Control of Postharvest Decay of Apple Fruit with Candida saitoana and Induction of Defense Responses
Abstract
The ability of Candida saitoana to induce systemic resistance in apple fruit against Botrytis cinerea was investigated. To separate the antagonistic activity of C. saitoana from its ability to induce resistance, the antagonist and the pathogen were applied in spatially separated wounds. In fresh apples, C. saitoana applied 0 or 24 h before inoculation with B. cinerea showed no effect on lesion development caused by B. cinerea. When applied 48 to 72 h preinoculation with B. cinerea, however, C. saitoana reduced lesion diameter by more than 50 and 70%, respectively, compared with wounding. C. saitoana had no effect on lesion development on stored apples, regardless of the lag period between yeast treatment and inoculation with B. cinerea. In addition to inducing systemic resistance, C. saitoana increased chitinase and β-1,3-glucanase activities with a higher accumulation in fresh than in stored apples. In fresh apples, the onset of systemic resistance to B. cinerea coincided with the increase in chitinase and β-1,3-glucanase activity in systemically protected tissue. These studies show that C. saitoana is capable of inducing systemic resistance in apple fruit and indirectly suggest that antifungal hydrolases are involved in the observed systemic protection.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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 El Ghaouth et al. 2003
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 El Ghaouth et al. 2003
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 24 · Cited by 165
- Authors
- El Ghaouth, A., Wilson, C. L., & Wisniewski, M.
- ORCID
- Wisniewski, Michael
- Venue
- Phytopathology®
- Publisher
- Scientific Societies
- Published
- 2003-03
- Volume
- 93
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 344-348
- ISSN
- 0031-949X (ISSN-L)
- 1943-7684
- OpenAlex
- W2087265897
- Cited by
- 165
- References
- 24
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 4.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Phytopathology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (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 › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Fungal Plant Pathogen Control
- Keywords
- Candida saitoana, Botrytis cinerea, apple, postharvest decay, induced systemic resistance, biological control, chitinase, β-1,3-glucanase, stored apples, plant defense response
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