REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The global increase in human population and environmental pollution has the
ill-fated consequence that worldwide food production may soon become scarce.
Therefore, in twenty first century, an environmentally safe and sustainable crop
production to feed the increasing population will be one of the great challenges.
Moreover, severe yield losses of economically important crops due to various plant
pathogens and pests are also of major concern around the world. In spite of good
agronomic and horticultural practices, producers often rely heavily on chemical
fertilizers and pesticides. Over the past 100 years, such chemical inputs to agriculture
have significantly contributed to the remarkable improvements in crop production and
quality (Junaid et al., 2013). However, excessive and indiscriminate use of
agrochemicals has resulted in long list of harmful effects on environment and human
health (Gunnell et al., 2007; Leach and Mumford, 2008), and led to considerable
changes in consumer’s attitude towards the approach of using various agrochemicals in
agriculture. “Furthermore, emerging, re-emerging, and endemic plant pathogens
continue to challenge our ability to safeguard plant growth and health worldwide”
(Miller et al., 2009). Therefore, the health awareness of the people together with the
development of resistant pathogens due to the continuous misuse of the chemicals
contributes to the restricted use of chemicals in crop protection. Under such
circumstances, there is a great need for sound and ecologically friendly approaches in
agriculture for enhanced agricultural production and to cater the increasing world’s
population. The use of microbes for biological control of plant pathogens and for
enhancement of plant growth has been emerged as promising alternative to reduce the
use of chemical pesticides and fertilizers (Compant et al., 2005; Glick, 2012; Saraf et
al., 2014). Different microbes belonging to different groups of organisms such as
bacteria, fungi, actinobacteria have been studied as potential biocontrol and growth
promoting agents (Whipps, 2001; Raiijmakers et al., 2002; Beneduzi et al., 2012;
Santoyo et al., 2012). Among these antagonistic and plant growth promoting
microorganisms, actinobacteria have received widespread attention due to their ability
to produce vast array of secondary metabolites (El-Tarabily, 2008; Khamna et al., 2009;
Palaniyandi et al., 2013b; Sharma, 2014b).
5
Review of Literature
2.1 ACTINOBACTERIA
6
Review of Literature
7
Review of Literature
8
Review of Literature
In 1890, Gasperini reported actinobacteria for the first time as potential killers of
fungi and bacteria. Later in 1932, Tims studied an actinobacterium which was
antagonistic towards Pythium, a fungal pathogen of sugarcane. Afterwards, Waksman
(1937) studied actinobacteria in detail for their antagonistic effect upon other
microorganisms. Since then there are numerous reports on the potential of
actinobacteria, mainly Streptomyces spp. as potent biocontrol tools in the control of
various phytopathogens, especially phytopathogenic fungi (Tahvonen and Avikainen,
1987; El-Abyad et al., 1993; Yuan and Crawford, 1995; Trejo-Estrada et al., 1998ab;
Chamberlain and Crawford, 1999; Berg et al., 2001; Doumbou et al., 2002; Berdy,
2005; Zucchi et al., 2008; Errakhi et al., 2009; Boukaew et al., 2011; Kim et al., 2015).
9
Review of Literature
root rots. El-Tarabily et al. (1997) isolated and screened streptomycete and non
streptomycete actinobacteria for biocontrol of cavity spot disease of carrots caused by
Pythium coloratum and two isolates, Streptomyces janthinus and Streptomyces albidum
were the most effective in suppressing the disease in inoculated plants. In the same year,
Elson et al. (1997) reported Streptomyces sp. for biological control of
Helminthosporium solani causing silver scurf of potato tubers. Marten et al. (2001)
reported the use of RhizovitR obtained from Streptomyces rimosus to control a wide
range of fungi including Pythium spp., Phytophthora spp., R. solani, A. brassicicola,
and Botrytis sp. Later on, Liu et al. (2004) reported a high antagonistic activity of S.
rimosus against Fusarium solani, Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cucumarinum, Verticillium
dahliae, R. solani, Fulvia fulva, B. cinerea, Alternaria alternata, S.
sclerotiorum and Bipolaris maydis. Dhanasekaran et al. (2005) demonstrated biocontrol
potential of Streptomyces isolates which significantly reduced the R. solani damping off
in tomato plants. Streptomyces species J-2 and B-11, isolated from rhizosphere soil of
sugarbeet, significantly reduced the incidence of root rot in sugar beet after the
treatment of Sclerotium rolfsii infested soil with their biomass and culture filtrates
(Errakhi et al., 2007).
