Diverse microbial communities in non-aerated compost teas suppress bacterial wilt

  • W. K. MengeshaEmail author
  • S. M. Powell
  • K. J. Evans
  • K. M. Barry
Original Paper


Non-aerated compost teas (NCTs) are water extracts of composted organic materials and are used to suppress soil borne and foliar disease in many pathosystems. Greenhouse trials were used to test the effectiveness of NCTs to suppress potato bacterial wilt caused by Ralstonia solanacearum on plants grown in soils inoculated with a virulent isolate of the pathogen (biovar II). NCTs prepared from matured compost sources: agricultural waste (AWCT), vermicompost (VCT) and solid municipal waste (SMWCT) were evaluated at three initial application times (7 days before inoculation, at time of inoculation and 7 days after inoculation) prior to weekly applications, in a randomized complete-block design. AWCT applied initially at the time of inoculation resulted in the greatest disease suppression, with the disease severity index 2.5-fold less than the non-treated plants and the “area under the disease progress curve” (AUDPC) 3.2-fold less. VCT and SMWCT were less suppressive than AWCT regardless of initial application time. Next generation sequencing of the v4 region of 16S rRNA gene and the internal transcribed spacer region (ITS1) revealed that diversity and composition of the bacterial and fungal communities across the NCTs varied significantly. Dominant bacterial phyla such as Actinobacteria, Bacteroidetes, Firmicutes, Proteobacteria, Verrucomicrobia, Chloroflexi, Planctomycetes, Acidobacteria, and a fungal phylum Ascomycota were detected in all NCTs. AWCT had optimum physico-chemical measurements with higher bacterial Shannon diversity indices (H) and fungal richness (S) than the other treatments. We conclude that bacterial wilt of potatoes grown in controlled conditions can be suppressed by a non-aerated compost tea with a high microbial diversity when applied at planting and weekly thereafter.


Disease severity Next generation sequencing Microbial diversity Non-aerated compost tea Ralstonia solanacearum 



The authors would like to thank staff members at the bacteriology section of Ambo Plant Protection Research centre for provision of the glasshouse facility used for conducting the research. The Australian Development Scholarship (ADS) provided to the first author is gratefully acknowledged and we thank the School of Land and Food of UTAS for operational support. Thanks to David Ratkowsky for his advice on statistical analysis.


