Information on the bioproducts used in this study.
Abstract
Biological control agents are alternatives to chemical pesticides in the management of plant diseases. Currently, hundreds of bioproducts are commercially available in international market varying mainly in antagonistic microorganisms and formulation. We screened four Trichoderma-based products as to their efficacy in controlling Sclerotinia stem rot (SSR) under protected and field environments and their effect on soybean seeds’ sanity and physiological qualities. We also tested application technologies through seed microbiolization and foliar spraying to deliver the microorganisms, and their compatibility with chemical fungicides. In vitro assays showed that all Trichoderma strains were antagonistic to S. sclerotiorum evidencing hyperparasitic activity. Moreover, the bioproducts reduced fungi incidence on soybean seeds, promoted faster seedling emergence and did not hamper seeds’ vigor. Increases of 14 and 37% were registered for root length and shoot fresh weight over that of the untreated control indicating potential application of the bioproducts as soybean growth promoters. Thiophanate-methyl and procymidone were the most compatible, without drastically affecting spore germination or mycelium growth. Under field conditions, all Trichoderma strains reduced SSR incidence and increased soybean grain yield. Formulation interferes on bioproducts’ viability and efficacy deserving special attention upon development.
Keywords
- biological control
- Sclerotinia sclerotiorum
- Glycine max
- hyperparasitism
- physiological seed quality
1. Situation of Sclerotinia stem rot in Brazil

Figure 1.
Estimation of the production area in Brazil (soybean, beans, and cotton), in which
The first report on the use of
Efficient chemical control of SSR relies on prophylactic application of fungicides, since curative spraying does not revert yield losses despite being effective in reducing the inoculum potential for subsequent crops. The intensive long-term fungicide-based management strategies for the control of this disease resulted in the development of resistant
We accessed the efficacy of different
2. Development of biological control in Brazil using Trichoderma
2.1. Microorganisms and growth conditions
Trichoderma strains used in this research were recovered from bioproducts available on the market (Table 1) after plating in PDA medium (20% potato extract, 2% dextrose, and 2% agar). All inhibition assays were against the
Bioproduct codification | Active ingredient/microorganism | Formulation | Titer reported by the manufacturer |
---|---|---|---|
SF04 | WG | 1.0 × 1010e | |
IBLF006 | WP | 5.0 × 1010e | |
ESALQ-1306 | CS | 2.0 × 109f | |
Tricho | WP | 1.0 × 108e |
Table 1.
Strain SF04
Strain IBLF006
Strain ESALQ-1306
Not specified on product’s label
Colony-forming units (CFU) m L−1 or CFU g−1
Viable conidia m L−1
WG, wettable granule; WP, wettable powder; CS, concentrated suspension
2.2. Monitoring of quality of bioproducts
Products (Tables 1 and 2) were serially diluted in sterile distilled water and plated in PDA medium for 5 days.
SF04 | IBLF006 | ESALQ-1306 | Tricho | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Bioproduct label | 1.0 × 1010a | 5.0 × 1010a | 2.0 × 109b | 1.0 × 108a |
Hemocytometer | 8.8 × 1010 | 1.2 × 1010 | 1.9 × 1010 | 6.7 × 109 |
Platea | 5.0 × 1010 | 3.0 × 106 | 6.0 × 109 | 1.0 × 107 |
Bacterial contaminationc,d | 5.0 × 105 A | 6.0 × 106 C | 1.0 × 106 A | 3.0 × 106 B |
Viability (%)c | 98 A | 60 C | 98 A | 90 B |
Table 2.
Monitoring of quality of bioproducts.
CFU mL−1 or CFU g−1
Viable conidia mL−1
Averages followed by different uppercase letters are statistically different by the Tukey test (
Data transformed to
Titer of
2.3. In vitro antagonistic activity to S. sclerotiorum
Antagonism of
Higher concentrations of the antagonist in the tested bioproducts were recorded by direct quantification of the number of viable spores in a hemocytometer slide. Compared to quantification in a plate, this may occur because nearby propagules, after spread on plate’s surface, visually form only one colony, underestimating the result, which does not happen in the individualized spore counting under a light microscope. From all counted spores, IBLF006 was the only bioproduct with germination percentage lower than 90, coincident to its higher contamination by bacterial cells. By accessing the concentration on the plate through the indirect counting method (serial dilutions of fungi suspensions), the bioproduct SF04 showed
There is a clear need to standardize and specify on the product’s label the methodology adopted for quality monitoring, due to discrepancies between antagonist concentration values measured by spores counting (direct quantification) and by the number of in vitro colonies (indirect). Besides, limitations and modifications of the methodologies interfere in the result [38, 39, 40, 41]. The maintenance of viability, especially during storage of the bioproduct, requires studies on formulations more adequate to the stability of microorganisms. In the market,
The antagonistic effect of the strains was first verified through simultaneous cultivation under in vitro conditions, determining the area of the plate occupied by the colonies of

Figure 2.
