Redirecting to http://dergipark.org.tr/_fragment?_hash=vtUueB2lsNLPGB6FEV6d2bTEuLTU9uLJBftvApVhpoI&_path=id%3D659802%26_format%3Dhtml%26_locale%3Dtr%26_controller%3DApp%255CController%255CSite%255CArticleController%253A%253AesiArticleStats.
Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Prevalence and Characterization of Plant Growth Promoting Mechanisms of Endophytic and Epiphytic Bacterial Species Isolated from Almond Trees Growing in Diyarbakır Province of Turkey

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 23 Sayı: 3, 641 - 654, 30.06.2020

Zekiye Ceren Aktan , Soner Soylu

https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.659802
Cited By: 26

Öz

The aims of this study were to identify endophytic and epiphytic plant growth promoting bacteria (PGPB) from healthy almond trees and to characterize plant growth promoting mechanisms. By using MALDI-TOF analyses, 19 Gram-negative isolates, belonging to Serratia, Pseudomonas, Ochrobactrum and Enterobacter genus and 26 Gram-positive isolates, belonging to Bacillus and Arthrobacter genus were identified. Among the tested bacterial isolates, 46 isolates were positive for siderophore production, 45 isolates for ammonium production, 35 isolates solubilized phosphorus varying ratios, and all isolates produced IAA between 5.48-127.81 µg/ml concentrations. Isolates of Pseudomonas spp and Enterobacter cloacae were found highly effective for siderophore production, S. marcescens for solubilisation of phosphorus, E. cloacae for IAA production, Bacillus spp for ammonia production. Bacterial isolates tested showed significant differences in siderophore, ammonia and IAA production and phosphorus solubilisation efficiency. It was found that the efficacies of endophytic bacterial isolates were lower compared to the same species of epiphytic bacterial isolates. Overall results suggest that use of the most efficient PGPB isolates have an excellent potential to be used as biofertilizer for cultivation of economically important crops.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Almond Biological control Plant Growth Promoting Bacteria (PGPB) Bio-fertiliser

