Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T03:23:52.735Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of humic acid and plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) on induced resistance of canola to Brevicoryne brassicae L

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 October 2018

R. Sattari Nasab ,
M. Pahlavan Yali  and
M. Bozorg-Amirkalaee
R. Sattari Nasab
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, Shahid Bahonar University, Kerman, Iran
M. Pahlavan Yali*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, Shahid Bahonar University, Kerman, Iran
M. Bozorg-Amirkalaee
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran
*
*Author for correspondence Phone: +983433257442 Fax: +983433257443 E-mail: pahlavanm@uk.ac.ir
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The cabbage aphid, Brevicoryne brassicae L. (Hem: Aphididae), is an important pest of canola that can considerably limit profitable crop production either through direct feeding or via transmission of plant pathogenic viruses. One of the most effective approaches of pest control is the use of biostimulants. In this study, the effects of humic acid, plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR), and integrated application of both compounds were investigated on life table parameters of B. brassicae, and the tolerance of canola to this pest. B. brassicae reared on plants treated with these compounds had the lower longevity, fecundity, and reproductive period compared with control treatment. The intrinsic rate of natural increase (r) and finite rate of increase (λ) were lowest on PGPR treatment (0.181 ± 0.004 day−1 and 1.198 ± 0.004 day−1, respectively) and highest on control (0.202 ± 0.005 day−1 and 1.224 ± 0.006 day−1, respectively). The net reproductive rate (R0) under treatments of humic acid, PGPR and humic acid + PGPR was lower than control. There was no significant difference in generation time (T) of B. brassicae among the tested treatments. In the tolerance test, plants treated with PGPR alone or in integrated with humic acid had the highest tolerance against B. brassicae. The highest values of total phenol, flavonoids, and glucosinolates were observed in treatments of PGPR and humic acid + PGPR. Basing on the antibiosis and tolerance analyses in this study, we concluded that canola plants treated with PGPR are more resistant to B. brassicae. These findings could be useful for integrated pest management of B. brassicae in canola fields.

Keywords

cabbage aphidreproductionlife tabletoleranceantibiosis
Type
Research Papers
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 109 , Issue 4 , August 2019 , pp. 479 - 489
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abd-El-Kareem, F. (2007) Induced resistance in bean plants against root rot and Alternaria leaf spot diseases using biotic and abiotic inducers under field conditions. Research Journal of Agriculture and Biological Sciences 3, 767–774.Google Scholar
Ahmad, S., Daur, I., Al-Solaimani, S.G. & Yasir, M. (2016) Effect of rhizobacteria inoculation and humic acid application on canola (Brassica napus L.) crop. Pakistan Journal of Botany 48(5), 2109–2120.Google Scholar
Anwar, M. & Shafique, M. (1999) Relative development of aphids on different Brassica cultivars. Pakistan Journal of Zoology 31, 357–359.Google Scholar
Arancon, N.Q., Edwards, C.A., Lee, S. & Byrne, R. (2006) Effects of humic acids from vermicomposts on plant growth. European Journal of Soil Biology 42, 65–69.Google Scholar
Bennett, R.N. & Wallsgrove, R.M. (1994) Tansley review No. 72: secondary metabolites in plant defence mechanisms. New Phytologist 127, 617–633.Google Scholar
Bentz, J.A., Reeves, I.J., Barbosa, P. & Francis, B. (1995) Nitrogen fertilizer effect on selection, acceptance and suitability of Euphorbia pulcherrima (Euphorbiaceae) as a host plant to Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Environmental entomology 24, 40–45.Google Scholar