Scanning electron photomicrography of the interactions between
The antagonistic activity of the bioproducts was also verified against the pathogen survival structures (data not shown). Percentage of non-germinated sclerotia and of sclerotia colonized by
2.4. Hyperparasitism and antagonistic activity of Trichoderma -based products against S. sclerotiorum of Trichoderma spp. to S. sclerotiorum
To study the interaction between the antagonist and the pathogen, mycelia agar discs (5 mm diameter) from collation zones among both fungi colonies were collected at the seventh day of co-cultivation and further analyzed [54, 55]. Discs were fixed to bristles in modified Karnovsky solution (2.5% glutaraldehyde and 2% paraformaldehyde in cacodylate buffer 0.05 M, pH 7.2), at 4°C for 17 h, followed by four rinses with mentioned buffer. Samples were subsequently fixed with 1% (w v−1) osmium tetroxide in cacodylate buffer 0.01 M (pH 7.2) during 1 hour at 4°C, rinsed thrice with distilled water, and dehydrated in graded acetone series (30, 50, 70, 90, and 100%). Samples were kept at each solution for 10 minutes, and each step was repeated three times. Drying was done with carbon dioxide using a critical point dryer (TEC-030) (Balzers, Liechtenstein). Samples were fixed to aluminum stubs and gold-coated (20 nm/180 seconds) before visualized in a scanning electron microscope model LEO 435VP (Zeiss, Oberkochen). Figures 2 and 3 show the hyperparasitism and antagonistic activity of Trichoderma-based products against

Figure 3.
Spore germination (%) of
2.5. Effect of Trichoderma spp. on sclerotia germination
Soil parasitism of
2.6. Compatibility of fungicides with Trichoderma spp. in vitro and in seed treatment
Different fungicides (Table 3), usually used in the control of
Fungicide codification | Active ingredient (ai) | Concentration of the ai (g L−1 or g kg−1) | Dosea |
---|---|---|---|
Tm | Thiophanate-methyl | 500 | 100b |
TmF | Thiophanate-methyl + fluazinam | 350 + 52.5 | 180b |
C | Carbendazim | 500 | 100b |
F | Fluazinam | 500 | 200c |
FldMM | Fludioxonil + metalaxyl-M | 25 + 10 | 100b |
FiTmPy | Fipronil + t. methyl + pyraclostrobin | 250 + 225 + 25 | 200b |
Pro | Procymidone | 500 | 200c |
Table 3.
Chemical fungicides used in the compatibility test.
mL of commercial product 100 kg−1 of seeds
Dose recommended for seed treatment
Experimental dose
The medium was poured into Petri dishes and inoculated with 5-mm-dia colony discs of Trichoderma strains (Table 4). Plates were then incubated for 1 week. The diameter of Trichoderma colonies was measured daily. At the seventh day, we calculated the growth speed index (GSI) according to [57].
Treatment | Active ingredient (ai) | Application timinge | Dose (L/kg ai ha−1) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | 2nd | 3rd | 4th | |||
Control | — | — | — | — | — | — |
SF04 | V4 | V6 | — | — | 2.0 × 109 | |
IBLF006 | V4 | V6 | — | — | 2.0 × 108 | |
ESALQ-1306 | V4 | V6 | — | — | 2.0 × 109 | |
Tricho | V4 | V6 | — | — | 2.0 × 106 | |
ESALQ-1306 + Tm | V4 | V6 | 2.0 × 109 | |||
R1 | R2 | 0.5 | ||||
Tm | Thiophanate-methyl | — | — | R1 | R2 | 0.5 |
F | Fluazinam | — | — | R1 | R2 | 0.5 |
Table 4.
Description of active ingredients/microorganisms, application timing, and doses of products in the control of
Strain SF04
Strain IBLF006
Strain ESALQ-1306
Not specified on product’s label
According to soybean phenological stage proposed by [56]
Seed treatment was done with soybean cultivar NK7074RR, considered susceptible to SSR [58]. Chemical and biological fungicides were applied at doses recommended by the manufactures (Table 2). Seeds were first treated with the chemical pesticides followed by application of the bioproducts. Positive controls consisted of seeds treated only with the
We used diameter data measured from colonies during a 7-day incubation period to calculate the growth speed index (GSI) of the
Fungicide | SF04 | IBLF006 | ESALQ-1306 | Tricho | SF04 | IBLF006 | ESALQ-1306 | Tricho |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.1 ppm | 1 ppm | |||||||
Tm | 12.0 Ab | 12.6 Aa | 12.6 Aa | 13.0 Aa | 6.7 Bc | 12.0 Aa | 10.1 Ab | 12.2 Aa |
