91)90079-F · DOI
  7. Droby, 1989, Characterization of the biocontrol activity of Debaryomyces hansenii in the control of Penicillium digitatum of grapefruits, Canadian Journal Microbiology, 35, 794, 10.1139/m89-132 · DOI
  8. Droby, 1993, Pilot testing of Pichia guilliermondii: a biocontrol agent of postharvest diseases of citrus fruit, Biological Control, 3, 47, 10.1006/bcon.1993.1008 · DOI
  9. Droby, 1998, Commercial testing of aspire: a yeast preparation for the biological control of postharvest decay of citrus, Biological Control, 12, 97, 10.1006/bcon.1998.0615 · DOI
  10. Droby, 2001, Microbial control of postharvest diseases of fruits and vegetables–current status and future outlook, Acta Horticulturae (ISHS), 553, 371, 10.17660/ActaHortic.2001.553.85 · DOI
  11. Eckert, J.W. 1990. Role of chemical fungicides and biological agents in postharvest disease control. In: Biological Control of Postharvest Diseases of Fruits and Vegetables Workshop Proceedings Shepherdtown, West Wirginia, Sept 12–14, 14–30.
  12. Janisiewicz, 2005, Experimental bin drenching system for testing biocontrol agents to control postharvest decay of apples, Plant Disease, 89, 487, 10.1094/PD-89-0487 · DOI
  13. Janisiewicz, 2002, Biological control of postharvest diseases of fruits, Annual Review of Phytopathology, 40, 411, 10.1146/annurev.phyto.40.120401.130158 · DOI
  14. Kinay, P., Yildiz, M., Droby, S., Yildiz, F., Cohen, L., Weiss, B. 1998. Evaluation of antagonistic activity of epiphytic yeasts against rot pathogens of mandarin orange and grapefruit. In: Duffy, B.K., Rosenberger, U., Defago, G. (Eds.), Molecular Approaches in Biological Control, IOBC/wprs Bulletin no. 21(9), pp. 291–296.
  15. Kinay, P. 2001. Mandarinlerde Penicillium Çürüklüklerine karşı entegre savaşım olanakları üzerinde araştırmalar (Studies on possibilities of integrated control of Penicillium decays on mandarins). Ph.D. Dissertation. E.Ü. Fen Bil. Enst. İzmir, 108 pp.
  16. Kinay, P.,Yildiz, M., Yildiz,F., Delen, N., Tosun, N. 2001. Control of postharvest penicillium decays on citrus fruits with antagonistic yeasts and chemicals. In: Ben-Arie, R., Philosoph-Hadas (Eds.), Proc. 4th Int. Conf. on Postharvest. Acta Horticulturae, 553, pp. 383–385.
  17. Kinay, P., Yildiz, M., Droby, S. 2002. Biocontrol of Penicillium decays with epiphytic yeasts on Satsuma mandarins. In: Elad, Y., Köhl, J., Shtienberg, D. (Eds.), Proc. of the 7th WG Meeting Influence of A-Biotic and Biotic Factors on Biocontrol Agents, Kusadasi, Turkey 22–25 May 2002. IOBC WPRS Bull, pp. 207–210.
  18. Kloepper, 1981, Development of a powder formulation of Rhizobacteria for inoculation of potato seed pieces, Phytopathology, 71, 590, 10.1094/Phyto-71-590 · DOI
  19. Mokiou, 2002, Ecophysiological manipulation of the fermentation process improves viability of the biocontrol yeast Pichia anomala, Biocontrol of Fungal and Bacterial Plant Pathogens, 25, 395
  20. Muller-Stover, 2004, Two granular formulations of Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. orthoceras to mitigate sunflower broomrape Orobanche cumana, Biocontrol, 49, 595, 10.1023/B:BICO.0000036438.66150.21 · DOI
  21. Quimby, 1999, A simple method for stabilizing and granulating fungi, Biocontrol Science and Technology, 9, 5, 10.1080/09583159929857 · DOI
  22. Ozbek, T., Delen, N. 1995. Turunçgil meyvelerinde Penicillium Türlerinin Oluşturduğu Depo Çürüklüklerine Karşı Savaşım Olanakları Üzerinde Araştırmalar. Türkiye VII. Fitopatoloji Kongresi Bildirileri, 26–29 Eylül 1995, Adana, pp. 220–224.
  23. Piano, 1997, Characterization of the biocontrol capability of Metschnikowia pulcherrima against Botrytis postharvest rot of apple, Postharvest Biology and Technology, 11, 131, 10.1016/S0925-5214(97)00022-7 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Sezen, N., Yildiz, M., Kinay, P. 2004. Control of Botrytis cinerea on Sultanina seedless table grape by epiphytic yeast and their integration with lower doses of SO2. XIII. Internatinal Botrytis Symposium 25–31 October 2004, Antalya Turkey, p. 41.
  25. Shabana, 2003, Granular Pesta formulation of Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. orthoceras for biological control of sunflower broomrape: efficacy and shelf-life, Biological Control, 26, 189, 10.1016/S1049-9644(02)00130-5 · DOI
  26. Shah, 1999, Production factors involved in the formulation of Erynia neoaphidis as alginate granules, Biocontrol Science and Technology, 9, 19, 10.1080/09583159929875 · DOI
  27. Smilanick, 1992, Control of green mould of lemons with Pseudomonas species, Plant Disease, 76, 481, 10.1094/PD-76-0481 · DOI
  28. Snowdon, 1990, Vol. 1
  29. Spadaro, 2002, Mechanisms of action and efficacy of four isolates of the yeast Metschnikowia pulcherrima active against postharvest pathogens on apples, Postharvest Biology and Technology, 24, 123, 10.1016/S0925-5214(01)00172-7 · DOI · Paper page
  30. Spadaro, 2004, State of the art and future prospects of the biological control of postharvest fruit diseases, International Journal of Food Microbiology, 91, 185, 10.1016/S0168-1605(03)00380-5 · DOI
  31. Vidhyasekaran, 1995, Development of formulation of Pseudomonas fluorescens for control of chickpea wilt, Plant Disease, 79, 780, 10.1094/PD-79-0782 · DOI
  32. Wilson, 1993, A selection strategy for microbial antagonists to control postharvest diseases of fruits and vegetables, Scienta Horticulturae, 53, 183, 10.1016/0304-4238(93)90066-Y · DOI
  33. Wisniewski, 1992, Biological control of postharvest diseases of fruits and vegetables: recent advances, Hortscience, 27, 94, 10.21273/HORTSCI.27.2.94 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Kinay, P., & Yildiz, M.
Venue
Biological Control
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-06
Volume
45
Issue
3
Pages
433-440
ISSN
1049-9644 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.biocontrol.2008.03.001
OpenAlex
W2077561288
Cited by
67
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 4
FWCI
4.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
Biological Control (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Postharvest Quality and Shelf Life Management
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Fungal Plant Pathogen Control
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Yeasts and Rust Fungi Studies
Keywords
Metschnikowia pulcherrima, Candida guilliermondii, citrus fruit decay, green mold, blue mold, shelf life, yeast viability, sodium alginate, adjuvants, Citrus unshiu, grapefruit

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review