10
Review of Literature
11
Review of Literature
12
Review of Literature
13
Review of Literature
guanidylfungin exhibiting activity against various plant pathogenic fungi and bacteria
were recovered from Streptomyces sp. A3265 (Minh et al., 2015). In another report,
Bafilomycins B1 and C1 isolated from the fermentation culture of Streptomyces
cavourensis NA4 exhibited significant broad spectrum antifungal activity against
different phytopathogenic fungi (Pan et al., 2015). An antifungal metabolite, 3-methyl-
3,5-amino-4-vinyl-2-pyrone from Streptomyces sp. N2 possess broad-spectrum
inhibitory activity towards plant pathogenic fungi such as Fusarium oxysporum f. sp.
niveum, R. solani, Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. vasinfectum, Pyricularia grisea,
Penicillium italicum and C. gloeosporioides. Antifungal compound also showed
protective effect against C. gloeosporioides to prevent anthracnose on grape fruits (Xu
et al., 2015). Streptomyces sp. strain Di944 was reported to control root rot and
damping-off of tomato seedlings caused by R. solani when applied as a seed treatment
or added to peat-based potting medium (Sabaratnam and Traquair, 1996, 2002). Later
this antagonist was identified as Streptomyces griseocarneus (Traquair et al., 2013).
Recently, in 2015, Sabaratnam and Traquair reported the presence of an antifungal
compound, designated as rhizostreptin, which is a pentaene macrolide complex, in the
cell-free culture filtrates of S. griseocarneus Di944 and demonstrated its involvement in
suppression of Rhizoctonia damping-off of tomato plants. More recently, Palaniyandi et
al. (2016) demonstrated that foliar application of culture filtrate extract of an
azalomycin-producing S. malaysiensis on Yam plants, significiantly reduced the disease
severity (yam anthracnose caused by C. gloeosporioides) to 26% as compared to
untreated plants where disease severity was >92%.
15
Review of Literature
16
Review of Literature
17
Review of Literature
18
Review of Literature
19
Review of Literature
spectrum antifungal activity against both brown rot and white rot fungi (Nagpure et al.,
2014). The zymogram analysis of cell-free culture filtrate revealed presence of five
chitinase isoenzymes, one β-1,3-glucanase and four protease isoenzymes.
Some strains produce both hydrolytic enzymes and antibiotics and may provide
better disease control than the strains producing cell wall-degrading enzymes alone. Once
hydrolytic enzymes damage the cell wall, then pathogen is more likely to be susceptible
to attack by other biological, physical and chemical agents (El-Mehalawy et al., 2004).
Therefore, use of more than one mechanisms for biocontrol of pathogens is always
preffered. S. lydicus WYEC108, a potent biocontrol agent towards Pythium seed and root
rot was reported to produce both antifungal antibiotics and extracellular chitinase
enzymes (Yuan and Crawford, 1995). The antifungal activity of S. hygroscopicus against
C. gloeosporioides and S. rolfsii was also attributed to both hydrolytic enzymes and
thermostable antifungal compounds (Prapagdee et al., 2008). In 2012, Lee et al.
demonstrated the association of chitinase, glucanase and 2-Furancarboxaldehyde in
biocontrol mechanism of S. cavourensis. Jayamurthy et al. (2014) also documented the
involvement of both antifungal antibiotics and hydrolytic enzymes in the biocontrol
potential of Streptomyces NII 1006. S. exfoliatus strain MT9 showed strong and broad-
spectrum antagonism towards several fruit-rotting fungi by producing fungal cell-wall
lytic enzymes and antifungal metabolites (Choudhary et al., 2014).
20
Review of Literature
21
Review of Literature
present in soil has been reported to inhibit the growth of phytopathogenic fungi,
promote plant growth, show antinematode activity, and induce host systemic resistance
(Yuan et al., 2012; Raza et al., 2013; Schmidt et al., 2015). In the year of 1973, Moore-
Landecker and Stotzky demonstrated that volatile substances from actinobacteria can
cause several morphological alterations in hyphae and conidiophores of several fungi
such as F. oxysporum, Aspergillus giganteus, Penicillium viridicatum, Zygorhynchus
vuilleminii and Trichoderma viride.