TmF | 12.1 Aa | 8.7 Db | 5.9 Dd | 7.9 Dc | 5.3 Ca | 4.0 Db | 3.6 Db | 3.7 Db |
C | 1.3 Da | 1.2 Fa | 1.1 Ga | 1.7 Ga | 0.4 Ea | 1.0 Ga | 0.5 Fa | 1.0 Fa |
F | 4.6 Ca | 3.0 Eb | 4.4 Ea | 4.8 Ea | 4.7 Ca | 3.3 Eb | 3.8 Db | 3.9 Db |
FldMM | 1.9 Db | 2.0 Gb | 2.3 Fb | 3.9 Fa0 | 1.4 Db | 2.3 Fa | 2.5 Ea | 2.7 Ea |
FiTmPy | 8.6 Bb | 9.7 Ca | 7.3 Cc | 8.8 Cb | 5.4 Ca | 6.1 Ca | 4.7 Cb | 5.6 Ca |
Pro | 8.0 Bb | 10.8 Ba | 11.2 Ba | 11.5 Ba | 12.2 Aa | 9.3 Bb | 9.2 Bb | 9.7 Bb |
10 ppm | 100 ppm | |||||||
Tm | 0.3 Cb | 1.5 Ba | 1.7 Ca | 0.9 Bb | 0.1 Ca | 0.1 Da | 0.1 Da | 0.2 Da |
TmF | 0.8 Ca | 0.3 Ca | 0.5 Da | 0.2 Ba | 0.1 Ca | 0.0 Da | 0.1 Da | 0.1 Da |
C | 0.0 Ca | 0.3 Ca | 0.2 Da | 0.2 Ba | 0.1 Ca | 0.5 Da | 0.2 Da | 0.2 Da |
F | 4.6 Aa | 2.1 Ab | 2.7 Bb | 2.6 Ab | 3.6 Aa | 1.5 Bc | 2.3 Bb | 2.3 Bb |
FldMM | 1.8 Ba | 2.3 Aa | 1.9 Ca | 1.9 Aa | 1.1 Ba | 1.1 Ca | 1.0 Ca | 1.1 Ca |
FiTmPy | 0.4 Ca | 0.4 Ca | 0.3 Da | 0.3 Ba | 0.4 Ca | 0.1 Da | 0.2 Da | 0.1 Da |
Pro | 2.1 Bb | 2.2 Ab | 3.5 Aa | 2.0 Ab | 3.7 Aa | 3.0 Aa | 3.6 Aa | 3.2 Aa |
1000 ppm | 0 ppm | |||||||
Tm | 0.0 Ca | 0.0 Ba | 0.0 Ba | 0.0 Ba | 14.12 | 12.81 | 13.61 | 11.96 |
TmF | 0.0 Ca | 0.0 Ba | 0.0 Ba | 0.0 Ba | ||||
C | 0.0 Ca | 0.3 Ba | 0.1 Ba | 0.0 Ba | ||||
F | 2.1 Ba | 0.5 Ba | 0.8 Ba | 0.7 Ba | ||||
FldMM | 0.3 Ca | 0.5 Ba | 0.5 Ba | 0.3 Ba | ||||
FiTmPy | 0.0 Ca | 0.0 Ba | 0.1 Ba | 0.0 Ba | ||||
Pro | 3.9 Aa | 2.4 Aa | 3.5 Aa | 3.2 Aa |
Table 5.
Growth speed index (GSI) calculated based on
Colonies were plated in PDA medium supplemented with chemical fungicides at concentrations ranging from 0 to 1000 ppm
Averages followed by the same uppercase letters, in columns, and lowercase letters, in lines, do not differ significantly by the Tukey test (
To check the compatibility between chemical fungicides and bioproducts in seed treatment, a common agricultural practice, we evaluated the viability of the spores of the antagonists after exposure to the active ingredients. Like the plating assay, in the soybean seed treatment, significant effects (
The simultaneous use of biocontrol agents and pesticides in disease management may allow reduction of recommended doses of chemicals [66]. This possibility could mitigate compatibility problems, as the fungicides applied in low concentrations did not visibly affect
2.7. Sanity of soybean seeds treated with Trichoderma spp.
The efficacy of the antagonist in the control of seed pathogens was verified through the blotter test. Four hundred soybean seeds cv. NK7074RR, artificially inoculated or not with
Seeds can be source of inoculum introducing pathogens to new cultivation areas and increasing diseases in the field. Besides, physiological seed quality can be compromised by deteriorating action of fungi during storage. Alternatively, chemical seed treatment microbiolization ensures seed health by using living microorganisms. In the sanity test, soybean seeds were treated with the bioproducts. We observed predominance, but not exclusivity, of
Now considering the soybean seeds artificially inoculated,
Seed microbiolization represents a useful and promising method for the control of seed pathogens (infecting or contaminating the seed lot) and of soil-borne pathogens (as
All bioproducts accelerated emergence speed index on sand seedbed test. The index practically doubled compared to the untreated control. This result indicates improvement in the physiological quality of soybean seeds inoculated with
2.8. Effect of Trichoderma spp. on soybean germination and early development and effect of Trichoderma spp. on physiological quality of soybean seeds
The standardization of the seed germination and seedling emergence on sand seedbed tests [78] to access possible effects of the antagonist on physiological quality of soybean seeds is an important procedure. Germination test consisted of four replicates of 50 seeds each placed in filter paper rolls as recommended [78]. Soybean seeds were artificially inoculated with
where ESI = emergence speed index; E1, E2, … En = number of normal seedlings obtained at the first, second, and at the nth counting; and N1, N2, … Nn = number of days from sowing to the first, second, and nth counting.
