Cited by 22Plant-Microbe Interactions and ImmunityPostharvest Quality and Shelf Life ManagementFungal Plant Pathogen Control

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The antagonistic effect and mechanisms of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens DGA14 against anthracnose in mango cv. ‘Carabao’

Alvindia, Dionisio G., Acda, Miriam A.·2015·Biocontrol Science and Technology

Abstract

Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain DGA14 was tested for in vitro antagonism towards Colletotrichum gloeosporioides, a causal pathogen of anthracnose in mango cv. ‘Carabao’. DGA14 produced extracellular metabolites in solid and liquid media that suppressed the growth of C. gloeosporioides. The cells of DGA14 were often observed adjacent to the pathogen so affecting its spore germination and mycelium development. DGA14 colonised mango fruit 48 h after artificial inoculation and persisted 14 days after storage at 18–20°C. On fruit surfaces, DGA14 attached and produced dents to spores of C. gloeosporioides. Dipping mangoes in aqueous cell suspension (108 mL L−1) of DGA14 significantly decreased the incidence of anthracnose as compared to untreated fruit.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09583157.2014.996738

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Govender V., 2001, Research Journal. South African Mango Growers Association, 21, 6
  2. Korsten L., 1995, South African Avocado Growers Association, 18, 124
  3. Korsten L., 1992, South African Mango Growers Association Yearbook, 12, 72
  4. Korsten L., 1991, South African Mango Growers Association Yearbook, 11, 65
  5. Nuevo P. A., 201, Technology reducing postharvest losses and maintain quality of fruits and vegetables, pp. 154
  6. Sundravadana S., 2007, Journal of Agricultural and Biological Science, 2, 10
  7. Vivekananthan R., 2006, Phytopathologia Mediterranea, 45, 126

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Alvindia, D. G., & Acda, M. A.
Affiliations
Central Luzon State University (PH)
Corresponding author
Alvindia, Dionisio G.
Venue
Biocontrol Science and Technology
Published
2015-02-09
Volume
25
Issue
5
Pages
560-572
ISSN
  • 0958-3157 (ISSN-L)
  • 1360-0478
OpenAlex
W2073078066
Cited by
22
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2
FWCI
1.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Biocontrol Science and Technology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant-Microbe Interactions and Immunity
  • 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
Keywords
Bacillus amyloliquefaciens, Colletotrichum gloeosporioides, anthracnose, mango, Carabao mango, biological control, antagonistic activity, spore germination inhibition, mycelial growth inhibition, fruit dip treatment, extracellular metabolites

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