Bhattacharyya, P.N. & Jha, D.K. (2012) Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR): emergence in agriculture. World Journal of Microbiology & Biotechnology 28(4), 1327–1350.Google Scholar
Birch, A.N.E., Griffiths, D.W. & Smith, W.H.M. (1990) Changes in forage and oilseed rape glucosinoiates in response to attack by turnip root fly (Delia fioralis). Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 51, 309–320.Google Scholar
Blackman, R.L. & Eastop, V.F. (2000) Aphids on the World's Crop: An Identification and Information Guide. London, John Wiley and Sons, 466 pp.Google Scholar
Bong, C.F.J. & Sikorowski, P.P. (1991) Effects of cytoplasmic polyhedrosis virus and bacterial contamination on growth and development of the corn earworm, Helicoverpa zea. Journal of Invertebrate Pathology 57, 406–412.Google Scholar
Bottomley, W.B. (1914) The significance of certain food substances for plant growth. Annals of Botany 28, 531–540.Google Scholar
Bourgaund, F., Gravot, A., Milesi, S. & Gontier, E. (2010) Production of plant secondary metabolite: a historical perspective. Plant Science 161, 839–851.Google Scholar
Broadway, R.M., Gongora, C., Kain, W.C., Sanderson, J.A., Monroy, J.A., Bennett, K.C., Warner, J.B. & Hoffman, M.P. (1998) Novel chitinolytic enzymes with biological activity against herbivorous insect. J ournal of Chemical Ecology 24, 985–998.Google Scholar
Cacco, G. & Dell'Agnola, G. (1984) Plant growth regulator activity of soluble humic complex. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 62, 306–310.Google Scholar
Cakmakci, R., Erat, M., Erdo.an, U.G. & Donmez, M.F. (2007) The influence of PGPR on growth parameters, antioxidant and pentose phosphate oxidative cycle enzymes in wheat and spinach plants. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science 170, 288–295.Google Scholar
Carey, J.R. (1993) Applied Demography for Biologists with Special Emphasis on Insects. New York, Oxford University Press, 206 pp.Google Scholar
Chamam, A., Sanguin, H., Bellvert, F., Meiffren, G., Comte, G., Wisniewski-Dye, F., Bertrand, C. & Prigent-Combaret, C. (2013) Plant secondary metabolite profiling evidences strain-dependent effect in the Azospirillum-Oryza sativa association. Phytochemistry 87, 65–77.Google Scholar
Chassy, A.W., Bui, L., Renaud, E.N.C., Van Horn, M. & Mitchell, A.E. (2006) A three-year comparison of the content of antioxidant micro constituents and several quality characteristics in organic and conventionally managed tomatoes and bell peppers. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 54, 8244–8252.Google Scholar
Cheng, Z., Park, E. & Glick, B.R. (2007) 1- Aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate deaminase from Pseudomonas putida UW4 facilitates the growth of canola in the presence of salt. Canadian Journal of Microbiology 53, 912–918.Google Scholar
Chi, (2017) TWOSEX-MSChart: A Computer Program for the age-Stage, two-sex Life Table Analysis. Taichung, Taiwan, National Chung Hsing University. Available online at http://140.120.197.173/ecology/Download/TWOSEX-MSChart.rar.Google Scholar
Chi, H. & Liu, H. (1985) Two new methods for the study of insect population ecology. Bulletin of the Institute of Zoology Academia Sinica 24, 225–240.Google Scholar
Cipollini, D., Stevenson, R., Enright, S., Eyles, A. & Bonello, P. (2008) Phenolic metabolites in leaves of the invasive shrub, Lonicera maackii, and their potential phytotoxic and anti-herbivore effects. Journal of Chemical Ecology 34, 144–152.Google Scholar
Cordeiro, F.C., Catarina, C.S., Silveira, V. & De Souza, S.R. (2011) Humic acid effect on catalase activity and the generation of reactive oxygen species in corn (Zea mays). Bioscience, Biotechnology, and Biochemistry 75(1), 70–74.Google Scholar
Dell'Agnola, G. & Nardi, S. (1987) Hormone-like effect of enhanced nitrate uptake induced by depolycondensed humic fractions obtained from Allolobophora rosea and A. caliginosa faeces. Biology and Fertility of Soils 4, 115–118.Google Scholar