The register of the number of plantlets with abnormalities, with necrotic cotyledons, and infected with SSR, as well as shoot and root lengths (cm) and fresh and dry weights (g), is very important in this case or evaluation. Standard germination test followed a randomized design with four replications of 50 seeds each, whereas the seedling emergence on sand test was carried out in a completely randomized block design with four replicates of 200 seeds each. The treatments consisted of the four biological products and a control (without the antagonist) inoculated or not with
2.9. In vivo biocontrol of S. sclerotiorum and biological control of soybean SSR under field conditions
After laboratory and greenhouse experiments, we conducted a field study at a commercial soybean crop geo-referenced at 19°12′54″S and 47°56′58″W, 947 m of altitude, during the summer season (from December/2009 to April/2010). Climatological data [maximum and minimum temperatures (°C), relative air humidity (%), and pluvial precipitation (mm)] were obtained from the weather station located at the farm. Soil was classified as a ferralsol, and the field had previous report of SSR occurrence. Sowing was done with 15 seeds per linear meter using soybean cultivar BRS Valiosa RR (susceptible to SSR) at a final stand of 10 plants m−1. Crop conduction was according to Embrapa [81]. Experimental design was in random blocks with seven treatments and a control (Table 3), with four replications. Each plot consisted of six rows of 5 m length and 0.5 m apart totalizing an area of 480 m2. The four central rows despising 0.5 m from both edges were considered as the useful plot. Spraying was done with a CO2 pressurized costal sprayer equipped with XR110.02 nozzles at a volume of 200 L ha−1. Environmental conditions were constantly monitored during application of the (bio)products ranging from 27.2 to 34.3°C, 47 to 65% of relative air humidity, and winds of 0 to 5 km h−1. The titer of the
Treatments | AUDPC | INCID. (%) | AUDI | SCLE. (g) | TGW (g) | YIELD (kg ha−1) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Control | 909.4 B | 25.5 B | 20130.0 B | 6.6 A | 127.6 B | 1942.5 C |
SF04 | 685.0 B | 9.2 A | 5296.9 A | 2.4 A | 147.2 A | 2890.0 A |
IBLF006 | 766.9 B | 10.8 A | 7319.4 A | 5.8 A | 136.4 B | 2523.3 B |
ESALQ-1306 | 651.2 B | 9.8 A | 5005.0 A | 2.2 A | 145.8 A | 2897.5 A |
Tricho | 656.9 B | 12.2 A | 5877.5 A | 4.6 A | 144.5 A | 2452.5 B |
ESALQ-1306 + Tm | 532.5 A | 10.5 A | 4258.8 A | 2.5 A | 146.1 A | 2765.0 A |
Tm | 658.1 B | 12.8 A | 6690.6 A | 3.4 A | 143.3 A | 2945.0 A |
F | 440.6 A | 7.5 A | 2620.6 A | 1.9 A | 151.5 A | 3015.0 A |
Table 6.
Control of
AUDPC, area under the disease progress curve; INCID, disease incidence; AUDI, area under the disease index (% incidence × % severity); SCLE, sclerotia weight; TGW, a thousand grain weight averages followed by different uppercase letters, in columns, are statistically different by the Scott-Knott test (
The use of
Disease symptoms were not attenuated in plants treated with the bioproducts; however, they showed significant reduction in SSR incidence and lower disease index. Incidence is the most important parameter when it comes to SSR field evaluation. Disease index estimates the damage to the plant both by the number of diseased plants (incidence) and by the lesion length (severity) [82]. Application of bioproducts alone reduced the index by 64–75%. It is important to mention that biological control does not promote total eradication of phytopathogens but the maintenance of the population at levels enough not to cause economic damages to the crop. In our study, this was reflected by the productivity increase of up to 35 bushels ha−1 in relation to the untreated control, an income of US$297 ha−1.
3. Conclusions
In conclusion, we report the use of
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior—CAPES, Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico—CNPq and Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas Gerais, FAPEMIG, for financial support. Special thanks go to Fabio J. Carvalho for the statistical advice provided. The third author acknowledges PPGA-UFU and CAPES for PNPD scholarship.
References
- 1.
Martin-Guay MO, Paquette A, Dupras J, Rivest D. The new green revolution: Sustainable intensification of agriculture by intercropping. Science of the Total Environment. 2018; 615 :767-772 - 2.
Pellegrini P, Fernández RJ. Crop intensification, land use, and on-farm energy-use efficiency during the worldwide spread of the green revolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2018; 115 (10):2335-2340 - 3.
Grapputo A, Boman S, Lindstrom L, Lyytinen A, Mappes J. The voyage of an invasive species across continents: Genetic diversity of North American and European Colorado potato beetle populations. Molecular Ecology. 2005; 14 (14):4207-4219 - 4.
Hovmoller MS, Yahyaoui AH, Milus EA, Justesen AF. Rapid global spread of two aggressive strains of a wheat rust fungus. Molecular Ecology. 2008; 17 (17):3818-3826 - 5.
Amaya OS, Restrepo OD, Argüelles J, Garramuño EA. Evaluación del comportamiento del complejo Spodoptera con la introducción de algodón transgénico al Tolima, Colombia. Corpoica Ciencia y Tecnología Agropecuaria. 2009;10 (1):24-32 - 6.
