Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
1
Currently Registered Biopesticides
Fungi antagonists:
Epidemiological concepts
Ampelomyces quisqualis
Candida oleophila
AQ10
Aspire and biological control
Coniothyrium minitans Contans WG
Intercept WG
Myrothecium verrucaria(killed) DiTera
Trichoderma spp.&
Gliocaldium spp. Plantshield
Rootshield
Soilgard
Primastop
Plant Activators:
Bacterial protein Messenger
Synthetic chemicals Actigard
17 years
Festival of Enthusiasms in Biological
Relative Disease Incidence
Control
100
Water control
80
60
40 Antibiotic
Integrated • ‘Effective biocontrol requires massive antagonist introduction’
standards
20 Biological
techologies
• ‘Biocontrol is overwhelmed by high pathogen populations’
No. of orchard trials:
0 26 6 13 20 23 18 9 23 40 8 8
A
d
)
X-
e)
)
A
X-
el
H
6
in
el
6
1
H
50
50
lin
9-
D
pr
hi
hi
yc
pr
D
C
os
A
yc
os
A
om
E
an
eE
us
an
Fe
ac
yc
yc
r
-o
-o
pt
B
pl
B
(F
M
M
tr
+
CP
ht
tre
P
ht
te
1
en
en
P-
8
EC
lig
lig
9-
xy
E
13
th
th
C
B
(o
B
E
6
17
ne
50
50
ce
6
c
re
p
50
el
A
on
on
e
st
us
hi
A
tr
A
ue
is
os
X-
1+
pl
H
gr
eq
pr
yc
D
9-
1
A
9-
ED
A
S
M
C
6
+
en
Fe
50
06
th
A
us
A5
P-
us
pl
an
EC
pl
06
B
1
06
A5
ht
9-
A5
lig
C
an
B
B
ht
1
9-
lig
C
2
Most common pathogen dose/ disease response relationship Question of the day:
100%
of pathogen dose,
0%
Amount of inoculum (X)
Proportion of pathogen
Efficiency constant Next Step:
inoculum rendered ineffective
Xi/X = 1 – e-cz • Define observed plant disease as a function
Density of biocontrol agent
of the density of the biocontrol agent
Proportion of pathogen
inoculum remaining effective
Y = 1 – e-ax e - cz
1- Xi/X = e - cz
3
A few published studies
presented data relating
disease suppression to
Does the idea work? antagonist dose,
Biocontrol dose-response studies from the literature: Biocontrol dose-response studies from the literature:
50 5 50 5
Adams & Fravel 1991 Adams & Fravel 1991
Sclerotinia minor sclerotia/100 g soil
Sclerotinia minor sclerotia/100 g soil
4 4
35 3.5 35 3.5
30 3 30 3
25 2.5 25 2.5
20 2 20 2
15 1.5 15 1.5
10 1 10 1
5 0.5 5 0.5
0 0 0 0
0 5 10 15 20 0.E+00 2.E+07 4.E+07 6.E+07 8.E+07 0 5 10 15 20 0.E+00 2.E+07 4.E+07 6.E+07 8.E+07
Sporodesmium sclerotivorum (kg/ha) Pseudomonas fluorescens (cfu/seed) Sporodesmium sclerotivorum (kg/ha) Pseudomonas fluorescens (cfu/seed)
2 1 2 1
1.8 Mandeel & Baker 1991 1.8 Mandeel & Baker 1991
Incidence of Fusarium Wilt [-ln(1-y)]
0.9 0.9
1.6 0.8 1.6 0.8
1.4 0.7 1.4 0.7
1.2 0.6 1.2 0.6
1 0.5 1 0.5
0.8 0.4 0.8 0.4
0.6 0.3 0.6 0.3
0.4 0.2 0.4 0.2
0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1
0 0 0 0
0 1 2 3 4 0.E+00 2.E+04 4.E+04 6.E+04 0 1 2 3 4 0.E+00 2.E+04 4.E+04 6.E+04
Trichoderma harzianum (g/kg soil) Non-pathogenic Fusarium oxysporum (cfu/g soil) Trichoderma harzianum (g/kg soil) Non-pathogenic Fusarium oxysporum (cfu/g soil)
4
Recognition of an asymptotic limit to effectiveness of biocontrol
Biocontrol agent potentially 100% effective A = 1.0
100%
1.0
pathogen propagules
rendered ineffective
A 0.8
High amount of
Proportion of
Xi/X = A (1 – e-cz )
0.4
Low amount of
pathogen inoculum (x)
0.2
0%
Amount of biocontrol agent (Z) 0.0
0 100 200 300 400 500
Density of biological control agent (z)
Biocontrol agent is maximally 80% effective A = 0.8 Effective antibiosis is a factor that
influences magnitude of the asymptote
1.0 Control of Crown Gall of Tomato with A. radiobacter K84
High amount of
pathogen inoculum (x) 1.0
Tomato
Proportion diseased (y)
0.8 0.8
Pathogen resistant
0.6 to agrocin 84
Disease incidence
0.6 0.4
Pathogen sensitive
0.2
to agrocin 84
1.0
pathogen inoculum (x)
0.8
0.2
0.6 Pathogen
y = 1-exp{-k x[(1-A ) + A exp(-c z)]} 0.4
oversprayed
0.0 0.2
A.r. K84
0 100 200 300 400 500
Cherry 0.0
spotted
Density of biological control agent (z) 0E+0 1E+8 2E+8 3E+8 4E+8 5E+8 6E+8
5
Oregon State Inoculated Fire Blight Trials 1991-2007
17 years
80
60
Integrated
40 Antibiotic
standards
20 Biological
No. of orchard trials: techologies
0 26 6 13 20 23 18 9 23 40 8 8
d
)
X-
e)
)
A
-
el
H
6
in
el
6
1
rX
50
50
lin
9-
D
pr
hi
hi
yc
D
Ap
D
C
os
A
yc
os
D
om
E
an
eE
us
an
Fe
ac
yc
yc
r
-o
-o
pt
B
pl
B
(F
M
M
tr
+
CP
ht
tre
P
ht
te
1
en
en
P-
8
EC
lig
lig
9-
xy
E
13
(s
C
th
th
C
B
(o
B
E
6
17
ne
50
50
ce
ce
6
d
re
ep
50
el
A
on
on
st
us
hi
A
tr
A
ue
is
os
X-
1+
pl
H
gr
eq
pr
yc
D
9-
1
A
9-
ED
A
S
M
C
6
+
en
Fe
50
06
th
A
us
A5
P-
us
pl
an
EC
pl
06
B
1
06
A5
ht
9-
A5
lig
C
an
B
B
ht
1
9-
lig
C
Epiphytic yields:
Pear growth chamber Apple growth chamber
1.0E+08 1.6E+07
A B
7.5E+07 1.2E+07
Mixed Inoculum
Wild type :: hrp L-
Population size (CFU per flower)
1 :: 13
5.0E+07 8.0E+06
Mixed Inoculum
Wild type :: hrp L-
2.5E+07 1 :: 11 4.0E+06
0.0E+00 0.0E+00
5.0E+06 5.0E+06
0.0E+00 0.0E+00
Ea153N hrpL- Mixed Ea153N hrpL- Combined