de Medeiros, F.H.V., Silva, G., Mariano, R.L.R. & Barros, R. (2005) Effect of bacteria on the biology of diamondback moth (Plutella xylostella) on cabbage (Brassica oleraceae var. capitata) cv. Midori. Anais da Academia Pernambucana de Ciência Agronômica 2, 204–212.Google Scholar
du Jardin, P. (2015) Plant biostimulants: definition, concept, main categories and regulation. Scientia Horticulturae 196, 3–14.Google Scholar
Efron, B. & Tibshirani, R.G. (1993) An introduction to the Bootstrap. New York, NY, Chapman & 230 Hall, 432 pp.Google Scholar
Eigenbrode, S.D. & Espelie, K.E. (1995) Effects of plant epicuticular lipids on insect herbivores. Annual Review of Entomology 40, 171–194.Google Scholar
Ellis, P.R., Pink, D.A.C., Phelps, K., Jukes, P.L., Breeds, S.E. & Pinnegar, A.E. (1998) Evaluation of a core collection of Brassica accessions for resistance to Brevicoryne brassicae. Euphytica 103, 149–160Google Scholar
Eyheraguibel, B., Silvestre, J. & Morard, P. (2008) Effects of humic substances derived from organic waste enhancement on the growth and mineral nutrition of maize. Bioresource Technology 99(10), 4206–4212.Google Scholar
Fahimi, A., Ashouri, A., Ahmadzadeh, M., Hoseini Naveh, V., Asgharzadeh, A. & Maleki, F. (2014) Effect of PGPR on population growth parameters of cotton aphid. Archives of Phytopathology and Plant Protection 47(11), 1274–1285.Google Scholar
Furk, C. & Hines, C.M. (1993) Aspects of insecticide resistance in the melon and cotton aphid, Aphis gossypii (Hemiptera: Aphididae). Annals of Applied Biology 123, 9–17.Google Scholar
Glick, B.R. (1995) The enhancement of plant-growth by free-living bacteria. Canadian Journal of Microbiology 41, 109–117.Google Scholar
Glick, B.R., Patten, C.L., Holgin, G. & Penrose, D.M. (1999) Biochemical and Genetic Mechanisms Used by Plant Growth Promoting bacteria. London, Imperial College Press, 267 pp.Google Scholar
Goodman, D. (1982) Optimal life histories, optimal notation, and the value of reproductive value. The American Naturalist 119, 803–823.Google Scholar
Gulser, F., Sonmez, F. & Boysan, S. (2010) Effects of calcium nitrate and humic acid on pepper seedling growth under saline condition. Journal of Environmental Biology 31(5), 873–876.Google Scholar
Halkier, B.A. & Gershenzon, J. (2006) Biology and biochemistry of glucosinolates. Annual review of plant biology 57, 303–333.Google Scholar
Hanafi, A., Traore, M., Schnitzler, W.H. & Woitke, M. (2007) Induced resistance of tomato to whiteflies and phytium with the PGPR Bacillus subtilis in a soilless crop grown under greenhouse conditions. pp. 315–322 in Hanafi, A. & Schnitzler, W.H. (Eds) Proceedings of VIIIth IS on Protected Cultivation in Mild Winter Climates, vol. 747. Acta horticulturae, Morocco.Google Scholar
Hanafy Ahmed, A.H., Nesiem, M.R., Hewedy, A.M. & Sallam, H.El-S. (2010) Effect of simulation compounds on growth, yield and chemical composition of snap bean plants grown under calcareous soil conditions. Journal of American Science 6, 552–569.Google Scholar
Havlíčková, H. (1995) Some characteristics of flag leaves of two winter-wheat cultivars infested by rose-grain aphid, Metopolophium dirhodum (Walker). Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection 102, 530–535.Google Scholar
Hesler, L.S. & Tharp, C.I. (2005) Antibiosis and antixenosis to Rhopalosiphum padi among triticale accessions. Euphytica 143, 153–160.Google Scholar
Hondo, T., Yoshida, K., Nakagawa, A., Kawai, T., Tamura, H. & Goto, T. (1992) Structural basis of blue-color development in flower petals from Commelina communis. Nature 358, 515–518.Google Scholar
Hosseini, P. (2014). Effects of vermicompost, PGPR, humic and nitrogen fertilizers on population growth of cotton aphid, Aphis gossypii (Glover) (Hemiptera: Aphididae). Dissertation, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Iran. (In Persian with English abstract).Google Scholar
