The DOI matches its Crossref record; 64 of the 64 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Mode of Action of Microbial Biological Control Agents Against Plant Diseases: Relevance Beyond Efficacy
Open accessAbstract
Microbial biological control agents (MBCAs) are applied to crops for biological control of plant pathogens where they act via a range of modes of action. Some MBCAs interact with plants by inducing resistance or priming plants without any direct interaction with the targeted pathogen. Other MBCAs act via nutrient competition or other mechanisms modulating the growth conditions for the pathogen. Antagonists acting through hyperparasitism and antibiosis are directly interfering with the pathogen. Such interactions are highly regulated cascades of metabolic events, often combining different modes of action. Compounds involved such as signaling compounds, enzymes and other interfering metabolites are produced in situ at low concentrations during interaction. The potential of microorganisms to produce such a compound in vitro does not necessarily correlate with their in situ antagonism. Understanding the mode of action of MBCAs is essential to achieve optimum disease control. Also understanding the mode of action is important to be able to characterize possible risks for humans or the environment and risks for resistance development against the MBCA. Preferences for certain modes of action for an envisaged application of a MBCA also have impact on the screening methods used to select new microbials. Screening of MBCAs in bioassays on plants or plant tissues has the advantage that MBCAs with multiple modes of action and their combinations potentially can be detected whereas simplified assays on nutrient media strongly bias the selection towards in vitro production of antimicrobial metabolites which may not be responsible for in situ antagonism. Risks assessments for MBCAs are relevant if they contain antimicrobial metabolites at effective concentration in the product. However, in most cases antimicrobial metabolites are produced by antagonists directly on the spot where the targeted organism is harmful. Such ubiquitous metabolites involved in natural, complex, highly regulated interactions between microbial cells and/or plants are not relevant for risk assessments. Currently, risks of microbial metabolites involved in antagonistic modes of action are often assessed similar to assessments of single molecule fungicides. The nature of the mode of action of antagonists requires a rethinking of data requirements for the registration of MBCAs.
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
Cites
Phylogenetic identification and in situ detection of individual microbial cells without cultivation
Amann, R., Ludwig, W., & SCHLEIFER, K. H. (1995) · Microbiological Reviews · doi:10.1128/mmbr.59.1.143-169.1995 · Cited by 9,093
Trichoderma species — opportunistic, avirulent plant symbionts
Harman, G. E., Howell, C. R., Viterbo, A., Chet, I., & Lorito, M. (2004) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nrmicro797 · Cited by 4,019
Plant-Growth-Promoting Rhizobacteria
Lugtenberg, B., & Kamilova, F. (2009) · Annual Review of Microbiology · doi:10.1146/annurev.micro.62.081307.162918 · Cited by 3,987
Boller, T., & Felix, G. (2009) · Annual Review of Plant Biology · doi:10.1146/annurev.arplant.57.032905.105346 · Cited by 3,387
Induced systemic resistance by beneficial microbes
Pieterse, C. M. J., Zamioudis, C., Berendsen, R. L., Weller, D. M., Van Wees, S. C. M., & Bakker, P. A. H. M. (2014) · Annual Review of Phytopathology · doi:10.1146/annurev-phyto-082712-102340 · Cited by 3,272
Bioactive Microbial Metabolites: A Personal View
Bérdy, J. (2005) · The Journal of Antibiotics · doi:10.1038/ja.2005.1 · Cited by 3,170
Compant, S., Duffy, B., Nowak, J., Clément, C., & Barka, E. A. (2005) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.71.9.4951-4959.2005 · Cited by 2,640
Bacillus lipopeptides: versatile weapons for plant disease biocontrol
Ongena, M., & Jacques, P. (2008) · Trends in Microbiology · doi:10.1016/j.tim.2007.12.009 · Cited by 2,418
P ATHOGEN P OPULATION G ENETICS, E VOLUTIONARY P OTENTIAL, AND D URABLE R ESISTANCE
McDonald, B. A., & Linde, C. (2002) · Annual Review of Phytopathology · doi:10.1146/annurev.phyto.40.120501.101443 · Cited by 2,128
Microbial interactions and biocontrol in the rhizosphere
Whipps, J. M. (2001) · Journal of Experimental Botany · doi:10.1093/jexbot/52.suppl_1.487 · Cited by 1,934
Cited by
Trichoderma: The “Secrets” of a Multitalented Biocontrol Agent
Sood, M., Kapoor, D., Kumar, V., Sheteiwy, M. S., Ramakrishnan, M., Landi, M., Araniti, F., & Sharma, A. (2020) · Plants · doi:10.3390/plants9060762 · Cited by 650
Combining Biocontrol Agents with Chemical Fungicides for Integrated Plant Fungal Disease Control
Ons, L., Bylemans, D., Thevissen, K., & Cammue, B. P. A. (2020) · Microorganisms · doi:10.3390/microorganisms8121930 · Cited by 438
Panno, S., Davino, S., Caruso, A. G., Bertacca, S., Crnogorac, A., Mandić, A., Noris, E., & Matić, S. (2021) · Agronomy · doi:10.3390/agronomy11112188 · Cited by 382
Biocontrol Activity and Plant Growth Promotion Exerted by Aureobasidium pullulans Strains
Di Francesco, A., Di Foggia, M., Corbetta, M., Baldo, D., Ratti, C., & Baraldi, E. (2021) · Journal of Plant Growth Regulation · doi:10.1007/s00344-020-10184-3 · Cited by 62
Bian, J.-Y., Fang, Y.-L., Song, Q., Sun, M.-L., Yang, J.-Y., Ju, Y.-W., Li, D.-W., & Huang, L. (2021) · Phytopathology® · doi:10.1094/phyto-05-20-0170-r · Cited by 49
Metadata
- Authors
- Köhl, J., Kolnaar, R., & Ravensberg, W. J.
- Venue
- Frontiers in Plant Science
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2019-07-19
- Volume
- 10
- Pages
- 845-845
- ISSN
- 1664-462X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2963252488
- Cited by
- 1,382
- References
- 64
- FWCI
- 92.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Mode of Action of Microbial Biological Control Agents Against Plant Diseases: Relevance Beyond Efficacy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3389/fpls.2019.00845
- The paper
- Köhl, J., Kolnaar, R., & Ravensberg, W. J. (2019). Mode of Action of Microbial Biological Control Agents Against Plant Diseases: Relevance Beyond Efficacy. Frontiers in Plant Science. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2019.00845
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.