22
Review of Literature
often is required to fill the critical niches and to effectively compete against pathogenic
fungi. The seed bacterization method has been proved to be more effective as the
biocontrol agent can rapidly and extensively grow and cover the surface of the seeds
and can protect the plants from invading soil-borne pathogens (Martin and Loper, 1999;
Lu et al., 2004; Kanini et al., 2013).
2.2.1.5 Hyperparasitism
Several bacteria and fungi display hyperparasitism, in which they feed on the
pathogenic microorganisms. A strain of S. griseus was reported to parasitize
Colletotrichum lindemuthianum and showed growth on surface of hyphae. Due to
internal parasitism showed by the Streptomyces strain, the formation of several blebs
was also observed in parasitized hyphae. Degenerated hyphae resulted in sponge-like
texture and holes in cell walls of C. lindemuthianum (Tu, 1988). Another Streptomyces
species, S. griseoviridis strain K61 (main constituent of the Mycostop, a commercial
biofungicide) also showed parasitism on several phytopathogenic fungi. It penetrated
the fungal cell wall with little fragmentation of the hyphae in case of Pythium but
hyphae of R. solani and F. oxysporum were affected slightly. The strain K61 showed
more profound destroying effect against conidia of Alternaria due to heavy
colonization.
24
Review of Literature
25
Review of Literature
Conn et al. (2008) reported induction of defence pathways (SAR and JA/ET
pathways) in Arabidopsis by antagonistic endophytic actinobacteria isolated from wheat
tissues. Normally, induction of these pathways was low, however, in the presence of
pathogen, actinobacteria treated plants displayed high-level of gene expression related
to defence as compared to non-treated controls. Moreover, they also documented that
resistance to the bacterial pathogen Erwinia carotovora subsp. carotovora was related
to the induction of JA/ET pathway whereas resistance to the fungal pathogen F.
oxysporum was related to induction of SAR pathway. Additionally, these authors also
stated that culture filtrates induce different pathways when obtained from
actinobacterial strain grown under different conditions. For example, Micromonospora
sp. strain EN43 induced SAR pathway and JA/ET pathway when grown in minimal
medium and complex medium, respectively.
26
Review of Literature
There are many reports which indicate the important role of secondary
metabolites of actinobacteria, especially Streptomyces spp. in the biological control of
insect pests including S. liltoralis (Bream et al., 2001), H. armigera (Xiong et al., 2004;
Osman et al., 2007; Arasu et al., 2013), S. litura (Arasu et al., 2013) Ostrinia furnacalis
(Bayot-Custodio et al., 2014), Aphis gossypii (Zhang et al., 2010) Mythimna separate
(Wang et al., 2011) Tribolium castaneum (Anwar et al., 2014). Following the discovery
of highly potent insecticidal, nematicidal and acaricidal avermectins from Streptomyces
avermitilis (Burg et al., 1979; Putter et al., 1981), several other secondary metabolites,
with insecticidal activity, such as prasinons, doramectin, milbemycin, tetranectin,
nanchangmycin, dianemycin, macrotetrolides and faerifungin and spinosad have been
obtained from genus Streptomyces and established as potential protective agents against
a variety of pest insects (Montesinos, 2003; Omura, 2008). Among these, the
avermectins and milbemycin obtained from S. avermitilis and S. hygroscopicus subsp.
aureolacrimosus, respectively are of significant commercial importance (Dybas, 1983;
Mishim et al., 1983; Nolan and Cross, 1988). They are structurally related and belong to
family of macrolide antibiotics. The avermectins (abamectin and ivermectin) have
demonstrated high potential against agricultural and household insect pests in several
orders. The ivermectin is commercially available in many countries. Milbemycins
produced in submerged cultures exhibit a broad spectrum of activity against agricultural
pests such as aphids, mites, tent caterpillars, intestinal worms, and other parasites that
prey on crops and livestock. They are promising as agricultural pesticides because of
27
Review of Literature
their potent activity without toxicity to plants and animals at effective dosages
(Takiguchi et al., 1980).