Huang, Y.B. & Chi, H. (2012) Assessing the application of the jackknife and bootstrap techniques to the estimation of the variability of the net reproductive rate and gross reproductive rate: a case study in Bactrocera cucurbitae (Coquillett) (Diptera: Tephritidae). Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 61, 37–45.Google Scholar
Ishida, M., Kakizaki, T., Ohara, T. & Morimitsu, Y. (2011) Development of a simple and rapid extraction method of glucosinolates from radish roots. Breeding Science 61, 208–211.Google Scholar
Jezek, J., Haggett, B.G.D., Atkinson, A. & Rawson, D.M. (1999) Determination of glucosinolates using their alkaline degradation and reaction with ferricyanide. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 47, 4669–4674.Google Scholar
Keel, C. & Maurhofer, M. (2009) Insecticidal activity in biocontrol pseudomonads. p. 51 in Weller, D., Thomashow, L., Loper, J., Paulitz, T., Mazzola, M., Mavrodi, D., Landa, B.B. & Thompson, J. (Eds) 8th International PGPR Workshop in Portland, Oregon, USA, 17–22 May 2009. 51pp. Available online at www.capps.wsu.edu/pgpr.Google Scholar
Kelm, M. & Gadomski, H. (1995) Occurrence and harmfulness of the cabbage aphid, Brevicoryne brassicae (L.) on winter rape. Materially Sesji Institutes Ochrony Roslin 5, 101–103.Google Scholar
Krizek, D.T., Brita, S.J. & Mirecki, R.M. (1998) Inhibitory effects of ambient level of solar UV-A and UV-B on growth of cv. New Red Fire lettuce. Physiologia Plantarum 103, 1–7.Google Scholar
Labana, K.S., Ahjua, K.L., Gupta, M.L. & Brar, K.S. (1983) Preliminary studies on chemical basis of resistance in Brassica species to mustard aphid (Lipaphis erysimi). pp. 1132–1142 in Proceedings of the 6th International Rapeseed Conference, Paris.Google Scholar
Lammerink, J., MacGibhon, D.B. & Wallace, A.R. (1984) Effect of the cabbage aphid (Brevicoryne brassicae) on total glucosinolate in the seed of oilseed rape (Brassica napus). New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 27, 89–92.Google Scholar
Liu, Z., Li, D., Gong, P.Y. & Wu, K.J. (2004) Life table studies of the cotton bollworm, Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), on different host plants. Environmental Entomology 33, 1570–1576.Google Scholar
Malik, R.S., Anand, I.J. & Srinivasachar, D. (1983) Effects of glucosinolates in relation to aphid [lipaphis erysimi] fecundity in crucifers. International Journal of Tropical Agriculture 1, 273–278.Google Scholar
Mardani-Talaee, M., Nouri-Ganblani, G., Razmjou, J., Hassanpour, M., Naseri, B. & Asgharzadeh, A. (2016) Effects of chemical, organic and bio-Fertilizers on some secondary metabolites in the leaves of bell Pepper (Capsicum annuum) and their impact on life table parameters of Myzus persicae (Hemiptera: Aphididae). Journal of Economic Entomology 109, 472–477.Google Scholar
Mardani-Talaee, M., Razmjou, J., Nouri-Ganbalani, G., Hassanpour, M. & Naseri, B. (2017) Impact of chemical, organic and bio-fertilizers application on bell pepper, Capsicum annuum L. and biological parameters of Myzus persicae (Sulzer) (Hem.: Aphididae). Neotropical Entomology 46, 578–586.Google Scholar
Meena, B., Radhajeyalakshmi, R., Marimuthu, T., Vidhyasekaran, P., Doraiswamy, S. & Velazhahan, R. (2000) Induction of pathogenesis-related proteins, phenolics and phenylalanine ammonia-lyase in groundnut by Pseudomonas fluorescens. Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection 107, 514–527.Google Scholar
Mohamadi, P., Razmjou, J., Naseri, B. & Hassanpour, M. (2017) Population growth parameters of Tuta absoluta (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) on tomato plant using organic substrate and biofertilizers. Journal of Insect Science 17(2), 1–7.Google Scholar
Møller, P., Ploger, A. & Sørensen, H. (1985) Quantitative analysis of total glucosinolate content in concentrated extracts from double low rapeseed by the Pd-glucosinolate complex method. pp. 97–110 in Sørensen, H. (Eds) Advances in the Production and Utilization of Cruciferous Crop. Dordrecht, Martinus Nijhoff/DR W. Junk Publishers.Google Scholar
