Cited by 326Postharvest Quality and Shelf Life ManagementPlant-Microbe Interactions and ImmunityFungal Plant Pathogen Control

Induction of Resistance to Penicillium digitatum in Grapefruit by the Yeast Biocontrol Agent Candida oleophila

Droby, S., Vinokur, V., Weiss, B., Cohen, L., Daus, A., Goldschmidt, E. E., Porat, R.·2002·Phytopathology®

Abstract

The yeast Candida oleophila, the base of the commercial product Aspire, is recommended for the control of postharvest decay in citrus and pome fruit. Its modes of action include nutrient competition, site exclusion, and direct mycoparasitism. In the present study, we showed that application of Candida oleophila to surface wounds or to intact ‘Marsh Seedless’ grapefruit elicited systemic resistance against Penicillium digitatum, the main postharvest pathogen of citrus fruit. The induction of pathogen resistance in fruit was already pronounced 24 h after elicitation; it was distance, concentration, and time dependent and restricted to the peel tissue closely surrounding the yeast application site. The induction of pathogen resistance required viable yeast cells at concentrations of 10 8 to 10 9 cells ml-1. Nonviable autoclaved or boiled yeast cells or lower yeast concentrations were ineffective in enhancing fruit disease resistance. Application of Candida oleophila cell suspensions to grapefruit peel tissue increased ethylene biosynthesis, phenylalanine ammonia lyase activity, and phytoalexin accumulation, and increased chitinase and β-1,3-endoglucanase protein levels, indicated by western immunoblotting analysis. Scanning electron microscope observations revealed that spore germination and germ tube growth of Penicillium digitatum were markedly inhibited in wounds made near the yeast-treated sites. Overall, this study provides evidence that induced resistance against postharvest decay of citrus fruit should be considered an important component of the multiple modes of action of the yeast Candida oleophila.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1094/phyto.2002.92.4.393

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Biofilm formation, high osmotolerance, induction of resistance in the plant or fruit, and direct parasitism of hyphae contribute to the biocontrol activity of Candida species.

    “biofilm formation, high osmotolerance, induction of resistance in the plant/fruit, and direct parasitism of hyphae were shown to contribute to the biocontrol activity of Candida species (Droby and Chalutz 1994; Droby et al. 2002; El Ghaouth et al. 2003; Wisniewski et al. 1995, 2007).”

    From Biocontrol yeasts: mechanisms and applications (2019) · cites this paper as Droby et al. 2002

  • S. cerevisiae, Rhodosporidium paludigenum, Candida saitoana, C. oleophila and Metschnikowia species induce an innate immune response and cause resistance against phyllosphere pathogens in fruits.

    “S. cerevisiae, Rhodosporidium paludigenum, Candida saitoana, C. oleophila and Metschnikowia species induce an innate immune response and eventually cause resistance against phyllosphere pathogens in fruits”

    From Biocontrol yeasts: mechanisms and applications (2019) · cites this paper as Droby et al. 2002

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Droby, S., Vinokur, V., Weiss, B., Cohen, L., Daus, A., Goldschmidt, E. E., & Porat, R.
Venue
Phytopathology®
Published
2002-04
Volume
92
Issue
4
Pages
393-399
ISSN
  • 0031-949X (ISSN-L)
  • 1943-7684
OpenAlex
W2039364830
Cited by
325
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 12
FWCI
9.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Phytopathology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Postharvest Quality and Shelf Life Management
  • 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
Keywords
Candida oleophila, Penicillium digitatum, grapefruit, induced resistance, postharvest decay, mycoparasitism, ethylene production, phenylalanine ammonia-lyase, phytoalexins, chitinase, β-1,3-endoglucanase, spore germination inhibition, citrus fruit, ASPIRE

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