Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 373

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Endophytic bacterial communities of field-grown potato plants and their plant-growth-promoting and antagonistic abilities

Sessitsch, Angela, Reiter, Birgit, Berg, Gabriele·2004·Canadian Journal of Microbiology

Abstract

To study the effect of plant growth on potato-associated bacteria, the composition and properties of bacteria colonizing the endosphere of field-grown potato were analyzed by a multiphasic approach. The occurrence and diversity of potato-associated bacteria were monitored by a cultivation-independent approach, using terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis of 16S rDNA. The patterns obtained revealed a high heterogeneity of community composition and suggested the existence of plant-specific communities. However, endophytic populations correlated to a certain extent with plant growth performance. Endophytes were also isolated from plants that grew well or grew poorly and were identified by partial sequencing of the 16S rRNA genes. A broad phylogenetic spectrum was found among isolates and differently growing plants hosted different bacterial populations. In an approach to investigate the plant-growth-promoting potential of potato-associated bacteria, a total of 35 bacteria were screened by dual testing for in vitro antagonism towards (i) the fungal pathogens Verticillium dahliae, Rhizoctonia solani, Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, and Phytophthora cactorum and (ii) the bacterial pathogens Erwinia carotovora, Streptomyces scabies, and Xanthomonas campestris. The proportion of isolates with antagonistic activity was highest against Streptomyces sp. (43%) followed by those against Xanthomonas sp. (29%). As all plants showed more or less severe disease symptoms of scab disease caused by Streptomyces scabies, we assume that the presence of the pathogen induced the colonization of antagonists. The antifungal activity of the isolates was generally low. The biotechnological potential of endophytic isolates assessed by their antagonistic activity and by in vitro production of enzymes, antibiotics, siderophores, and the plant growth hormone indole-1,3-acetic acid was generally high. Overall, seven endophytes were found to antagonize fungal as well as bacterial pathogens and showed a high production of active compounds and were therefore considered promising biological control agents.Key words: T-RFLP, 16S rRNA, siderophores, IAA, biocontrol.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1139/w03-118

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

See all 373

Metadata

Authors
Sessitsch, A., Reiter, B., & Berg, G.
Venue
Canadian Journal of Microbiology
Published
2004-04-01
Volume
50
Issue
4
Pages
239-249
ISSN
  • 0008-4166 (ISSN-L)
  • 1480-3275
OpenAlex
W2129234968
Cited by
373
References
0
FWCI
15.74
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: Endophytic bacterial communities of field-grown potato plants and their plant-growth-promoting and antagonistic abilities. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1139/w03-118
The paper
Sessitsch, A., Reiter, B., & Berg, G. (2004). Endophytic bacterial communities of field-grown potato plants and their plant-growth-promoting and antagonistic abilities. Canadian Journal of Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1139/w03-118

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.