ArticlePloS one2019
Developing tools for evaluating inoculation methods of biocontrol Streptomyces sp. strains into grapevine plants.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Molecular Identification and Acid Stress Response of anInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- The Grapevine Microbiome to the Rescue: Implications for the Biocontrol of Trunk Diseases.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Isolation, Identification, Biocontrol Activity, and Plant Growth Promoting Capability of a SuperiorPolish journal of microbiology · 2021Article
- Seed Biopriming with Microbial Inoculant Triggers Local and Systemic Defense Responses againstInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Metagenome-Sourced Microbial Chitinases as Potential Insecticide Proteins.Frontiers in microbiology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The endophytic Streptomyces sp. VV/E1, and rhizosphere Streptomyces sp. VV/R4 strains, isolated from grapevine plants were shown in a previous work to reduce the infection rate of fungal pathogens involved in young grapevine decline. In this study we cloned fragments from randomly amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD), and developed two stably diagnostic sequence-characterized amplified region (SCAR) markers of 182 and 160 bp for the VV/E1 and VV/R4 strains, respectively. The SCAR markers were not found in another 50 actinobacterial strains isolated from grapevine plants. Quantitative real-time PCR protocols based on the amplification of these SCAR markers were used for the detection and quantification of both strains in plant material. These strains were applied on young potted plants using two methods: perforation of the rootstock followed by injection of the microorganisms or soaking the root system in a bacterial suspension. Both methods were combined with a booster treatment by direct addition of a bacterial suspension to the soil near the root system. Analysis of uprooted plants showed that those inoculated by injection exhibited the highest rate of colonization. In contrast, direct addition of either strain to the soil did not lead to reliable colonization. This study has developed molecular tools for analyzing different methods for inoculating grapevine plants with selected Streptomyces sp. strains which protect them from fungal infections that enter through their root system. These tools are of great applied interest since they could easily be established in nurseries to produce grafted grapevine plants that are protected against fungal pathogens. Finally, this methodology might also be applied to other vascular plants for their colonization with beneficial biological control agents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.