Xiong et al. (2005) isolated S. avermitilis strain 173 from marine source which
showed potent insecticidal activity against serious pests such as Spodoptera exigua, H.
armigera, aphids and Plutella xyllostlla L. Later, Liu et al. (2008) also reported the
insecticidal potential of secondary metabolites of strain of Streptomyces sp. against S.
exigua, Plutella xylostella, Aphis glycines etc. Spinosad derived from fermentation
broth of soil actinobacterium, Sacchropolyspora spinosa, caused significant reduction
in the population of H. armigera and other pests (Mandour, 2009; Wang et al., 2009)
and has been accepted in organic farming. With continuous research for bioinsecticidal
agents, Wang et al. (2011) isolated four doramectin congeners from S.
avermitilis NEAU1069 which showed acaricidal and insecticidal activity against
Tetranychus urticae Koch and M. separate, respectively. El- Khawaga and Megahed
(2012) demonstrated insecticidal activity of soil actinobacteria against S. littoralis
where S. bikiniensis A11 exhibited 100% larval mortality. The culture filtrate of
Streptomyces lavendulae showed highly toxic effect against 2nd-instar larvae of S.
28
Review of Literature
littoralis with 84 % mortality. A year later, Arasu et al. (2013) isolated novel polyketide
from Streptomyces sp. AP-123 which displayed antifeedant, larvicidal and growth
inhibitory bioactivities against S. litura and H. armigera. In another report,
Vijayabharthi et al. (2014a) also reported the insecticidal activity of 15 actinobacteria
isolates against H. armigera, S. litura and Chilo partellus.
Among various plant pathogens, nematodes are also one of the important
microscopic obligate biotrophic plant parasites with worldwide distribution and cause
severe damage to a wide variety of economically important agricultural crops. As there
is an increasing trend towards the use of microorganisms as biocontrol agents for
controlling various plant pests, the search for new potential microbial nematicides has
also gained momentum. Actinobacteria, especially Streptomyces spp. have also been
reported for production of various nematicidal compounds (Burg et al., 1979; Mishra et
al., 1987a; Park et al., 2002; Sun et al., 2006; Ruanpanun et al., 2011b; Yang et al.,
2013; Zeng et al., 2013). For example avermectins, insecticidal compounds
(macrocyclic lactone derivatives) obtained from fermentation broth of S. avermitilis,
and their derivatives have been used worldwide to control parasitic nematodes and pests
(Burg et al., 1979). Later, Mishra et al. (1987a) also screened a large number of
29
Review of Literature
metabolites of aerobic actinobacteria and found that 12 isolates showed toxicity against
free-living nematode Panagrellus redivivus. Dicklow et al. (1993) investigated
nematicidal properties of Streptomyces species isolated from nematode suppressed soil
and observed that the metabolites produced by these bacteria inhibited reproduction of
Caenorhabditis elegans which was used as a screening model in the laboratory test. In
greenhouse experiment, the Streptomyces strain was also found to reduce tomato root
galling caused by M. incognita. This antinematode streptomycete was then identified as
Streptomyces dicklowii.
30
Review of Literature
Kloepper and Schroth (1978) were the first who defined plant growth promoting
bacteria (PGPB) as those root colonizing bacteria where following their inoculation
onto seeds, enhanced plant growth was observed. These microorganisms, isolated from
diverse environments, positively influence many plant growth parameters and yield
(Kloepper et al., 1980; Bashan and Holguin, 1998; Vacheron et al., 2013) and thus
possess the potential to be used as substitute of chemical fertilizers which have several
ill effects. Different groups of bacteria (Bacillus, Pseudomonas etc.) have been
developed commercially as plant growth enhancers. Similarly, there are reports which
also documented streptomycetes as potent plant growth promoters (Yuan and Crawford,
1995; Mishra et al., 1987b; Kunoh et al., 2002; Nassar et al., 2003; El-tarabily, 2008;
Sousa et al., 2008; Gopalakrishnan et al., 2013; Palanyandi et al., 2013c; Passari et al.,
2015). However, despite their well-documented history as biocontrol agents, these
species have been poorly investigated specifically for their potential in plant growth
promotion. In 1974, Merriman et al. reported that treatment of carrot seeds with the S.
griseus (Krainsky) Waksman and Henrici isolate in two separate field trials resulted in
higher marketable yields over controls by 17% and 15%. Nearly two decades later, El-
Abyad et al. (1993) observed significant improvement in tomato growth after the
coating of tomato seeds with each of three antagonistic Streptomyces strains.