Proje Numarası

MKU BAP-16444

Kaynakça

  • Ahemad M, Kibret M 2014. Mechanisms and Applications of Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria: Current Perspective. Journal of King Saud University-Science, 26: 1-20.
  • Araujo FF, Henning AA, Hungria M 2005. Phytohormones and Antibiotics Produced by Bacillus subtilis and Their Effects on Seed Pathogenic Fungi and on Soybean Root Development. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 21(8-9): 1639-1645.
  • Arora NK, Tewari S, Singh S, Lal N, Maheshwari DK 2012. PGPR for Protection of Plant Health Under Saline Conditions. In: Maheshwari DK (ed.) Bacteria in Agrobiology: Stress management, pp. 239-258. Bernal G, Illanes A, Ciampi L 2002. Isolation and Partial Purification of a Metabolite From A Mutant Strain of Bacillus sp. With Antibiotic Activity Against Plant Pathogenic Agents. Electronic Journal of Biotechnology, (on line), 15 April 2002, 5 (1). Available from http://www.ejbiotechnology.info/content/vol5/issue1/full/4/
  • Bhardwaj D, Ansari MW, Sahoo RK, Tuteja N 2014. Biofertilizers Function As Key Player In Sustainable Agriculture By Improving Soil Fertility, Plant Tolerance And Crop Productivity. Microb Cell Fact, 13: 66.
  • Cappuccino JC, Sherman N 1992. In Microbiology: A laboratory Manual, third ed. Benjamin Cummings Pub. Co, New York, pp. 125-179.
  • Fravel DR 1988. Role of Antibiosis in The Biocontrol Of Plant Disease. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 26: 75-91.
  • Glickman E, Dessaux Y 1995. A Critical Evaluation of The Specificity of Salkowski Reagent For Indole Compounds Produced by Phytopathogenic Bacteria. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 61: 793–796.
  • Gupta G, Parihar SS, Ahirwar NK, Snehi SK, Singh V 2015. Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR): Current and Future Prospects for Development of Sustainable Agriculture. Journal of Microbial and Biochemical Technology, 7: 096-102.
  • Hallmann J, Quadt-Hallmann A, Mahaffee WF, Kloepper JW 1997. Bacterial endophytes in agricultural crops. Canadian Journal of Microbiology, 43(10): 895-914.
  • Kumar P, Dubey RC, Maheshwari DK 2012. Bacillus strains Isolated From Rhizosphere Showed Plant Growth Promoting And Antagonistic Activity Against Phytopathogens. Microbiological Research, 167: 493–499.
  • Krebs B, Junge H, Ockhardt A, Hoding B, Heubner D, Erben, U 1993. Bacillus subtilis: An effective Biocontrol Agent. Pesticide Science, 37: 427429. Lelliot RA, Stead DE 1987. Methods For The Diagnosis Of Bacterial Diseases Of Plants. (T.F. Preece, Editor). In: Methods in Plant Pathology, Vol 2, Black well Scientific Publications. pp. 176-177, Oxford.
  • Leong J 1986. Siderophores: Their Biochemistry And Possible Role In The Biocontrol Of Plant Pathogens. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 24: 187-209.
  • Loper JE, Schroth MN 1986. Influence of Bacterial Sources Of Indole-3-Acetic Acid On Root Elongation Of Sugar Beet. Phytopathology, 76(4): 386–389.
  • Lugtenberg B, Kamilova F 2009. Plant-Growth-Promoting Rhizobacteria. Annual Review of Microbiology 63: 541-556.
  • Marquez-Santacruz HA, Hernandez-Leon R, Orozco-Mosqueda MC, Velazquez-Sepulveda I, Santoyo G 2010. Diversity of Bacterial Endophytes In Roots Of Mexican Husk Tomato Plants (Physalis ixocarpa) and Their Detection In The Rhizosphere. Genetics and Molecular Research, 9(4): 2372-2380.
  • Mehta PS, Negi KS, Ojha SN 2010. Native Plant Genetic Resources and Traditional Foods Of Uttarakhand Himalaya For Sustainable Food Security And Livelihood. Indian Journal of Natural Products and Resources, 1 (1): 89–96.
  • Nega A 2014. Review On Concepts in Biological Control Of Plant Pathogens. Journal of Biology, Agriculture and Healthcare, 4(27): 33-54.
  • Patten CL, Glick BR 2002. Role of Pseudomonas putida Indoleacetic Acid In Development Of The Host Plant Root System. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 68(8): 3795-3801.
