4 research outputs found
Biological Control of Postharvest Diseases by Microbial Antagonists
The postharvest phase has been considered a very suitable environment for successful
application of biological control agents (BCAs), since the first work on the biological
control of brown rot disease of stone fruit was reported by Pusey and Wilson
[1]. Sure enough, the conditions of constant temperature and high humidity seem to
offer more chances to BCAs, increasing their antifungal activity [2]. BCAs are living
organisms and act following different antagonistic strategies depending on
pathogens, host and environment. Knowledge of their modes of action is therefore
essential to enhance their viability and increase their potentiality in disease control.
In general, antagonists used for biocontrol of postharvest diseases are yeasts and
bacteria, and to a lesser extent fungi, and they have been widely reviewed [3\u20137].
Antagonists can display a wide range of modes of action, at different stages of
their activity, relating to different hosts, pathogens; sometimes-different modes act
simultaneously, and it is therefore difficult to establish which individual mechanism
has contributed to a specific antifungal action. Considerable information is available
with respect to their efficacy, their application under storage conditions, and their
mixture with safe substances or according to the formulation. However, the mechanisms
by which BCAs exert their activity against pathogens have not yet been fully
elucidated [5] and sometimes, in order to achieve maximum effectiveness in postharvest
phase, were combined with physical and chemical methods including heat
treatments, gamma or UV-C irradiation, and controlled atmosphere (CA).
The bottleneck of the biocontrol matter remains the BCAs formulation often
done in association with private companies, due to the high costs of production and
the regulatory barriers to BCAs registration in different countries that often do not encourage their dissemination. Also, a formulation often could reduce the activity
of antagonists with respect to the fresh cells [2]
Biological Control of Postharvest Diseases by Microbial Antagonists
The postharvest phase has been considered a very suitable environment for successful
application of biological control agents (BCAs), since the first work on the biological
control of brown rot disease of stone fruit was reported by Pusey and Wilson
[1]. Sure enough, the conditions of constant temperature and high humidity seem to
offer more chances to BCAs, increasing their antifungal activity [2]. BCAs are living
organisms and act following different antagonistic strategies depending on
pathogens, host and environment. Knowledge of their modes of action is therefore
essential to enhance their viability and increase their potentiality in disease control.
In general, antagonists used for biocontrol of postharvest diseases are yeasts and
bacteria, and to a lesser extent fungi, and they have been widely reviewed [3–7].
Antagonists can display a wide range of modes of action, at different stages of
their activity, relating to different hosts, pathogens; sometimes-different modes act
simultaneously, and it is therefore difficult to establish which individual mechanism
has contributed to a specific antifungal action. Considerable information is available
with respect to their efficacy, their application under storage conditions, and their
mixture with safe substances or according to the formulation. However, the mechanisms
by which BCAs exert their activity against pathogens have not yet been fully
elucidated [5] and sometimes, in order to achieve maximum effectiveness in postharvest
phase, were combined with physical and chemical methods including heat
treatments, gamma or UV-C irradiation, and controlled atmosphere (CA).
The bottleneck of the biocontrol matter remains the BCAs formulation often
done in association with private companies, due to the high costs of production and
the regulatory barriers to BCAs registration in different countries that often do not encourage their dissemination. Also, a formulation often could reduce the activity
of antagonists with respect to the fresh cells [2]