Gopalakrishnan et al. (2013 and 2015ab) reported plant growth promoting potential of
Streptomyces spp. which significantly enhanced the agronomic traits in streptomycete
inoculated sorghum, rice and chickpea over uninoculated control plants. Similarly, Jog
et al. (2014) also demonstrated that Streptomyces cultures significantly improved
growth in inoculated wheat as compared to an uninoculated control after 4 weeks.
Recently Passari et al. (2015) studied in vitro as well as in vivo plant growth promoting
31
Review of Literature
To date, there has been only limited commercial use of plant growth promoting
microorganisms as their large scale application has been restricted due to insufficient
understanding of the mechanisms responsible for enhanced plant growth, rhizosphere
incompetence, and the inability of microbial strains to flourish in different types of soil
and environmental conditions. With recent progress towards understanding the
mechanisms that these organisms utilize to facilitate the plant growth, the use of plant
growth promoting microorganisms are expected to continue to increase worldwide.
Interactions between plant and plant growth promoting bacteria involve a combination
of direct and indirect mechanisms (El-Tarabily, 2008; Sousa et al., 2008; El-Tarabily et
al., 2009; Franco-Correaa et al., 2010; Glick, 2012; Gopalakrishnan et al., 2012;
Goudjal et al., 2014). Direct attributes for promotion of plant growth by these bacteria
include several mechanisms such as production of plant growth regulators such as
auxins, gibberelins and cytokinins (Aldesuquy et al., 1998; Sousa et al., 2008; El-
Tarabily, 2008; Khamna et al., 2010; Alam et al., 2012; Sadeghi et al., 2012;
Harikrishnan et al., 2014a), production of siderophores (Khamna et al., 2009; Nakouti
et al., 2012; Wang et al., 2014), fixation of atmospheric nitrogen (Prakash and
Cummings, 1988; Gadkari et al., 1992; Madhaiyan et al., 2009), solubilization of
phosphate (Hamdali et al., 2008ac; Balakrishna et al., 2012; Hamdali et al., 2012), and
alleviation of stress by producing the enzyme ACC deaminase which lowers ethylene
levels in plant rhizosphere (El-Tarabily, 2008; Siddikee et al., 2010; Palaniyandi et al.,
2014). The indirect mechanisms of plant growth promotion include production of
antibiotics and cell wall lytic enzymes, competition for space and induction of systemic
resistance (Doumbou et al., 2002). PGPR strains may use one or a combination of these
growth promoting attributes in the rhizosphere and influence plant growth (Glick et al.,
2007; El-Tarabily, 2008; Palaniyandi et al., 2014).
32
Review of Literature
33
Review of Literature
Iron is a vital element for plant growth. “Despite its relative abundance in
nature, the amount of bioavailable iron is very limited (about less than 10-18 M) because
atmospheric oxygen rapidly oxidizes iron into sparingly soluble ferric oxyhydroxides”
(Wang et al., 2014). Plants and microorganisms can readily uptake iron in Fe2+ which is
the more soluble form (Francis et al., 2010). Microorganisms having capability to
reduce Fe3+ to Fe2+ improves plant growth by increasing the bioavailability of iron in
the plant rhizosphere. In 2007, Valencia-Cantero et al. reported an actinobacterial
strain, Arthrobacter maltophilia which reduced Fe3+ to Fe2+ and thereby stimulated
growth of common bean by improving the bioavailability of iron in soil bean.
34
Review of Literature
In addition to their role in plant growth promotion, several workers also reported
involvement of siderophores in indirect biocontrol of soil borne pathogens where they
inhibit their growth by competing for available iron in plant rhizosphere soils (Muller et
al., 1984; Tokala et al., 2002).
Phosphorus (P) is one of the important nutrients for plant growth and
development. It also plays role in energy transfer, photosynthesis, respiration, signal
transduction and macromolecular biosynthesis (Fernández et al., 2007). However, many
agricultural soils throughout the world are P deficient (Arcand and Schneider, 2006). It
is present in the form of insoluble metallic complexes (with Fe, Al, Mn etc.) in acidic
soil while in alkaline soil it reacts with Ca and form insoluble Ca3(PO4)2. As a result,
only a small portion of P is available for plant growth (1 mg/kg or less) (Hamdali et al.