  1. Acero JL, Benítez FJ, Real FJ, González M (2008) Chlorination of organophosphorus pesticides in natural waters. J Hazard Mater 153:320–328. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2007.08.051 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Al-Dahmani JH, Abbasi PA, Miller SA, Hoitink HA (2003) Suppression of bacterial spot of tomato with foliar sprays of compost extracts under greenhouse and field conditions. Plant Dis 87:913–919CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aley EFLGP, Elphinstone J (1995) Culture media for Ralstonia solanacearum isolation, identification and maintenance. Fitopatologia 30:126–130Google Scholar
  4. Álvarez B, Vasse J, Le-Courtois V, Trigalet-Démery D, López M, Trigalet A (2008) Comparative behavior of Ralstonia solanacearum biovar 2 in diverse plant species. Phytopathology 98:59–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Álvarez B, Biosca EG, López MM (2010) On the life of Ralstonia solanacearum, a destructive bacterial plant pathogen. Curr Res Technol Educ Topics Appl Microbiol Microbial Biotechnol 1:267–279Google Scholar
  6. Anderson MJ, Willis TJ (2003) Canonical analysis of principal coordinates: a useful method of constrained ordination for ecology. Ecology 84:511–525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Anith KN, Momol MT, Kloepper JW, Marois JJ, Olson SM, Jones JB (2004) Efficacy of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria, acibenzolar-S-methyl, and soil amendment for integrated management of bacterial wilt on tomato. Plant Dis 88:669–673. doi: 10.1094/PDIS.2004.88.6.669 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Aryantha IP, Cross R, Guest DI (2000) Suppression of Phytophthora cinnamomi in potting mixes amended with uncomposted and composted animal manures. Phytopathology 90:775–782. doi: 10.1094/phyto.2000.90.7.775 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Campbell CL, Madden LV (1990) Introduction to plant disease epidemiology. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Caporaso JG et al (2011) Global patterns of 16S rRNA diversity at a depth of millions of sequences per sample. Proc Natl Acad Sci 108:4516–4522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Caporaso JG et al. (2012) Ultra-high-throughput microbial community analysis on the Illumina HiSeq and MiSeq platforms. ISME J 6:1621–1624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dannon EA, Wydra K (2004) Interaction between silicon amendment, bacterial wilt development and phenotype of Ralstonia solanacearum in tomato genotypes. Physiol Mol Plant Pathol 64:233–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. DeSantis TZ et al (2006) Greengenes, a chimera-checked 16S rRNA gene database and workbench compatible with ARB. Appl Environ Microbiol 72:5069–5072CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ding C, Shen Q, Zhang R, Chen W (2013) Evaluation of rhizosphere bacteria and derived bio-organic fertilizers as potential biocontrol agents against bacterial wilt (Ralstonia solanacearum) of potato. Plant Soil 366:453–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Evans KJ, Percy AK (2014) Integrating compost teas in the management of fruit and foliar diseases for sustainable crop yield and quality. In: Maheshwari DK (ed) Composting for sustainable agriculture. Springer, Cham, pp 173–198Google Scholar
  16. Gado E (2013) Induction of resistance in potato plants against bacterial wilt disease under Egyptian condition. J Appl Sci Res 9:170–177Google Scholar
  17. Gamliel A, Austerweil M, Kritzman G (2000) Non-chemical approach to soilborne pest management—organic amendments. Crop Prot 19:847–853 doi: 10.1016/S0261-2194(00)00112-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gao M, Liang F, Yu A, Li B, Yang L (2010) Evaluation of stability and maturity during forced-aeration composting of chicken manure and sawdust at different C/N ratios. Chemosphere 78:614–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Goszczynska T, Serfontein J, Serfontein S (2000) Introduction to practical phytobacteriology. SAFRINET The Southern African (SADC) Loop of BioNet-InternationalGoogle Scholar
  20. Hayward AC (1964) Characteristics of Pseudomonas solanacearum. J Appl Bacteriol 27:265–277. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.1964.tb04912.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hayward A (1991) Biology and epidemiology of bacterial wilt caused by Pseudomonas solanacearum. Annu Rev Phytopathol 29:65–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hoitink H, Boehm M, Hadar Y (1993) Mechanisms of suppression of soilborne plant pathogens in compost-amended substrates. In: Hoitink HAJ, Keener HM (eds)  Science and engineering of composting: design, environmental, microbiological and utilization aspects. Renaissance Publications, Worthington, OH, pp 601–621Google Scholar
  23. Hoitink H, Stone A, Han D (1997) Suppression of plant diseases by composts. HortScience 32:184–187Google Scholar
  24. Islam M, Mondal C, Hossain I, Meah M (2014) Compost tea as soil drench: an alternative approach to control bacterial wilt in brinjal. Arch Phytopathol Plant Prot 47:1475–1488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kassa B, Chindi A (2013) Seed tuber cycle and latent infection for the spread of potato bacterial wilt Ralstonia solanacearum (Smith) a threat for seed production in Ethiopia Asian. J Plant Pathol 7:74–83Google Scholar
  26. Kelman A (1954) The relationship of pathogenicity of Pseudomonas solanacearum to colony appearance in a tetrazolium medium. Phytopathology 44:693–695Google Scholar
  27. Kempe J, Sequeira L (1983) Biological control of bacterial wilt of potatoes: attempts to induce resistance by treating tubers with bacteria. Plant Dis 67:499–503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Koné SB, Dionne A, Tweddell RJ, Antoun H, Avis TJ (2010) Suppressive effect of non-aerated compost teas on foliar fungal pathogens of tomato. Biol Control 52:167–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kuo S, Ortiz-Escobar M, Hue N, Hummel R (2004) Composting and compost utilization for agronomic and container crops. Recent Res Dev Environ Biol 1:451–513Google Scholar
