The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Influence of plant species on disease suppression by Pseudomonas fluorescens strain CHAO with enhanced antibiotic production
Abstract
Introduction of the recombinant cosmid pME3090 into Pseudomonas fluorescens strain CHAO, a good biocontrol agent of various diseases caused by soilborne pathogens, increased three‐ to five‐fold the production of the antibiotic metabolites pyoluteorin (Pit) and 2,4‐diacetylphlorogIucinol (Phi) in vitro. Strain CHAO/pME3090 also overproduced Pit and Phi in the rhizosphere of wheat infected or not infected with Pythium ultimum. The biocontrol activity of the wild‐type and recombinant Straitis was compared using various plant pathogen‐host combinations in a gnotobiotic system. Antibiotic overproduction affected neither the protection of wheat against P. ultimum and Gaeumannomyces graminis var. tritici nor the growth of wheat plants. In contrast, strain CHA0/pME3090 showed an increased capacity to protect cucumber against Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cucumerinum and Phomopsis sclerotioides , compared with the wild‐type strain CHAO, The antibiotic overproducing strain protected tobacco roots significantly better against Thielaviopsis basicola than the wild‐type strain but drastically reduced the growth of tobacco plants and was also toxic to the growth of sweet com. On King's B agar and on malt agar, the recombinant strain CHA0/pME3090 inhibited all pathogens more than did the parental strain CHAO. Synthetic Pit and Phi were toxic to all fungi tested. Tobacco and sweet com were more sensitive to synthetic Pit and Phi than were cucumber and wheat. There was no correlation between the sensitivity of the pathogens to the synthetic antibiotics and the degree of disease suppression by strain CHAO pME3090. However, there was a correlation between the sensitivity of the plants and the toxicity of the recombinant strain. We conclude that the plant species rather than the pathogen determines whether cosmid pME3090 in P. fluorescens strain CHAO leads to improved disease suppression.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Biological control of soil-borne pathogens by fluorescent pseudomonads
Haas, D., & Défago, G. (2005) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nrmicro1129 · Cited by 2,598
Self-citationSYSTEMIC RESISTANCE INDUCED BY RHIZOSPHERE BACTERIA
van Loon, L. C., Bakker, P. A. H. M., & Pieterse, C. M. J. (1998) · Annual Review of Phytopathology · doi:10.1146/annurev.phyto.36.1.453 · Cited by 2,361
Diversity and Natural Functions of Antibiotics Produced by Beneficial and Plant Pathogenic Bacteria
Raaijmakers, J. M., & Mazzola, M. (2012) · Annual Review of Phytopathology · doi:10.1146/annurev-phyto-081211-172908 · Cited by 674
Biocontrol of Soilborne Plant Pathogens.
Handelsman, J., & Stabb, E. V. (1996) · The Plant Cell · doi:10.1105/tpc.8.10.1855 · Cited by 624
Frequency of Antibiotic-Producing Pseudomonas spp. in Natural Environments
Raaijmakers, J. M., Weller, D. M., & Thomashow, L. S. (1997) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.63.3.881-887.1997 · Cited by 494
Metadata
- Authors
- MAURHOFER, M., KEEL, C., HAAS, D., & DÉFAGO, G.
- Venue
- Plant Pathology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1995-02
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 40-50
- ISSN
- 0032-0862 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-3059
- OpenAlex
- W2004985021
- Cited by
- 212
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Influence of plant species on disease suppression by Pseudomonas fluorescens strain CHAO with enhanced antibiotic production. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-3059.1995.tb02714.x
- The paper
- MAURHOFER, M., KEEL, C., HAAS, D., & DÉFAGO, G. (1995). Influence of plant species on disease suppression by Pseudomonas fluorescens strain CHAO with enhanced antibiotic production. Plant Pathology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3059.1995.tb02714.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.