Cited by 136Plant-Microbe Interactions and ImmunityFungal Plant Pathogen ControlMicrobial Natural Products and Biosynthesis

Antagonist effects of Bacillus spp. strains against Fusarium graminearum for protection of durum wheat ( Triticum turgidum L. subsp. durum )

Open access
Zalila-Kolsi, Imen, Ben Mahmoud, Afif, Ali, Hacina, Sellami, Sameh, Nasfi, Zina, Tounsi, Slim, Jamoussi, Kaïs·2016·Microbiological Research

Abstract

Bacillus species are attractive due to their potential use in the biological control of fungal diseases. Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain BLB369, Bacillus subtilis strain BLB277, and Paenibacillus polymyxa strain BLB267 were isolated and identified using biochemical and molecular (16S rDNA, gyrA, and rpoB) approaches. They could produce, respectively, (iturin and surfactin), (surfactin and fengycin), and (fusaricidin and polymyxin) exhibiting broad spectrum against several phytopathogenic fungi. In vivo examination of wheat seed germination, plant height, phenolic compounds, chlorophyll, and carotenoid contents proved the efficiency of the bacterial cells and the secreted antagonist activities to protect Tunisian durum wheat (Triticum turgidum L. subsp. durum) cultivar Om Rabiia against F. graminearum fungus. Application of single bacterial culture medium, particularly that of B. amyloliquefaciens, showed better protection than combinations of various culture media. The tertiary combination of B. amyloliquefaciens, B. subtilis, and P. polymyxa bacterial cells led to the highest protection rate which could be due to strains synergistic or complementary effects. Hence, combination of compatible biocontrol agents could be a strategic approach to control plant diseases.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.micres.2016.06.012

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 70 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zalila-Kolsi, I., Ben Mahmoud, A., Ali, H., Sellami, S., Nasfi, Z., Tounsi, S., & Jamoussi, K.
Affiliations
University of Sfax (TN)
Venue
Microbiological Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-11
Volume
192
Pages
148-158
ISSN
0944-5013 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2462549137
Cited by
136
References
70
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 6
FWCI
9.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Microbiological Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Tunisian “Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research”
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant-Microbe Interactions and Immunity
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Fungal Plant Pathogen Control
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Microbial Natural Products and Biosynthesis
Keywords
Bacillus amyloliquefaciens, Bacillus subtilis, Paenibacillus polymyxa, Fusarium graminearum, durum wheat, biological control, antagonistic activity, iturin, surfactin, fengycin, fusaricidin, polymyxins, seed treatment, plant pathogenic fungi
MeSH terms
Antibiosis, Antifungal Agents, Bacillus, Fusarium, Genes, Bacterial, Microbial Sensitivity Tests, Phenotype, Phylogeny, Plant Diseases, Seeds, Triticum, Germination

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