  • Pavlovic M, Konrad R, Iwobi AN, Sing A, Busch U, Huber I 2012. A Dual Approach Employing MALDI-TOF MS and Real-Time PCR for Fast Species Identification Within the Enterobacter cloacae complex. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 328: 46–53.
  • Rani MU, Reddy G 2011. Bacillus cereus and Enterobacter cancerogenus Screened For Their Efficient Plant Growth Promoting Traits Rhizobacteria (PGPR) and Antagonistic Traits Among Sixteen Bacterial Isolates From Rhizospheric Soils Of Pigeon Pea. African Journal of Microbiology Research, 5(15): 2090-2094.
  • Romero FM, Marina M, Pieckenstain FL 2014. The Communities Of Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) Leaf Endophytic Bacteria, Analyzed by 16S-ribosomal RNA Gene Pyrosequencing. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 351(2): 187-194.
  • Rosenbluet M, Martinez-Romero E 2006. Bacterial Endophytes and Their Interactions with Hosts. Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions, 19: 827–837.
  • Santoyo G, Moreno-Hagelsieb G, Carmen Orozco-Mosquedac M, Glick BR 2016. Plant Growth-Promoting Bacterial Endophytes. Microbiological Research 183: 92–99.
  • Saranraj P, Sivasakthivelan P, Sakthi SS 2013. Prevalence and Production Of Plant Growth Promoting Substance by Pseudomonas fluorescens Isolated From Paddy Rhizosphere Soil Of Cuddalore District, Tamil Nadu, India, African Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 5(2): 95-101.
  • Schwyn B, Neilands JB 1987. Universal Chemical Assay For Detection And Determination Of Siderophores. Analytical Biochemistry, 160: 47-56. Shi Y, Yang H, Zhang T, Sun J, Lou K 2014. Illumina-Based Analysis of Endophytic Bacterial Diversity and Space-Time Dynamics in Sugar Beet on The North Slope of Tianshan Mountain. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 98(14): 6375-6385.
  • Singh N, Pandey P, Dubey RC, Maheshwari DK 2008. Biological Control Of Root Rot Fungus Macrophomina phaseolina and Growth Enhancement of Pinus roxburghii (Sarg.) by Rhizosphere Competent Bacillus subtilis BN1. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 24: 1669-1679.
  • Sturz AV, Christie BR, Nowak J 2000. Bacterial Endophytes: Potential Role In Developing Sustainable Systems Of Crop Production. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences, 19(1): 1-30.
  • Sujatha N, Ammani K 2013. Siderophore Production by the Isolates of Fluorescent Pseudomonads. International Journal of Current Research and Review, 5(20): 01-07.
  • Sülü SM, Bozkurt İA, Soylu S 2016. Bitki Büyüme Düzenleyici ve Biyolojik Mücadele Etmeni Olarak Bakteriyel Endofitler. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 21: 103-111.
  • Tariq M, Hameed S, Yasmeen T, Zahid M 2014. Molecular Characterization and Identification of Plant Growth Promoting Endophytic Bacteria Isolated From the Root Nodules Of Pea (Pisum sativum L.). World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 30: 719-725.
  • Tjamos EC, Tjamos SE, Antoniou PP 2010. Biological Management of Plant Diseases: Highlights on Research and Application. Journal of Plant Pathology, 92: S17-S21.
  • Ullah A, Mushtaq H, Fahad S, Shah A, Chaudhary HJ 2017. Plant Growth Promoting Potential of Bacterial Endophytes in Novel Association with Olea ferruginea and Withania coagulans. Microbiology, 86(1): 119-127.
  • Vazquez P, Holguin G, Puente ME, Lopez-Cortes A, Bashan Y, 2000. Phosphate-Solubilizing Microorganisms Associated with the Rhizosphere of Mangroves in a Semiarid Coastal Lagoon. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 30: 460–468.
  • Wang Y, Zeng Q, Zhang Z 2010. Antagonistic Bioactivity of An Endophytic Bacterium H6. African Journal of Biotechnology, 9(37): 6140-6145.
  • Wei G, Kloepper JW, Tuzun S 1996. Induced Systemic Resistance to Cucumber Diseases And Increased Plant Growth by Plant-Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria Under Field Conditions. Phytopathology, 86: 221–224.
  • Weller DM 1988. Biological Control of Soil Borne Plant Pathogens In The Rhizosphere With Bacteria. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 26: 379-407.

