Induction of resistance in grapevines against powdery mildew by Bacillus strains

  • Indu S. SawantEmail author
  • Varsha P. Salunkhe
  • Shashikant B. Ghule
  • Pallavi N. Wadkar
  • Vijayshree Chavan
  • Yogita H. Ranade
  • Sanjay D. Sawant
Research Article


Table grape cultivars are highly susceptible to powdery mildew disease and frequent use of single site action fungicides has led to the development of fungicide resistance in the pathogen and detection of fungicide residues in grapes at harvest. A systematic study was conducted to identify bacteria which can induce resistance in grapevines against the powdery mildew. Two hundred and ninety three bacteria from the grapevine ecosystem were screened in vitro for their growth promoting activities. The twenty two positive isolates, identified as Bacillus species were further screened in vivo for their ability to reduce disease severity and eleven promising isolates which reduced disease severity by 35 per cent or more were identified. These Bacillus species induced higher levels of peroxidase, polyphenol oxidase, total phenols and total proteins in leaves of treated plants and also tested positive for IAA, NH3, HCN and siderophore production, which are implicated in plant growth promotion. The most promising of these, TS-45, DR-92, TL-171, and TP-232 were evaluated, alone or in binary combination, on field grown grapevines for three consecutive seasons during 2015 to 2017. All treatments reduced the powdery mildew severity as compared to the control in all the three trials. Combined applications, of TP-232+TL-171 and TS-45+DR-92 were more effective. Treated vines showed higher level of chitinase, β 1,3-glucanase, peroxidase and polyphenol oxidase activities. In morphological and 16S rDNA gene analysis, isolates TS-45, DR-92, TL-171, and TP-232 showed close homology to Bacillus subtilis, B. endophyticus, B. licheniformis and B. flexus, respectively. This study has shown that soil application of selected efficient Bacillus species can enhance grapevine resistance to powdery mildew disease.


Grapevines Bacillus Plant growth Powdery mildew Systemic resistance 


Supplementary material

42360_2019_171_MOESM1_ESM.docx (16 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 15 kb)
42360_2019_171_MOESM2_ESM.docx (15 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 15 kb)


