Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26765124›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Biological Control Activities of Rice-Associated Bacillus sp. Strains against Sheath Blight and Bacterial Panicle Blight of Rice.

Bishnu K Shrestha, Hari Sharan Karki, Donald E Groth, Nootjarin Jungkhun, Jong Hyun Ham

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
23.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 112 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. EndophyticPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Field Sanitation and Foliar Application ofThe plant pathology journal · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Open life sciences · 2019
    Article
  20. Isolation and characterization ofJournal, genetic engineering & biotechnology · 2018
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Bishnu K ShresthaDepartment of Plant Pathology and Crop Physiology, Louisiana State University Agricultural Center, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 70803, United States of America.
Hari Sharan KarkiDepartment of Plant Pathology and Crop Physiology, Louisiana State University Agricultural Center, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 70803, United States of America.
Donald E GrothRice Research Station, Louisiana State University Agricultural Center, Rayne, Louisiana, 70578, United States of America.
Nootjarin JungkhunChiang Rai Rice Research Center, Bureau of Rice Research and Development, Rice Department, 474 Moo 9, Phaholyothin Rd., Muang Phan, Phan, Chiang Rai, 57120, Thailand.
Jong Hyun HamDepartment of Plant Pathology and Crop Physiology, Louisiana State University Agricultural Center, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 70803, United States of America.
Louisiana State University Agricultural Center · USUbonRatchathani Rice Research Center · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Potential biological control agents for two major rice diseases, sheath blight and bacterial panicle blight, were isolated from rice plants in this study. Rice-associated bacteria (RABs) isolated from rice plants grown in the field were tested for their antagonistic activities against the rice pathogens, Rhizoctonia solani and Burkholderia glumae, which cause sheath blight and bacterial panicle blight, respectively. Twenty-nine RABs were initially screened based on their antagonistic activities against both R. solani and B. glumae. In follow-up retests, 26 RABs of the 29 RABs were confirmed to have antimicrobial activities, but the rest three RABs did not reproduce any observable antagonistic activity against R. solani or B. glumae. According to16S rDNA sequence identity, 12 of the 26 antagonistic RABs were closest to Bacillus amyloliquefaciens, while seven RABs were to B. methylotrophicus and B, subtilis, respectively. The 16S rDNA sequences of the three non-antagonistic RABs were closest to Lysinibacillus sphaericus (RAB1 and RAB12) and Lysinibacillus macroides (RAB5). The five selected RABs showing highest antimicrobial activities (RAB6, RAB9, RAB16, RAB17S, and RAB18) were closest to B. amyloliquefaciens in DNA sequence of 16S rDNA and gyrB, but to B. subtilis in that of recA. These RABs were observed to inhibit the sclerotial germination of R. solani on potato dextrose agar and the lesion development on detached rice leaves by artificial inoculation of R. solani. These antagonistic RABs also significantly suppressed the disease development of sheath blight and bacterial panicle blight in a field condition, suggesting that they can be potential biological control agents for these rice diseases. However, these antagonistic RABs showed diminished disease suppression activities in the repeated field trial conducted in the following year probably due to their reduced antagonistic activities to the pathogens during the long-term storage in -70C, suggesting that development of proper storage methods to maintain antagonistic activity is as crucial as identification of new biological control agents.

Indexed as

AntibiosisMicrobiotaBiological Control AgentsBurkholderiaGenes, BacterialOryzaRhizoctoniaRNA, Ribosomal, 16SBiological Control AgentsRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID26765124
PMCPMC4713167
OpenAlexW2234551430

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.