ArticleArchives of microbiology2024
Effects of different light wavelengths on Bacillus subtilis and Bacillus velezensis, two biocontrol agents isolated from the maize phyllosphere.
Article in Archives of microbiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Physical communication pathways in bacteria: an extra layer to quorum sensing.Biophysical reviews · 2025Review
- Article
- Combined transcriptomic and metabolomic analysis of the mechanism by whichFrontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In previous studies, two strains isolated from the maize phyllosphere were identified as Bacillus subtilis (EM-A7) and Bacillus velezensis (EM-A8) and selected as potential biocontrol agents against Exserohilum turcicum. This study aimed to assess the ability of EM-A7 and EM-A8 to form biofilm and have antagonistic activity under varying light conditions. LED sources were custom-designed so that each corresponded to a given spectrum at a specific photosynthetically active photon flux density. Significant differences were observed in growth parameters (generation time and constant growth rate) under different LED sources. Blue light inhibited the growth of both strains. Red increased k rate in EM-A8, while the g values increased in EM-A7. Red and white light generally increased biofilm formation, and blue light inhibited it. EM-A7 and EM-A8 significantly reduced their ability to swim under blue LED, but it was not affected by red, green, or white light. The ability to swarm was negatively affected. Fungal growth decreased significantly compared to the control when the bacterium growing on the same plate had been previously incubated under red and white light or in the dark. These results indicate that different light wavelengths clearly influenced the aspects assessed in B. subtilis and B. velezensis, with the effects of blue light being overall negative and those of red and white overall positive. Given that, all these factors can be important for the establishment and survival of Bacillus strains on leaves, as well as for their effectiveness against pathogens, light could be a significant factor to consider in the design of biocontrol strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38363376What 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.