Singh RP, Hodson DP, Huerta-Espino J, Jin Y, Bhavani S, Njau P, et al. The emergence of Ug99 races of the stem rust fungus is a threat to world wheat production. Annual Review of Phytopathology. 2011; 49 (1):465-481 - 7.
Cortez-Mondaca E, Pérez-Márquez J, Sifuentes-Ibarra E, Garcia-Gutierrez C, Valenzuela-Escoboza FA, Camacho-Baez JR. Impacto del cambio climático sobre insectos en Sinaloa; el caso palomillo de la papa Phthorimaea operculella Zeller 1873 (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae). In: Flores-Campana LM, Moran-Ângulo RE, Karam-Quiniones C, editors. Sinaloa y el Cambio Climático Global. Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa Instituto de Apoyo a la Investigación e Innovación México. 2014. pp. 219-235 - 8.
Sun SL, Zhu ZD, Zhang JL, Mei L. Outbreak of Choanephora stem rot caused byChoanephora cucurbitarum on Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa ) in China. Plant Disease. 2018. DOI: 10.1094/PDIS-12-17-1922-PDN [Epub ahead of print] - 9.
Carvalho FP. Pesticides, environment, and food safety. Food and Energy Security. 2017; 6 (2):48-60 - 10.
Juliatti FC, Polloni LC, Morais TP, Zacarias NRS, Silva EA, Juliatti BCM. Sensitivity of Phakopsora pachyrhizi populations to dithiocarbamate, chloronitrile, triazole, strobilurin, and carboxamide fungicides. Bioscience Journal. 2017;33 (4):933-943 - 11.
Ghorbanpour M, Omidvari M, Abbaszadeh-Dahaji P, Omidvar R, Kariman K. Mechanisms underlying the protective effects of beneficial fungi against plant diseases. Biological Control. 2018; 117 :147-157 - 12.
Harman GE, Howell CR, Viterbo A, Chet I, Lorito M. Trichoderma species—Opportunistic, avirulent plant symbionts. Nature Reviews. Microbiology. 2004; 2 :43-56 - 13.
Vos CM, De Cremer K, Cammue BPA, De Coninck B. The toolbox of Trichoderma spp. in the biocontrol of Botrytis cinerea disease. Mol. Plant Pathology. 2015;16 :400-412 - 14.
Błaszczyk L, Siwulski M, Sobieralski K, Lisiecka J, Jedryczka M. Trichoderma spp., application and prospects for use in organic farming and industry. Journal of Plant Protection Research. 2014; 54 (4):309-317 - 15.
Scharf DH, Brakhage AA, Mukherjee PK. Gliotoxin—Bane or boon? Environmental Microbiology. 2016; 18 :1096-1109 - 16.
Toghueoa RMK, Ekea P, Gonzálezb IZ, de Aldanab BRV, Nanaa LW, Boyoma FF. Biocontrol and growth enhancement potential of two endophytic Trichoderma spp. fromTerminalia catappa against the causative agent of common bean root rot (Fusarium solani ). Biological Control. 2016;96 :8-20 - 17.
Tuão Gava CA, Pinto JM. Biocontrol of melon wilt caused by Fusarium oxysporum Schlectf. sp. melonis using seed treatment with Trichoderma spp. and liquid compost. Biological Control. 2016;97 :13-20 - 18.
Vinale F, Sivasithamparam K, Ghisalberti EL, Marra R, Woo SL, Lorito M. Trichoderma-plant-pathogen interactions. Soil Biology & Biochemistry. 2008; 40 :1-10 - 19.
Smolińska U, Kowalska B, Kowalczyk W, Szczech M. The use of agro-industrial wastes as carriers of Trichoderma fungi in the parsley cultivation. Scientia Horticulturae. 2014; 179 :1-8 - 20.
Forster R. Inativação do vírus do mosaico comum do fumo pelo filtrado de culturas de Trichoderma sp . Bragantia. 1950;10 (5):139-148 - 21.
Bettiol W, Morandi MAB, Pinto ZV, Paula Junior TJ, Corrêa EB, Moura AB, et al. Produtos comerciais à base de agentes de biocontrole de doenças de plantas. Jaguariúna: Embrapa Meio Ambiente; 2012 - 22.
Meyer MC, Campos HD, Godoy CV, Utiamada CM. Ensaios cooperativos de controle biológico de mofo branco na cultura da soja—safras 2012 a 2015. Londrina: Embrapa Soja; 2016 - 23.
Lehner MS, Paula Junior TJ, Silva RA, Vieira RF, Carneiro JES, Schnabel G, et al. Fungicide sensitivity of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum : A thorough assessment using discriminatory dose, EC50, high-resolution melting analysis, and description of new point mutation associated with thiophanate-methyl resistance. Plant Disease. 2015;99 (11):1537-1543 - 24.
Di YL, Zhu ZQ , Lu XM, Zhu FX. Baseline sensitivity and efficacy of trifloxystrobin against Sclerotinia sclerotiorum . Crop Protection. 2016;87 :31-36 - 25.
