Indian Phytopathology

, Volume 71, Issue 2, pp 257–263 | Cite as

Effect of combined application of biofumigant, Trichoderma harzianum and Pseudomonas fluorescens on Rhizoctonia solani f.sp. sasakii

  • G. Bindu Madhavi
  • G. Uma Devi


Banded leaf and sheath blight disease of maize is incited by Rhizoctonia solani f. sp sasakii (RSS) and it can be effectively managed by biointensive management package, such as use of biofumigation of soil with mustard plant material in combination with potential P. fluorescens and Trichoderma harzianum for enhanced yields. The viability of RSS inoculum decreased in all the biofumigation treatments as compared to untreated control. The decrease in the viability ranged from 81.7 to 99%. Maximum reduction in the viability was recorded in treatment biofumigation + seed treatment + soil drenching + foliar spray with P. fluorescens. The radial growth of the inoculum in different treatments showed significant differences when compared to control which ranged from 44.7 to 90 mm. Total bacteria, Trichoderma spp. and Pseudomonas spp. population were high in all bio-fumigant treatments 50 days after incorporation of mustard plant material in both green house and field studies.


Biocontrol agents BLSB Maize Total bacteria Total fungi 


  1. Angus JF, Gardner PA, Kirkegaard JA, Desmarchelier JM (1994) Biofumigation: isothiocyanates released from Brassica roots inhibit growth of the take-all fungus. Plant Soil 162:107–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Biswas S, Datta M (2013) Evaluation of biological control agents against sheath blight of rice in Tripura. Indian Phytopathol 66(1):77–80Google Scholar
  3. Cohen MF, Mazzola M (2006) Resident bacteria, nitric oxide emission and particle size modulate the effect of Brassica napus seed meal on disease incited by Rhizoctonia solani and Pythium spp. Plant Soil 286(1–2):75–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Friberg H, Edel-Hermann V, Faivre C, Gautheron N, Fayolle L, Faloya V, Montfort F, Steinberg C (2009) Cause and duration of mustard incorporation effects on soil-borne plant pathogenic fungi. Soil Biol Biochem 41:2075–2084CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hoagland L, Carpenter-Boggs L, Reganold JP, Mazzola M (2008) Role of native soil biology in brassicaceous seed meal-induced weed suppression. Soil Biol Biochem 40(7):1689–1697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Madhavi GB, Uma Devi G, Vijay Krishna Kumar K, Ramesh Babu T, Naidu TCM (2015) Evaluation of different brassica species and onion for their biofumigation effect against Rhizoctonia solani f. sp. sasakii in vitro. J Res ANGRAU 43(3&4):22–28Google Scholar
  7. Mazzola M, Manici LM (2012) Apple replant disease: role of microbial ecology in cause and control. Annu Rev Phytopathol 50:45–65CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Mazzola M, Zhao X (2010) Brassica juncea seed meal particle size influence the chemistry but not soil biology based suppression of individual agents inciting apple replant disease. Plant Soil 337:313–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Motisi N, Montfort F, Dore T, Romillac N, Lucas P (2009) Duration of control of two soilborne pathogens following incorporation of above and below ground residues of Brassica juncea into soil. Plant Pathol 58:470–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Omirou M, Rousidou C, Bekris F, Papadopoulou KK, Menkissoglou-Spiroudi U, Ehaliotis C, Karpouzas DG (2010) The impact of biofumigation and chemical fumigation methods on the structure and function of the soil microbial community. Microb Ecol 61:201–213CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Ou SH (1985) Rice diseases, 2nd edn. Commonwealth Mycological Institute, Kew, p 380Google Scholar
  12. Porter IJ (1991) Factors which influence the effectiveness of solarization for control of soil borne fungal pathogens in South Eastern Australia. Ph. D Thesis, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Australia. p 268Google Scholar
  13. Raaijmakers JM, Paulitz TC, Steinberg C, Alabouvette C, Moënne-Loccoz Y (2009) The rhizosphere: a playground and battlefield for soil borne pathogens and beneficial microorganisms. Plant Soil 321:341–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Rajput LS, Harlapur SI (2015) Evaluation of fungicides and biocontrol agents for suppression of banded leaf and sheath blight of maize (Zea mays). Indian Phytopathol 68(2):149–155Google Scholar
  15. Smith BJ, Kirkegaard JA (2002) In vitro inhibition of soil microorganisms by 2-phenyl ethyl isothiocyanate. Plant Pathol 51:585–593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Tu CC, Kimbrough JW (1978) Systematics and phylogeny of fungi in the Rhizoctonia complex. Bot Gaz 139:454–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Yulianti Y, Sivasithamparam K, Turner WD (2006) Response of different forms of propagules of Rhizoctonia solani AG2-1 (ZG5) exposed to the volatiles produced in soil amended with green manures. Ann Appl Biol 148:105–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Phytopathological Society 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Plant Pathology, RARSAcharya NG Ranga Agricultural UniversityGunturIndia
  2. 2.College of AgricultureProfessor Jayasankar Telangana State Agricultural UniversityHyderabadIndia

Personalised recommendations