Cited by 192Postharvest Quality and Shelf Life ManagementFungal Plant Pathogen ControlPlant Pathogens and Fungal Diseases

Control of Postharvest Pathogens and Colonization of the Apple Surface by Antagonistic Microorganisms in the Field

Open access
Leibinger, Wolfgang, Breuker, Barbara, Hahn, Matthias, Mendgen, Kurt·1997·Phytopathology®

Abstract

Selected isolates of Aureobasidium pullulans, Rhodotorula glutinis, and Bacillus subtilis reduced the size and number of lesions on wounded apples caused by the postharvest pathogens Penicillium expansum, Botrytis cinerea, and Pezicula malicorticis. Combinations of the antagonistic microorganisms were applied to apple trees in the field late in the growing season of two consecutive years. The population dynamics of the introduced microorganisms and the incidence of fruit decay were determined. Population sizes of introduced antagonists on apple surfaces increased in the field following application of treatments until harvest. After transfer of the fruit from the field into cold storage, the populations of the introduced antagonists remained higher than in the control treatments. Identification of the applied isolates of A. pullulans and R. glutinis during the experiments was achieved by isolate-specific DNA probes generated from random amplified polymorphic DNA. A combination of two strains of A. pullulans and one strain of R. glutinis suppressed rotting of apple to the same extent as the commonly used fungicide Euparen. Our data demonstrate that the application of antagonistic microorganisms in the field represents a promising alternative to fungicide treatments to control post-harvest diseases of apple.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1094/phyto.1997.87.11.1103

Cites

34 of 34 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 35 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Leibinger, W., Breuker, B., Hahn, M., & Mendgen, K.
Affiliations
University of Konstanz (DE)
Corresponding author
Mendgen, Kurt
Venue
Phytopathology®
Published
1997-11
Volume
87
Issue
11
Pages
1103-1110
ISSN
  • 0031-949X (ISSN-L)
  • 1943-7684
OpenAlex
W2107044309
Cited by
192
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 6
FWCI
8.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Phytopathology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • KOPS (University of Konstanz) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Postharvest Quality and Shelf Life Management
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Fungal Plant Pathogen Control
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Plant Pathogens and Fungal Diseases
Keywords
apple postharvest disease, biological control, antagonistic microorganisms, Aureobasidium pullulans, Rhodotorula glutinis, Bacillus subtilis, Penicillium expansum, Botrytis cinerea, fruit decay, cold storage, population dynamics, fungicide alternatives, DNA probes, RAPD markers

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