2008a).
35
Review of Literature
36
Review of Literature
In addition to Fe and P, nitrogen (N) is another crucial plant nutrient required for
their growth and development. The N in the form of dintrogen (N2) gas is abundant in
the earth’s atmosphere (Muthukumarasamy et al., 2002) however, most of the soils are
deficient in utilizable N. The inadequate bioavailability of nitrogen and its requirement
for crop growth have spawned a huge N-based fertilizer industry worldwide (Westhoff,
2009; Santi et al., 2013). Plants use >50% of the applied fertilizers and this inefficient
use of nitrogen resulted in soil and underground water pollution with nitrate
accumulation which lead to health hazards and compromising agricultural
sustainability. Some organisms are able to use atmospheric nitrogen using a process
known as biological nitrogen fixation (BNF), which is the conversion of elemental N to
ammonia (NH3), a plant usable form (Lam et al., 1996; Franche et al., 2009; Wagner,
2012). Therefore, BNF constitutes an excellent sound source to substitute N fertilizer
(Pareek et al., 2002). According to Sellstedt and Richau (2013) among actinobacteria
some species of Arthrobacter, Agromyces, Corynebacterium, Mycobacterium,
Micromonospora, Propionibacteria and Streptomyces have nitrogen-fixing capability.
But till date, Frankia is the only most widely studied actinobacterium in terms of
nitrogen fixation. Frankia species live in symbiosis with a large number of dichotomous
plants (known as actinorhizal plants) and form nitrogen-fixing root nodules on their
roots (Palaniyandi et al., 2013b). Another nitrogen fixing actinobacterium Streptomyces
thermoautotrophicus (isolated from burning charcoal pile) is able to utilize N2 as a sole
source of nitrogen when grown under aerobic conditions at a temperature of 65 °C
(Gadkari et al., 1992). But it has not been reported for its involvement in formation of
root nodules in any plant or its direct positive influence on plants. In addition to these
bacteria, Valdés et al. (2005) reported nitrogen fixing property of endophytic bacteria
(that belonged to families Thermomonosporaceae and Micromonosporaceae) obtained
from roots of Casuarina equisetifolia. Franco-Correa et al. (2010) isolated thirty
actinobacterial isolates from rhizosphere of Trifolium repens L where 10 isolates
showed their ability to grow on nitrogen free medium.
Stresses, both biotic as well as abiotic often limit the crop productivity. Under
these stress conditions, the level of ethylene production increases in plants, which lead
37
Review of Literature
to negative impact on plant growth (Glick, 2005; Glick et al., 2007a). Plant growth
promoting microorganisms are well-known for their growth-promoting effects on
several plants using multiple mechanisms. Until recently, the production of
phytohormones by plant growth promoting bacteria was the most studied mechanism
and a lot of attention has been focused on role of IAA. However, in last few years it has
been found that number of plant growth promoting bacteria stimulate plant growth
through activity of enzyme ACC deaminase. This enzyme cleaves 1-aminocyclopropane
1-carboxylic acid, the ethylene precursor in plants, into ammonia and α- ketobutyrate,
thus lowering stress-ethylene level in the rhizosphere, and increase plant growth
(Jacobson et al., 1984; Glick, 2005; Glick et al., 2007b; Viterbo et al., 2010).
However, there are only two reports of ACC deaminase activity in Streptomyces
spp. El-Tarabily (2008) demonstrated the involvement of ACC deaminase in plant
growth promotion by Streptomyces filipinensis no.15 strain. The inoculation of tomato
plants with this strain significantly lowered ACC levels in shoots and roots and thereby
promoted the growth of the tomato plants. Recently, in 2014, Palaniyandi et al.
38
Review of Literature
observed ACC deaminase activity in six actinobacterial isolates, all belonging to the
genus Streptomyces. This shows that the distribution of ACC deaminase activity may
not be a common growth promoting trait among actinobacteria. They observed
significant increase in biomass and chlorophyll content and a reduction in leaf proline
content in tomato plants inoculated with Streptomyces PGPA39 (a ACC deaminase
producer strain) under conditions of salt stress as compared to control and uninoculated
salt-stressed plants.