Diyarbakır İlinde Yetişen Badem Ağaçlarından Endofit ve Epifit Bakteri Türlerinin İzolasyonu ve Bitki Gelişimini Teşvik Eden Mekanizmalarının Karakterizasyonu

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 23 Sayı: 3, 641 - 654, 30.06.2020

Zekiye Ceren Aktan , Soner Soylu

https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.659802
Cited By: 26

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, sağlıklı badem ağaçlarından izole edilen bitki gelişimini teşvik eden endofit ve epifit bakteri (PGPB) türlerin tanılanması ve bitki gelişimini teşvik eden mekanizmalarının belirlemektir. MALDI-TOF tanılama analizleri sonucu, 19 izolat Gram-negatif Serratia, Pseudomonas, Ochrobactrum ve Enterobacter, 26 izolat ise Gram-pozitif Bacillus ve Arthrobacter cinsine dahil türler olarak teşhis edilmiştir. Test edilen izolatlardan, 46 izolat siderofor, 45 izolat amonyak üretiminde pozitif, 35 izolat ise fosforu değişen oranlarda çözebilme yeteneğinde olurken, bakterilerin tamamı 5.48-127.81 µg/ml konsantrasyon aralığında IAA üretmişlerdir. Pseudomonas spp and Enterobacter cloacae izolatları siderofor, Serratia marcescens izolatları fosforu çözme, Enterobacter cloacae izolatları IAA üretme, Bacillus spp ise amonyak üretme etkinliğinin yüksek düzeylerde olduğu görülmüştür. Aynı türe bağlı endofit bakteri izolatları epifit bakteri izolatlarına kıyasla bu mekanizmaları daha düşük düzeyde teşvik ettiği belirlenmiştir. Elde edilen sonuçlar yüksek düzeyde siderofor, amonyak, IAA üretimi ile fosfor çözme gibi bitki gelişimini teşvik edici özellikleri sahip PGPB izolatlarının ekonomik öneme sahip kültür bitkilerin yetiştiriciliğinde biyolojik gübre olarak kullanılmada potansiyeline sahip olduğunu göstermiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Badem Biyolojik Mücadele Bitki Gelişimini Teşvik Eden Bakteri (PGPB) Biyogübre