Meyer MC, Campos HD, Godoy CV, Utiamada CM, Pimenta CB, Jaccoud Filho DS, et al. Eficiência de fungicidas para controle de mofo-branco ( Sclerotinia sclerotiorum ) em soja, na safra 2016/17: resultados sumarizados dos ensaios cooperativos. Londrina: Embrapa Soja; 2017 - 26.
Hou YP, Mao XW, Lin SP, Song XS, Duan YB, Wang JX, et al. Activity of a novel succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor fungicide pyraziflumid against Sclerotinia sclerotiorum . Pesticide Biochemistry and Physiology. 2018;145 :22-28 - 27.
Hu S, Zhang J, Zhang Y, He S, Zhu F. Baseline sensitivity and toxic actions of boscalid against Sclerotinia sclerotiorum . Crop Protection. 2018;110 :83-90 - 28.
Li JL, Zhu F, Li J. Expression of the histidine kinase gene Sshk correlates with dimethachlone resistance in Sclerotinia sclerotiorum . Phytopathology. 2018. DOI: 10.1094/PHYTO-05-18-0156-R [Epub ahead of print] - 29.
Mao XW, Li JS, Chen YL, Song XS, Duan YB, Wang JX, et al. Resistance risk assessment for fluazinam in Sclerotinia sclerotiorum . Pesticide Biochemistry and Physiology. 2018;144 :27-35 - 30.
Kumar S, Thakur M, Rani A. Trichoderma: Mass production, formulation, quality control, delivery and its scope in commercialization in India for the management of plant diseases. African Journal of Agricultural Research. 2014; 9 (53):3838-3852 - 31.
Garcia RA, Juliatti FC. Avaliação da resistência da soja a Sclerotinia sclerotiorum em diferentes estádios fenológicos e períodos de exposição ao inóculo. Tropical Plant Pathology. 2012;37 (3):196-203 - 32.
Araújo WL, Maccheroni Junior W, Aguilarvildoso CI, Barroso PAV, Saridakis HO, Azevedo JL. Variability and interactions between endophytic bacteria and fungi isolated from leaf tissues of citrus rootstocks. Canadian Journal of Microbiology. 2001; 47 :229-236 - 33.
Mello SCM, Ávila ZR, Braúna LM, Pádua RR, Gomes D. Cepas de Trichoderma para el control biológico deSclerotium rolfsii Sacc. Fitosanidad. 2007;11 (1):3-9 - 34.
Bardin SD, Huang HC. Research on biology and control of Sclerotinia diseases in Canada. Canadian Journal of Plant Pathology. 2001;23 (1):88-98 - 35.
Bell DK, Wells HD, Markham CR. In vitro antagonism ofTrichoderma species against six fungal plant pathogens. Phytopathology. 1982;72 (4):379-382 - 36.
Vale FXR, Fernandes Filho EI, Liberato JR. QUANT: A software plant disease severity assessment. In: International Congress of Plant Pathology, 8. Christchurch: International Society for Plant Pathology; 2003. p. 105 - 37.
Woo SL, Ruocco M, Vinale F, Nigro M, Marra R, Lombardi N, et al. Trichoderma -based products and their widespread use in agriculture. Open Mycology Journal. 2014;8 :71-126 - 38.
Milner RJ, Huppatz RJ, Swaris SC. A new method for assessment of germination of Metarhizium conidia. Journal of Invertebrate Pathology. 1991;57 :121-123 - 39.
Stentelaire C, Antoine N, Cabrol C, Feron G, Durand A. Development of a rapid and highly sensitive biochemical method for the measurement of fungal spore viability: An alternative to the CFU method. Enzyme and Microbial Technology. 2001; 29 :560-566 - 40.
Delalibera I Jr, Humber RA, Hajek AE. Preservation of in vitro cultures of the mite pathogenic fungusNeozygites tanajoae . Canadian Journal of Microbiology. 2004;50 :579-586 - 41.
Magalhães B, Faria M, Frazão H. A technique to estimate the conidial viability of Metarhizium flavoviride Gams & Rozsypal (Hyphomycetes) formulated in vegetable oil. Anais da Sociedade Entomológica do Brasil. 1997;26 (3):569-572 - 42.
Pomella AWV, Ribeiro RTS. Controle biológico com Trichoderma em grandes culturas—uma visão empresarial. In: Bettiol W, Morandi MAB, editors. Biocontrole de doenças de plantas: Uso e perspectivas. Jaguariúna: Embrapa Meio Ambiente; 2009. pp. 239-244 - 43.
Keswani C, Bisen K, Singh V, Sarma BK, Singh HB. Formulation technology of biocontrol agents: Present status and future prospects. In: Arora N, Mehnaz S, Balestrini R, editors. Bioformulations: For Sustainable Agriculture. New Delhi: Springer; 2016. pp. 35-52 - 44.
Mariano RdLR. Métodos de seleção in vitro para o controle biológico de patógenos de plantas. In: Fernandes JMC, Prestes AM, Picinini EC, editors. Revisão Anual de Patologia de Plantas. Passo Fundo, EMBRAPA-Trigo; 1993. pp. 369-409 - 45.