Nardi, S., Arnoldi, G. & Dell'Agnola, G. (1988) Release of the hormone-like activities from Allolobophora rosea and A. caliginosa faeces. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 68, 563–567.Google Scholar
Nardi, S., Pizzeghello, D., Schiavon, M. & Ertani, A. (2015) Plant biostimulants: physiological responses induced by protein hydrolyzed-based products and humic substances in plant metabolism. Scientia Agricola 73, 18–23.Google Scholar
Pineda, A., Zheng, S.J., Van Loon, J.A., Pieterse, M.J. & Dicke, M. (2010) Helping plants to deal with insects: the role of beneficial soil-borne microbes. Trends in Plant Science 15, 507–514.Google Scholar
Pizzeghello, D., Francioso, O., Ertani, A., Muscolo, A. & Nardi, S. (2013) Isopentenyladenosine and cytokinin-like activity of four humic substances. Journal of Geochemical Exploration 129, 70–75.Google Scholar
Qingwen, Z., Ping, L., Gang, W. & Qingnian, C. (1998) The biochemical mechanism of induced resistance of cotton to cotton bollworm by cutting of young seedling at plumular axis. Acta Phytopathologica Sinica 25, 209–212.Google Scholar
Rajendran, L., Samiyappan, R., Raguchander, T. & Saravanakumar, D. (2007) Endophytic bacteria mediate plant resistance against cotton bollworm. Journal of Plant Interactions 2, 1–10.Google Scholar
Rashid, M.H. & Chung, Y.R. (2017) Induction of systemic resistance against Insect herbivores in plants by beneficial soil Microbes. Frontiers in Plant Science 8, 1816.Google Scholar
Reddy, G.V.P. (2017) Integrated Management of Insect Pests on Canola and Other Brassica Oilseed Crops. Wallingford, Oxfordshire, UK, CABI, 394 pp.Google Scholar
Ronald, S.F. & Laima, S.K. (1999) Phenolics and Cold Tolerance of Brassica napus. Ontario, Department of Plant Agriculture.Google Scholar
Sandström, J., Telang, A. & Moran, N.A. (2000) Nutritional enhancement of host plants by aphids – a comparison of three aphid species on grasses. Journal of Insect Physiology 46, 33–40.Google Scholar
Scheuerell, S.J. & Mahaffee, W.F. (2004) Compost tea as a container medium drench for suppressing seedling damping-off caused by Pythium ultimum. Phytopathology 94, 1156–1163.Google Scholar
Smith, C.M. (1989) Plant Resistance to Insects, A Fundamental Approach. New York, John Wiley and Sons Ltd, 286 pp.Google Scholar
Southwood, T.R.E. & Henderson, P.A. (2000) Ecological Methods. Oxford, UK, Blackwell Science, 592 pp.Google Scholar
SPSS (2015) SPSS 22.0 for Windows. Chicago, IL, SPSS Inc.Google Scholar
Tjallingii, W.F. (1976) A preliminary study of host selection and acceptance behaviour in the cabbage aphid, Brevicoryne brassicae (L.). Symposia Biologica Hungarica 16, 283–285.Google Scholar
Tsunoda, R.T. (1980) Backscatter measurements of 11-cm equatorial spread-F irregularities. Geophysical Research Letters 7(10), 848–850.Google Scholar
van Emden, H.F. (1995) Host plant-aphidophaga interactions. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 52, 3–11.Google Scholar
Verkerk, R.H.J., Neugebauer, K.R., Ellis, P.R. & Wright, D.J. (1998). Aphids on cabbage: tritrophic and selective insecticide interactions. Bulletin of Entomological Research 88, 343–349.Google Scholar
Wójcicka, A. (2010) Cereal phenolic compounds as biopesticides of cereal aphids. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies 19, 1337–1343.Google Scholar
Yildirim, E.M. & Unay, A. (2011) Effects of different fertilizations on Liriomyza trifolii (Burgess) (Diptera: Agromyzidae) in tomato. African Journal of Agricultural Research 6, 4104–4107.Google Scholar
Zebelo, S., Song, Y., Kloepper, J.W. & Fadamiro, H. (2016) Rhizobacteria activates ( + )-δ-cadinene synthase genes and induces systemic resistance in cotton against beet armyworm (Spodoptera exigua). Plant, Cell & Environment 39, 935–943.Google Scholar
Zehnder, G., Kloepper, J., Yao, C. & Wei., G. (1997) Induction of systemic resistance in cucumber against cucumber beetles (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) by plant growth promoting rhizobacteria. Journal of Economic Entomology 90, 391–396.Google Scholar