Destekleyen Kurum

Hatay Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Bilimsel Araştırma Projeleri Komisyonu Başkanlığı

Proje Numarası

MKU BAP-16444

Teşekkür

Bu çalışma Hatay Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Bilimsel Araştırma Projeleri Komisyonu Başkanlığı tarafından finansal olarak desteklenmiştir (Proje Numarası: MKU BAP-16444).

Kaynakça

  • Ahemad M, Kibret M 2014. Mechanisms and Applications of Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria: Current Perspective. Journal of King Saud University-Science, 26: 1-20.
  • Araujo FF, Henning AA, Hungria M 2005. Phytohormones and Antibiotics Produced by Bacillus subtilis and Their Effects on Seed Pathogenic Fungi and on Soybean Root Development. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 21(8-9): 1639-1645.
  • Arora NK, Tewari S, Singh S, Lal N, Maheshwari DK 2012. PGPR for Protection of Plant Health Under Saline Conditions. In: Maheshwari DK (ed.) Bacteria in Agrobiology: Stress management, pp. 239-258. Bernal G, Illanes A, Ciampi L 2002. Isolation and Partial Purification of a Metabolite From A Mutant Strain of Bacillus sp. With Antibiotic Activity Against Plant Pathogenic Agents. Electronic Journal of Biotechnology, (on line), 15 April 2002, 5 (1). Available from http://www.ejbiotechnology.info/content/vol5/issue1/full/4/
  • Bhardwaj D, Ansari MW, Sahoo RK, Tuteja N 2014. Biofertilizers Function As Key Player In Sustainable Agriculture By Improving Soil Fertility, Plant Tolerance And Crop Productivity. Microb Cell Fact, 13: 66.
  • Cappuccino JC, Sherman N 1992. In Microbiology: A laboratory Manual, third ed. Benjamin Cummings Pub. Co, New York, pp. 125-179.
  • Fravel DR 1988. Role of Antibiosis in The Biocontrol Of Plant Disease. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 26: 75-91.
  • Glickman E, Dessaux Y 1995. A Critical Evaluation of The Specificity of Salkowski Reagent For Indole Compounds Produced by Phytopathogenic Bacteria. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 61: 793–796.
  • Gupta G, Parihar SS, Ahirwar NK, Snehi SK, Singh V 2015. Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR): Current and Future Prospects for Development of Sustainable Agriculture. Journal of Microbial and Biochemical Technology, 7: 096-102.
  • Hallmann J, Quadt-Hallmann A, Mahaffee WF, Kloepper JW 1997. Bacterial endophytes in agricultural crops. Canadian Journal of Microbiology, 43(10): 895-914.
  • Kumar P, Dubey RC, Maheshwari DK 2012. Bacillus strains Isolated From Rhizosphere Showed Plant Growth Promoting And Antagonistic Activity Against Phytopathogens. Microbiological Research, 167: 493–499.
  • Krebs B, Junge H, Ockhardt A, Hoding B, Heubner D, Erben, U 1993. Bacillus subtilis: An effective Biocontrol Agent. Pesticide Science, 37: 427429. Lelliot RA, Stead DE 1987. Methods For The Diagnosis Of Bacterial Diseases Of Plants. (T.F. Preece, Editor). In: Methods in Plant Pathology, Vol 2, Black well Scientific Publications. pp. 176-177, Oxford.
  • Leong J 1986. Siderophores: Their Biochemistry And Possible Role In The Biocontrol Of Plant Pathogens. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 24: 187-209.
  • Loper JE, Schroth MN 1986. Influence of Bacterial Sources Of Indole-3-Acetic Acid On Root Elongation Of Sugar Beet. Phytopathology, 76(4): 386–389.
  • Lugtenberg B, Kamilova F 2009. Plant-Growth-Promoting Rhizobacteria. Annual Review of Microbiology 63: 541-556.
  • Marquez-Santacruz HA, Hernandez-Leon R, Orozco-Mosqueda MC, Velazquez-Sepulveda I, Santoyo G 2010. Diversity of Bacterial Endophytes In Roots Of Mexican Husk Tomato Plants (Physalis ixocarpa) and Their Detection In The Rhizosphere. Genetics and Molecular Research, 9(4): 2372-2380.
  • Mehta PS, Negi KS, Ojha SN 2010. Native Plant Genetic Resources and Traditional Foods Of Uttarakhand Himalaya For Sustainable Food Security And Livelihood. Indian Journal of Natural Products and Resources, 1 (1): 89–96.
  • Nega A 2014. Review On Concepts in Biological Control Of Plant Pathogens. Journal of Biology, Agriculture and Healthcare, 4(27): 33-54.
  • Patten CL, Glick BR 2002. Role of Pseudomonas putida Indoleacetic Acid In Development Of The Host Plant Root System. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 68(8): 3795-3801.