Louzada GAS, Carvalho DDC, Mello SCM, Lobo M Jr, Martins I, Braúna LM. Antagonist potential of Trichoderma spp . from distinct agricultural ecosystems againstSclerotinia sclerotiorum andFusarium solani . Biota Neotropica. 2009;9 (3):145-149 - 46.
Agrios GN. Plant Pathology. fifth ed. New York: Elsevier Academic Press; 2005 - 47.
de Melo IS. Potencialidades de utilização de Trichoderma spp . no controle biológico de doenças de plantas. In: de Melo IS, editor. Controle Biológico de Doenças de Plantas. Jaguariúna: EMBRAPA-CNPMA; 1991. pp. 135-156 - 48.
de Melo IS, Costa FG. Desenvolvimento de uma formulação granulada a base de Trichoderma harzianum para controle de fitopatógenos. Jaguariúna: Comunicado Técnico; 2005 - 49.
Carvalho DDC, Oliveira TAS, Braúna LM, Mello SCM. Isolados de Trichoderma sp. antagônicos aFusarium oxysporum . Brasília: Comunicado Técnico; 2008 - 50.
Mendonza JLH, Pérez MIS, Prieto JMG, Velásquez JDQ , Olivares JGG, Langarica HRG. Antibiosis of Trichoderma spp. strains native to northeastern Mexico against the pathogenic fungus Macrophomina phaseolina. Brazilian Journal of Microbiology. 2015; 46 (4):1093-1101 - 51.
Matei S, Matei GB, Cornea P, Popa G. Characterization of soil Trichoderma isolates for potential biocontrol of plant pathogens. Soil Forming Factors and Processes from the Temperate Zone. 2011; 10 :29-37 - 52.
Manjunath M, Singh A, Tripathi AN, Prasanna R, Rai AB, Singh B. Bioprospecting the fungicides compatible Trichoderma asperellum isolate effective against multiple plant pathogensin vitro . Journal of Environmental Biology. 2017;38 (4):553-560 - 53.
Görgen CA, Silveira Neto AN, Carneiro LC, Ragagnin V, Lobo Junior M. White mold control with mulch and Trichoderma harzianum 1306 on soybean. Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira. 2009;44 (12):1583-1590 - 54.
Bossola JJ, Russel LD. Electron Microscopy. 2nd ed. Boston: Jones and Bartlett Publishers; 1998 - 55.
Tanaka OAF, Kitajima EW. Treinamento de Técnicas em Microscopia Eletrônica de Varredura. Piracicaba: ESALQ – NAP/MEPA; 2009 - 56.
Fehr WR, Caviness CE. Stages of Soybean Development, Yowa State University of Science and Technology. Ames: Cooperative Extension Service; 1977 - 57.
Lilly VG, Barnett HL. Growth. In: Physiology of the Fungi. New York: Mcgraw-Hill; 1951 - 58.
Caires AM. Reação de genótipos de soja transgênicos e convencionais à podridão branca da haste [Master’s Dissertation]. Uberlândia: Universidade Federal de Uberlândia; 2011 - 59.
McLean KL, Hunt JS, Stewart A. Compatibility of the biocontrol agent Trichoderma harzianum C52 with selected fungicides. New Zealand Plant Protection. 2001;54 :84-88 - 60.
McLean KL, Hunt JS, Stewart A, Wite D, Porter IJ, Villalta O. Compatibility of a Trichoderma atroviride biocontrol agent with management practices ofAllium crops. Crop Protection. 2012;33 :94-100 - 61.
Paula Júnior TJ, Vieira RF, Rocha PRR, Bernardes A, Costa EL, Carneiro JES, et al. White mold intensity on common bean in response to plant density, irrigation frequency, grass mulching, Trichoderma spp., and fungicide. Summa Phytopathologica. 2009;35 (1):44-48 - 62.
Aguiar RA, Cunha MG, Lobo Junior M. Management of white mold in processing tomatoes by Trichoderma spp. and chemical fungicides applied by drip irrigation. Biological Control. 2014; 74 :1-5 - 63.
Silva MAF, Moura KE, Moura KE, Salomão D, Patricio FRA. Compatibility of Trichoderma isolates with pesticides used in lettuce crop. Summa Phytopathologica. 2018;44 (2):137-142 - 64.
Ribas PP, Paz ICP, Santin RCM, Guimarães AMG, Silva ME, Matsumura ATS. Toxicidade de princípios ativos de fungicidas comerciais sobre Trichoderma spp. In: Congresso Brasileiro de Fitipatologia, 42; Rio de Janeiro, CD-ROM. 2009 - 65.
Lobo M Jr, Geraldine AM, Carvalho DDC. Controle biológico de patógenos habitantes do solo com Trichoderma spp., na cultura do feijoeiro comum. Santo Antônio de Goiás: Circular Técnico; 2009 - 66.
Kumar R, Singh SK, Yadav S, Kumar R, Choubey AK, Kumari A. Compatibility of Trichoderma viride with different fungicide and organic cake. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry. 2018;7 (2):2398-2401 - 67.