  30. Lee Y-H, Choi C-W, Kim S-H, Yun J-G, Chang S-W, Kim Y-S, Hong J-K (2012) Chemical pesticides and plant essential oils for disease control of tomato bacterial wilt. Plant Pathol J 28:32–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lemessa F, Zeller W (2007) Isolation and characterisation of Ralstonia solanacearum strains from Solanaceae crops in Ethiopia. J Basic Microbiol 47:40–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Li J-G, Dong Y-H (2013) Effect of a rock dust amendment on disease severity of tomato bacterial wilt. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 103:11–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lindahl BD et al. (2013) Fungal community analysis by high-throughput sequencing of amplified markers—a user’s guide. New Phytol 199:288–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Md Islam T, Toyota K (2004) Suppression of bacterial wilt of tomato by Ralstonia solanacearum by incorporation of composts in soil and possible mechanisms. Microbes Environ 19:53–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Moral R, Paredes C, Bustamante M, Marhuenda-Egea F, Bernal M (2009) Utilisation of manure composts by high-value crops: safety and environmental challenges. Bioresour Technol 100:5454–5460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Palmer A, Evans K, Metcalf D (2010) Characters of aerated compost tea from immature compost that limit colonization of bean leaflets by Botrytis cinerea. J Appl Microbiol 109:1619–1631Google Scholar
  37. Pane C, Celano G, Villecco D, Zaccardelli M (2012) Control of Botrytis cinerea, Alternaria alternata and Pyrenochaeta lycopersici on tomato with whey compost-tea applications. Crop Prot 38:80–86. doi: 10.1016/j.cropro.2012.03.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pane C, Celano G, Zaccardeli M (2014) Metabolic patterns of bacterial communities in aerobic compost teas associated with potential biocontrol of soilborne plant diseases. Phytopathol Mediterr 53:277Google Scholar
  39. Pradhanang P, Ji P, Momol M, Olson S, Mayfield J, Jones J (2005) Application of acibenzolar-S-methyl enhances host resistance in tomato against Ralstonia solanacearum. Plant Dis 89:989–993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. SAS Institute I (2011) SAS® 9.3. Software. SAS Institute, Inc. CaryGoogle Scholar
  41. Scheuerell SJ, Mahaffee WF (2006) Variability associated with suppression of gray mold (Botrytis cinerea) on Geranium by foliar applications of nonaerated and aerated compost teas. Plant Dis 90:1201–1208. doi: 10.1094/pd-90-1201 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Shiomi Y, Nishiyama M, Onizuka T, Marumoto T (1999) Comparison of bacterial community structures in the rhizoplane of tomato plants grown in soils suppressive and conducive towards bacterial wilt. Appl Environ Microbiol 65:3996–4001Google Scholar
  43. Shrestha K, Adetutu EM, Shrestha P, Walsh KB, Harrower KM, Ball AS, Midmore DJ (2011) Comparison of microbially enhanced compost extracts produced from composted cattle rumen content material and from commercially available inocula. Bioresour Technol 102:7994–8002. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2011.05.096 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tan S, Jiang Y, Song S, Huang J, Ling N, Xu Y, Shen Q (2013) Two Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strains isolated using the competitive tomato root enrichment method and their effects on suppressing Ralstonia solanacearum and promoting tomato plant growth. Crop Prot 43:134–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Thomas P, Upreti R (2014) Testing of bacterial endophytes from non-host sources as potential antagonistic agents against tomato wilt pathogen Ralstonia solanacearum. Adv Microbiol 4:656–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. van Elsas JD, Kastelein P, van Bekkum P, van der Wolf JM, de Vries PM, van Overbeek LS (2000) Survival of Ralstonia solanacearum biovar 2, the causative agent of potato brown rot, in field and microcosm soils in temperate climates. Phytopathology 90:1358–1366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. van Elsas JD, Chiurazzi M, Mallon CA, Elhottovā D, Krištůfek V, Salles JF (2012) Microbial diversity determines the invasion of soil by a bacterial pathogen. Proc Natl Acad Sci 109:1159–1164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Winstead N, Kelman A (1952) Inoculation techniques for evaluating resistance to Psuedomonas solanacearum. Phytopathology 42:628–634Google Scholar
  49. Wu K, Yuan S, Wang L, Shi J, Zhao J, Shen B, Shen Q (2014) Effects of bio-organic fertilizer plus soil amendment on the control of tobacco bacterial wilt and composition of soil bacterial communities. Biol Fertil Soils 50:961–971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Yabuuchi E, Kosako Y, Yano I, Hotta H, Nishiuchi Y (1995) Transfer of two Burkholderia and an Alcaligenes species to Ralstonia gen. nov.: proposal of Ralstonia pickettii (Ralston, Palleroni and Doudoroff 1973) comb. nov., Ralstonia solanacearum (Smith 1896) comb. nov. and Ralstonia eutropha (Davis 1969) comb. nov. Microbiol Immunol 39:897–904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Yaynu H (1989) Characteristics of isolates of Pseudomonas solanacearum in Ethiopia Ethiopian. J Agric Sci 11:7–13Google Scholar
  52. Yuliar YAN, Toyota K (2015) Recent trends in control methods for bacterial wilt diseases caused by Ralstonia solanacearum. Microbes Environ 30:1CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Land and Food, Tasmanian Institute of AgricultureUniversity of TasmaniaHobart, TasmaniaAustralia

Personalised recommendations