Root colonization is related to bacteria which can colonize the whole root
system and survive during several weeks in the presence of the natural microflora
(Weller, 1988). Later, Baker (1991) stated that root colonization is the ability of a
microorganism to colonize the rhizosphere of developing roots when applied by seed
treatment. The root colonization plays an important role in antagonistic as well as plant
growth promoting activities of bacteria (Chin-A-Woeng et al., 2000; El-Tarabily, 2008;
Bouizgarne, 2013). There are reports which also documented the role of root
colonization by Streptomyces species in biocontrol and plant growth promotion.
2.4.1 Mycostop
2.4.2 Rhizovit
2.4.3 Actinovate®
2.4.5 ArzentTM
2.4.6 Validamycin
41
Review of Literature
soil borne pathogens and is used for the control of R. solani in rice (sheath blight of
rice), potatoes, vegetables, strawberries, tobacco, ginger and other crops. It is also used
to control damping off diseases in vegetable seedlings, cotton, sugar beets, rice and
other plants. It is applied as a foliar spray, soil drench, seed dressing, or by soil
incorporation. Since 1970s, validamycin had been widely used in China against the Rice
Sheath Blight and in Japan and Netherlands to control black scurf of potato caused by
R. solani (Kulik, 1996). The popular trade names of validamycin are Validacin and
Solacol. Validamycin is mainly used in China, Japan, Netherlands, Colombia and India.
Abamectin under the trade names Avicta and Agri-Mec is commercially used as
nematicide and insecticide, respectively. Abamectin is a mixture of avermectins B1a (>
80%) and avermectin B1b (< 20%) derived from the soil bacterium, S. avermitilis.
Avicta is a contact nematicide used as seed treatment and immediately kills the
nematodes (eg. M. incognita, M. arenaria, M. javenica, Tylenchulus semipenetrans and
R. reniformis) upon contact and does not allow the nematode to feed or reproduce. Agri-
Mek is used as foliar spray to control insect and mite pests of a range of agronomic,
fruit, vegetable and ornamental crops.
2.4.8 Spinosad
42
Review of Literature
Table 2.3: Commercially available biocontrol agents, plant growth promoting agents and agroactive compounds derived from
actinobacteria (Palaniyandi et al., 2013b)
Product name Active Ingredient Application Country Reference
Actinovate® AG S. lydicus WYEC108 Biocontrol of fungal USA Elliott et al., 2009
pathogens
Actinovate® SP S. lydicus WYEC108 Biocontrol of fungal USA http://naturalindustries.com/commercial/Docs/2012/a
pathogens vspbrochure.pdf. Accessed 09 August 2013
Action Iron ® S. lydicus WYEC108 Biocontrol and plant USA http://naturalindustries.com/commercial/Docs/2012/a
growth promotion vspbrochure.pdf. Accessed 09 August 2013
Arzent™ Mixture of four separate, Biocontrol and plant Moscow Hamby and Crawford, 2002
compatible strains of S. growth promotion
hygroscopicus
Micro108® Seed S. lydicus WYEC108 Bicontrol and plant USA http://naturalindustries.com/commercial/Docs/2012/1
Inoculant growth promotion 08seedfactsheet.pdf. Accessed 09 August 2013
Micro108® soluble S. lydicus WYEC108 Biocontrol of fungal USA http://naturalindustries.com/commercial/Docs/2012/1
pathogens 08solublefactsheet.pdf. Accessed 09 August 2013
Thatch Control S. violaceusniger Biocontrol of fungal USA http://www.naturalindustries.com/retail/index.
strain YCED 9 pathogens php?option=com_content&view=article&id=
16&Itemid=7. Accessed 09 August 2013
'Rhizovit® S. rimosus Biocontrol of fungal German Marten et al., 2001
pathogens y
PH-D® Fungicide S. violaceusniger Biocontrol of fungal USA http://www.arysta-na.com/us-agriculture/products/
strain YCED 9 pathogens ph-d/overview.html. Accessed 09 August 2013
Mycostop® S. griseoviridis strain Biocontrol of fungal Finland Suleman et al., 2002
K61 pathogens
43
Review of Literature
44