Brasil. Ministério da Agricultura, Pecuária e Abastecimento. Manual de análise sanitária de sementes. Brasília: Mapa/ACS; 2009 - 68.
Martins CAO, Sediyama CS, Moreira MA, Rocha VS, Oliveira MGA, Gomes JLL. Qualidade sanitária das sementes de soja sem as três lipoxigenases. Revista Ceres. 2003; 50 (288):241-249 - 69.
Martínez-Medina A, Alguacil MDM, Pascual JA, Van Wees SCM. Phytohormone profiles induced by Trichoderma isolates correspond with their biocontrol and plant growth-promoting activity on melon plants. Journal of Chemical Ecology. 2014;40 :804-815 - 70.
Saber WIA, Ghoneem KM, Rashad YM, Al-Askar AA. Trichoderma harzianum WKY1: An indole acetic acid producer for growth improvement and anthracnose disease control in sorghum. Biocontrol Science and Technology. 2017;27 :654-676 - 71.
Bernat P, Nykiel-Szymańska J, Gajewska E, Różalska S, Stolarek P, Dackowa J, et al. Trichoderma harzianum diminished oxidative stress caused by 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) in wheat, with insights from lipidomics. Journal of Plant Physiology. 2018;229 :158-163 - 72.
El-Sharkawy HHA, Rashad YM, Ibrahim SA. Biocontrol of stem rust disease of wheat using arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and Trichoderma spp. Physiological and Molecular Plant Pathology. 2018;103 :84-91 - 73.
Zhang F, Ge H, Zhang F, Guo N, Wang Y, Chen L, et al. Biocontrol potential of Trichoderma harzianum isolate T-aloe againstSclerotinia sclerotiorum in soybean. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 2016;100 :64e74 - 74.
Zhang F, Chen C, Zhang F, Gao L, Liu J, Chen L, et al. Trichoderma harzianum containing 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate deaminase and chitinase improved growth and diminished adverse effect caused byFusarium oxysporum in soybean. Journal of Plant Physiology. 2017;210 :84-94 - 75.
Zhang W. Study on the Integrated Control of Soybean Sclerotinia Stem Rot Caused bySclerotinia sclerotiorum . Harbin: Northeast Agricultural University; 2009 - 76.
Abdel-Fattah GM, Shabana YM, Ismail AE, Rashad YM. Trichoderma harzianum : A biocontrol agent againstBipolaris oryzae . Mycopathologia. 2007;164 :81-89 - 77.
López-Bucio J, Pelagio-Flores R, Herrera-Estrella A. Trichoderma as biostimulant: Exploiting the multilevel properties of a plant beneficial fungus. Scientia Horticulturae. 2015;196 (30):109-123 - 78.
Brasil. Ministério da Agricultura, Pecuária e Abastecimento. Regras para análise de sementes. Brasília: Mapa/ACS; 2009 - 79.
Nakagawa J. Testes de vigor baseados no desempenho das plântulas. In: Krzyzanowski FC, Vieira RD, França Neto JB, editors. Vigor de sementes: conceitos e testes. Londrina: ABRATES; 1999 - 80.
Maguire JD. Speed of germination-aid selection and evaluation for seedling emergence and vigor. Crop Science. 1962; 2 (1):176-177 - 81.
Embrapa Soja. Tecnologias de Produção de soja-região central do Brasil—2014. Embrapa Soja, Londrina: Sistemas de Produção; 2013 - 82.
Juliatti FC, Juliatti FC. Podridão branca da haste da soja: Manejo e uso de fungicidas em busca da sustentabilidade nos sistemas de produção. Uberlândia: Composer; 2010 - 83.
Campbell CL, Madden LV. Introduction to Plant Disease Epidemiology. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1990 - 84.
Asad SA, Ali N, Hameed A, Khan SA, Ahmad R, Bilal M, et al. Biocontrol efficacy of different isolates of Trichoderma against soil borne pathogenRhizoctonia solani . Polish Journal of Microbiology. 2014;63 :95-103 - 85.
El-Sharkawy HHA, Tohamey S, Khalil AA. Combined effects of Streptomyces viridosporus andTrichoderma harzianum on controlling wheat leaf rust caused byPuccinia triticina . Plant Pathology Journal. 2015;14 :182-188 - 86.
Atanasova L, Le Crom S, Gruber S, Coulpier F, Seidl-Seiboth V, Kubicek CP, et al. Comparative transcriptomics reveals different strategies of Trichoderma mycoparasitism. BMC Genomics. 2013;14 :121 - 87.
Zhang X, Harvey PR, Stummer BE, Warren RA, Zhang G, Guo K, et al. Antibiosis functions during interactions of Trichoderma afroharzianum andTrichoderma gamsii with plant pathogenicRhizoctonia andPythium . Functional & Integrative Genomics. 2015;15 (5):599-610 - 88.
Sharma V, Salwan R, Sharma PN, Kanwar SS. Elucidation of biocontrol mechanisms of Trichoderma harzianum against different plant fungal pathogens: Universal yet host specific response. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules. 2017;95 :72-79