  • Pavlovic M, Konrad R, Iwobi AN, Sing A, Busch U, Huber I 2012. A Dual Approach Employing MALDI-TOF MS and Real-Time PCR for Fast Species Identification Within the Enterobacter cloacae complex. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 328: 46–53.
  • Rani MU, Reddy G 2011. Bacillus cereus and Enterobacter cancerogenus Screened For Their Efficient Plant Growth Promoting Traits Rhizobacteria (PGPR) and Antagonistic Traits Among Sixteen Bacterial Isolates From Rhizospheric Soils Of Pigeon Pea. African Journal of Microbiology Research, 5(15): 2090-2094.
  • Romero FM, Marina M, Pieckenstain FL 2014. The Communities Of Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) Leaf Endophytic Bacteria, Analyzed by 16S-ribosomal RNA Gene Pyrosequencing. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 351(2): 187-194.
  • Rosenbluet M, Martinez-Romero E 2006. Bacterial Endophytes and Their Interactions with Hosts. Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions, 19: 827–837.
  • Santoyo G, Moreno-Hagelsieb G, Carmen Orozco-Mosquedac M, Glick BR 2016. Plant Growth-Promoting Bacterial Endophytes. Microbiological Research 183: 92–99.
  • Saranraj P, Sivasakthivelan P, Sakthi SS 2013. Prevalence and Production Of Plant Growth Promoting Substance by Pseudomonas fluorescens Isolated From Paddy Rhizosphere Soil Of Cuddalore District, Tamil Nadu, India, African Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 5(2): 95-101.
  • Schwyn B, Neilands JB 1987. Universal Chemical Assay For Detection And Determination Of Siderophores. Analytical Biochemistry, 160: 47-56. Shi Y, Yang H, Zhang T, Sun J, Lou K 2014. Illumina-Based Analysis of Endophytic Bacterial Diversity and Space-Time Dynamics in Sugar Beet on The North Slope of Tianshan Mountain. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 98(14): 6375-6385.
  • Singh N, Pandey P, Dubey RC, Maheshwari DK 2008. Biological Control Of Root Rot Fungus Macrophomina phaseolina and Growth Enhancement of Pinus roxburghii (Sarg.) by Rhizosphere Competent Bacillus subtilis BN1. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 24: 1669-1679.
  • Sturz AV, Christie BR, Nowak J 2000. Bacterial Endophytes: Potential Role In Developing Sustainable Systems Of Crop Production. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences, 19(1): 1-30.
  • Sujatha N, Ammani K 2013. Siderophore Production by the Isolates of Fluorescent Pseudomonads. International Journal of Current Research and Review, 5(20): 01-07.
  • Sülü SM, Bozkurt İA, Soylu S 2016. Bitki Büyüme Düzenleyici ve Biyolojik Mücadele Etmeni Olarak Bakteriyel Endofitler. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 21: 103-111.
  • Tariq M, Hameed S, Yasmeen T, Zahid M 2014. Molecular Characterization and Identification of Plant Growth Promoting Endophytic Bacteria Isolated From the Root Nodules Of Pea (Pisum sativum L.). World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 30: 719-725.
  • Tjamos EC, Tjamos SE, Antoniou PP 2010. Biological Management of Plant Diseases: Highlights on Research and Application. Journal of Plant Pathology, 92: S17-S21.
  • Ullah A, Mushtaq H, Fahad S, Shah A, Chaudhary HJ 2017. Plant Growth Promoting Potential of Bacterial Endophytes in Novel Association with Olea ferruginea and Withania coagulans. Microbiology, 86(1): 119-127.
  • Vazquez P, Holguin G, Puente ME, Lopez-Cortes A, Bashan Y, 2000. Phosphate-Solubilizing Microorganisms Associated with the Rhizosphere of Mangroves in a Semiarid Coastal Lagoon. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 30: 460–468.
  • Wang Y, Zeng Q, Zhang Z 2010. Antagonistic Bioactivity of An Endophytic Bacterium H6. African Journal of Biotechnology, 9(37): 6140-6145.
  • Wei G, Kloepper JW, Tuzun S 1996. Induced Systemic Resistance to Cucumber Diseases And Increased Plant Growth by Plant-Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria Under Field Conditions. Phytopathology, 86: 221–224.
  • Weller DM 1988. Biological Control of Soil Borne Plant Pathogens In The Rhizosphere With Bacteria. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 26: 379-407.
Toplam 36 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Konular Ziraat, Veterinerlik ve Gıda Bilimleri
Bölüm ARAŞTIRMA MAKALESİ (Research Article)
Yazarlar