  1. Ahn IP, Park KS, Kim CH (2002) Rhizobacteria induced resistance perturbs viral disease progress and triggers defense-related gene expression. Mol Cells 13:302–308PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Aziz A, Verhagen B, Magnin-Robert M, Couderchet M, Clément C, Jeandet P, Trotel-Aziz P (2016) Effectiveness of beneficial bacteria to promote systemic resistance of grapevine to gray mold as related to phytoalexin production in vineyards. Plant Soil 405:141–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bennett FG, Westcott B (1982) Field assessment of resistance to powdery mildew in mature wheat plants. Plant Pathol 31:261–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brick JM, Bostock RM, Silverstone SE (1991) Rapid in situ assay for indole acetic acid production by bacteria immobilized on nitrocellulose membrane. Appl Environ Microbiol 57:535–538Google Scholar
  5. Cappuccino JC, Sherman N (1992) Microbiology: a laboratory manual, 3rd edn. Benjamin/cummings Pub. Co., New York, pp 125–179Google Scholar
  6. Choudhary DK, Johri BN (2009) Interactions of Bacillus spp. and plants-with special reference to induced systemic resistance (ISR). Microbiol Res 164:493–513PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Choudhary DK, Prakash A, Johri ABN (2007) Induced systemic resistance (ISR) in plants: mechanism of action. Indian J Microbiol 47:289–297PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Defago G, Haas D (1990) Pseudomonads as antagonists of soil borne plant pathogens: mode of action and genetic analysis. Soil Biochem 6:249–291Google Scholar
  9. Devi R, Thakur R (2018) Screening and identification of bacteria for plant growth promoting traits from termite mound soil. J Pharmacogn Phytochem 7:1681–1686Google Scholar
  10. Emmert EAB, Handelsman J (1999) Biocontrol of plant disease: a (Gram-) positive perspective. FEMS Microbiol Lett 171:1–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Franzener G, Schwan-Estrada KRF, Moura GS, Kuhn OJ, Stangarlin JR (2018) Induction of defense enzymes and control of anthracnose in cucumber by Corymbia citriodora aqueous extract. Summa Phytopathol 44:10–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. García-Gutiérrez L, Zeriouh H, Romero D, Cubero J, de Vincente A, Pérez-García A (2013) The antagonistic strain Bacillus subtilis UMAF6639 also confers protection to melon by activation of jasmonate- and salicylic acid-dependent responses. Microb Biotechnol 6:264–274PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gaur AC (1990) Physiological functions of phosphate solubilizing micro-organisms. In: Gaur AC (ed) Phosphate solubilizing micro-organisms as biofertilizers. Omega Scientific Publishers, New Delhi, pp 16–72Google Scholar
  14. Gupta P, Ravi I, Sharma V (2013) Induction of β-1, 3-glucanase and chitinase activity in the defense response of Eruca sativa plants against the fungal pathogen Alternaria brassicicola. Plant Interact 8:155–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hartmann A, Schikora A (2012) Quorum sensing of bacteria and trans-kingdom interactions of N-acyl homoserine lactones with eukaryotes. J Chem Ecol 38:704–713PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jetiyanon K, Fowler WD, Kloepper JW (2003) Broad-spectrum protection against several pathogens by PGPR mixtures under field conditions in Thailand. Plant Dis 87:1390–1394PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kimura M (1980) A simple method for estimating evolutionary rates of base substitutions through comparative studies of nucleotide sequences. J Mol Evol 16:111–120PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kloepper JW, Rodriguez-Kabana R, Zehnder GW, Murphy J, Sikora E, Fernandez C (1999) Plant root-bacterial interactions in biological control of soilborne diseases and potential extension to systemic and foliar diseases. Australas Plant Pathol 28:27–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kloepper JW, Ryu CM, Zhang S (2004) Induced systemic resistance and promotion of plant growth by Bacillus spp. Phytopathol 94:1259–1266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lee B, Farag MA, Park HB, Kloepper JW, Lee SH, Ryu C (2012) Induced resistance by a long-chain bacterial volatile: elicitation of plant systemic defense by a C13 volatile produced by Paenibacillus polymyxa. PLoS One 7:e48744PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lorck H (1948) Production of hydrocyanic acid by bacteria. Physiol Plant 1:142–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lowry OH, Rosebrough NJ, Fair AL, Randall RJ (1951) Protein measurement with the Folin phenol reagent. J Biol Chem 193:265–275Google Scholar
  23. Marques APGC, Pires C, Moreira H, Rangel AOSS, Castro PML (2010) Assessment of the plant growth promotion abilities of six bacterial isolates using Zea mays as indicator plant. Soil Biol Biochem 42:1229–1235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Maurhofer M, Haas D, Meuwly P, Metraux JP, Defago G (1994) Induction of systemic resistance of tobacco to tobacco necrosis virus by the root colonizing Pseudomonas fluorescens strain CHA0: influence of the gacA gene and pyoverdin production. Phytopathol 84:139–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Park KS, Ahn IP, Kim CH (2001) Systemic resistance and expression of the pathogenesis-related genes mediated by the plant growth-promoting rhizobacterium Bacillus amyloliquefaciens EXTN-1 against anthracnose disease in cucumber. Mycobiology 29:48–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Raupach GS, Kloepper JW (1998) Mixtures of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria enhance biological control of multiple cucumber pathogens. Phytopathology 88:1158–1164PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sadasivam S, Manickam A (1996) Biochemical methods for agricultural sciences. New Age International (P) Ltd, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  28. Sawant IS, Ghule SB, Sawant SD (2015) Molecular analysis reveals that lack of chasmothecia formation in Erysiphe necator in Maharashtra, India is due to presence of only MAT1-2 mating type idiomorph. Vitis 54:87–90Google Scholar
  29. Sawant IS, Wadkar PN, Rajguru YR, Mhaske NH, Salunkhe VP, Sawant SD, Upadhyay A (2016a) Biocontrol potential of two novel grapevine associated Bacillus strains for management of anthracnose disease caused by Colletotrichum gloeosporioides. Biocontrol Sci Technol 26:964–979CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sawant SD, Ghule MR, Sawant IS (2016b) First Report of QoI Resistance in Plasmopara viticola from vineyards of Maharashtra, India. Plant Dis 100:229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Schwachtje J, Karojet S, Kunz S, Brouwer S, van Dongen JT (2012) Plant-growth promoting effect of newly isolated rhizobacteria varies between two Arabidopsis ecotypes. Plant Signal Behav 7:623–627PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Schwyn B, Neilands JB (1987) Universal chemical assay for the detection and determination of siderophores. Anal Biochem 160:47–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Singleton VL, Rossi JA (1965) Colorimetry of total phenolics with phosphomolybdic phosphotungstic acid reagents. Am J Enol Viticult 16:144–158Google Scholar
  34. Sung KC, Chung YR (1997) Enhanced suppression of rice sheath blight using combination of bacteria which produce chitinases or antibiotics. In: Ogoshi A, Kobayashi K, Homma Y, Kodama F, Konodo N, Akino S (eds) Plant growth promoting Rhizobacteria: present status and future prospects. OECD, Paris, pp 370–373Google Scholar
  35. Tamura K, Stecher G, Peterson D, Filipski A, Kumar S (2013) MEGA 6: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis, version 6.0. Mol Bio Evol 30:2725–2729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Thakker JN, Patel N, Kothari IL (2007) Fusarium oxysporum derived elicitor-induced changes in enzymes of banana leaves against wilt disease. J Mycol Plant Pathol 37: 510–513Google Scholar
  37. Van Loon LC (2000) Systemic induced resistance. In: Slusarenko AJ et al. (eds) In mechanisms of resistance to plant diseases. Springer, Netherlands, pp 521–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Van Peer R, Niemann GJ, Schippers B (1991) Induced resistance and phytoalexin accumulation in biological control of Fusarium wilt of carnation by Pseudomonas sp. strain WCS417r. Phytopathology 81:728–734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Vejan P, Abdullah R, Khadiran T, Ismail S, Nasrulhaq Boyce A (2016) Role of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria in agricultural sustainability—a review. Molecules 21:pii: E573. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Viswanathan R, Samiyappan R (1999) Red rot disease in sugarcane: a major constraint for the Indian sugar industry. Sugar Cane 5:9–15Google Scholar
  41. Walters DR (2009) Are plants in the field already induced? Implications for practical disease control. Crop Prot 28:459–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wei G, Kloepper JW, Tuzun S (1991) Induction of systemic resistance of cucumber to Colletotrichum orbiculare by select strains of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria. Phytopathology 81:1508–1512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wei D, Kirimura K, Shoji U, Tsung-Hui L (1996) Purification and characterization of an extracellular β-glucosidase from the wood-grown fungus Xylaria regalis. Curr Microbiol 33:297–301PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Yan Z, Reddy MS, Ryu CM, McInroy JA, Wilson M, Kloepper JW (2002) Induced systemic protection against tomato late blight elicited by plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria. Phytopathology 92:1329–1333PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Phytopathological Society 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ICAR-National Research Centre for Grapes, P.O. Manjari FarmPuneIndia

Personalised recommendations