Zekiye Ceren Aktan 0000-0003-1031-8314

Soner Soylu 0000-0003-1002-8958

Proje Numarası MKU BAP-16444
Yayımlanma Tarihi 30 Haziran 2020
Gönderilme Tarihi 16 Aralık 2019
Kabul Tarihi 24 Şubat 2020
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2020 Cilt: 23 Sayı: 3

Kaynak Göster

APA Aktan, Z. C., & Soylu, S. (2020). Diyarbakır İlinde Yetişen Badem Ağaçlarından Endofit ve Epifit Bakteri Türlerinin İzolasyonu ve Bitki Gelişimini Teşvik Eden Mekanizmalarının Karakterizasyonu. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Tarım ve Doğa Dergisi, 23(3), 641-654. https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.659802

Cited By

Konya İlinde Yetiştirilen Patates Yumrularında Lastik Çürüklük Hastalık Etmeni Geotrichum candidum’un İzolasyonu, Morfolojik ve Moleküler Karakterizasyonu
Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Tarım ve Doğa Dergisi
Soner SOYLU
https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.714056
Bacillus cabrialesii BH5 Protects Tomato Plants Against Botrytis cinerea by Production of Specific Antifungal Compounds
Frontiers in Microbiology
Lu Zhou
https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2021.707609
Soğan(Allium cepa L.) Rizosferindeki Fosfat Çözen Bakterilerin İzolasyonu, Karakterisasyonu ve Soğan Gelişimi Üzerine Etkisi
Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Tarım ve Doğa Dergisi
İ̇dris BEKTAŞ
https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.811324
Amik Ovası Havuç Ekim Alanlarında Sorun Olan Fungal ve Bakteriyel Hastalık Etmenlerin Belirlenmesi
Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Tarım ve Doğa Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.1015936
Isolation of endophytic bacterial isolates from healthy banana trees and determination of their in vitro antagonistic activities against crown rot disease agent Fusarium verticillioides
Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.37908/mkutbd.1021349
Geotrichum citri-aurantii’nin Sebep Olduğu Turunçgil Ekşi Çürüklük Hastalığının Biyolojik Mücadelesinde Endofit Bakterilerin Biyokontrol Potansiyellerinin Belirlenmesi
Tekirdağ Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.33462/jotaf.944704
The Effect of Different Weed Control Treatments On Pharmacological Components of Stigma Quality of Saffron and Diversity of the Microbial Population in Soil
Gesunde Pflanzen
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10343-022-00677-4
Profiling of non-pathogenic bacterial population by MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry in stone fruits
International Journal of Agriculture, Environment and Food Sciences
https://doi.org/10.31015/jaefs.2022.2.3
Determination of fungal and bacterial species their densities in fruit and airborne microbiota in citrus packinghouses located in Hatay province
Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.37908/mkutbd.1095692
Molecular characterization of stem gall disease caused by Agrobacterium tumefaciens (= Agrobacterium biovar 1) on Citrus trees as a new host, in the Eastern Mediterranean region of Turkey
Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection
https://doi.org/10.1007/s41348-022-00678-5
A new bacterial disease of maize (Zea mays) in the Eastern Mediterranean Region: bacterial stalk rot disease caused by Dickeya zeae
Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.37908/mkutbd.1119953
Bazı endofitik ve rizosferik bakterilerin fasulyede Macrophomina phaseolina’ya karşı etkinliklerinin in vitro koşullarda belirlenmesi
Harran Tarım ve Gıda Bilimleri Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.29050/harranziraat.1195672
Isolation of bacterial isolates from soil samples and determination of their in vitro antagonistic potential against chickpea wilt disease agent Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. ciceris
Harran Tarım ve Gıda Bilimleri Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.29050/harranziraat.1216304
Investigation of the Biocontrol Effectiveness of Some Bacterial Strains on Eggplant Gray Mold Disease (Botrytis cinerea) in in vitro and in vivo conditions
Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Tarım ve Doğa Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.953977
Superior antibacterial activity against seed-borne plant bacterial disease agents and enhanced physical properties of novel green synthesized nanostructured ZnO using Thymbra spicata plant extract
Ceramics International
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2020.08.139
The effect of thymus syriacus plant extract on the main physical and antibacterial activities of ZnO nanoparticles synthesized by SILAR method
Inorganic Chemistry Communications
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inoche.2021.109088
Aynısefa (Calendula officinalis L.)’nın Kimyasal, Fizyolojik ve Morfolojik Gelişim Parametreleri Üzerine Bazı Endofitik Bakterilerin Etkisi
Türkiye Tarımsal Araştırmalar Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.19159/tutad.1311407
A new disease of strawberry, bacterial blight caused by Erwinia amylovora in Turkey
Journal of Plant Pathology
https://doi.org/10.1007/s42161-021-00994-z
Isolation, Characterization, and Tea Growth-Promoting Analysis of JW-CZ2, a Bacterium With 1-Aminocyclopropane-1-Carboxylic Acid Deaminase Activity Isolated From the Rhizosphere Soils of Tea Plants
Frontiers in Microbiology
https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2022.792876
Biocontrol of strawberry anthracnose disease caused by Colletotrichum nymphaeae using Bacillus atrophaeus strain DM6120 with multiple mechanisms
Tropical Plant Pathology
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40858-021-00477-7
Isolation and identification of Xanthomonas citri subsp. malvacearum, cotton bacterial blight disease agent and determination of the antibacterial activity of various plant essential oils
Harran Tarım ve Gıda Bilimleri Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.29050/harranziraat.1434729
Endofit ve Epifit Bakteri İzolatlarının Bazı Turunçgil Fungal Hastalık Etmenlerine Karşı in vitro Biyokontrol Etkinlik ve Etki Mekanizmalarının Belirlenmesi
Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Tarım ve Doğa Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.1459337
Determination of fungal and bacterial microbiota of broomrape species found in their major host plants grown in Hatay province of Türkiye
Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.37908/mkutbd.1516441
Isolation, Identification and Determination of Biocontrol Activities of Rhizobacteria against Cown Rot Disease Agent Rhizoctonia solani AG 2-2 in Sugar Beet (Beta vulgaris L.)
Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Tarım ve Doğa Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.1611970
Morphological and Molecular Characterization of a Pathogen Causing Sour Rot of Banana Fruit Grown in Türkiye: A New Potential Fungal Disease Agent
Applied Fruit Science
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10341-025-01493-6
Biocontrol Potential of Acinetobacter lactucae and Pseudarthrobacter polychromogenes in Managing Pepper Bacterial Spot Disease
Journal of Phytopathology
https://doi.org/10.1111/jph.70140
 Kapak Resmi İndir

21082



2022-JIF = 0.500

2022-JCI = 0.170

Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi (International Peer Reviewed Journal)

       Dergimiz, herhangi bir başvuru veya yayımlama ücreti almamaktadır. (Free submission and publication)

      Yılda 6 sayı yayınlanır. (Published 6 times a year)


88x31.png 

Bu web sitesi Creative Commons Atıf 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır.

                 


Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Tarım ve Doğa Dergisi
e-ISSN: 2619-9149