Open access peer-reviewed chapter

Role of Mycorrhizae in Crop Protection

Written By

Stephen Larbi-Koranteng, Frederick Kankam, Joseph Adomako and Muntala Abdulai

Submitted: 28 October 2022 Reviewed: 15 November 2022 Published: 09 December 2022

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.109020

From the Edited Volume

Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi in Agriculture - New Insights

Edited by Rodrigo Nogueira de Sousa

Chapter metrics overview

150 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics

Abstract

Mychorrizae are indigenous soil fungi that are found associated symbiotically with plant root system. They promote growth of the root system by protecting the plant from pathogen attack, acting directly or indirectly as biocontrol agents and offering plant resistance. These group of rhizosphere fungi also benefit from various biosynthetic substances produced by the root of the plant (root exudates). In this chapter, attempt is being made to present a balanced account of the various roles these fungi play in plant protection. This will give our cherish readers the opportunity to appreciate the mycorrhizal fungi as potential biocontrol agents or bioprotectants of soilborne plant pathogens.

Keywords

  • mycorrhizae
  • mycorrhizal fungi
  • bioprotectant
  • biocontrol agents
  • rhizosphere fungi

1. Introduction

With ever increasing world population and its impact, there is a significant pressure to feed the world by agriculturists. Demand for growth of major agriculture commodities is imperative. One major component that militate against achieving this objective is the effort by pests and diseases to reduce yield of agriculture crop production. The impact of both biotic and abiotic stress on production has a greater effect on our aim of increasing agricultural productivity. Many management practices especially pesticides application to mitigate pests and diseases incidence have directly negative influence on the surrounding environment [1, 2].

Pesticides use is regarded as one of the major and common agricultural management practices with a growing evidence of negative impacts on the ecosystem for their application. Any form of synthetic pesticides used ends up creating environmental as well as health concerns. These products may find their way contaminating water bodies resulting in contamination to human and aquatic lives, residual in agricultural produce, causing metabolic disorders to humans when contaminated foods are consumed. They also pose high financial cost to farmers with serious financial burden on output due to their expensive nature.

Many natural resources conservatives have called for reduction in the application of these pesticides and resort to natural, environmentally friendlier and healthy alternatives/practices that require reduction, if not complete their elimination [3, 4]. Many biological, chemical and physical factors also influence soil quality, among these are the microbial communities in the rhizosphere that contribute to soil quality thereby enhancing plant growth and health [5, 6]. The extent of microbial interaction among members have great significance. Among these microorganisms are the Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR) and the Arbuscular Mycorrhizae (AM). The later lives symbiotically with the plant in the rhizosphere due to its extensively hyphal network development thereby protecting the crop from pathogen attack [7], decreases biotic and abiotic stress and reducing disease incidence [6, 8]. Therefore, if the potentials of AM are properly harnessed in agriculture, it should be able to reduce sustainably the cost and use of synthetic pesticides in agriculture systems. This is because many soils contain the indigenous AM fungi that colonize the root systems [9], even though not all plants are dependent on Mycorrhizae, most increase yield when AM fungi are applied [10]. This is sure way to attain agricultural sustainability with the reduction in the pesticides and at the same time protecting the crops from pathogen attack and ensuring high yield. Therefore, this chapter tries to detail the role Mycorrhizae fungi play not only in protecting the plant as a biocontrol agents/bioprotectants of soil-borne pathogens but also promoting plant growth thereby realizing its full potential and ensuring maximum yield.

Advertisement

2. Importance of mycorrhizal fungi as a biocontrol agent in suppressive soils

The management of plant disease by chemical approach has been one of the classical methods in agriculture that has sustained productivity for ages. As much as this has been helpful, it has also resulted in nearly an uncontrollable levels of pesticide resistance among many plant pathogens. Also, their direct and indirect impacts have led to the destruction of non-target and beneficial soil organisms as well as raising various health concerns among human and animal populations [4, 11]. To manage this, an appreciable number of studies in recent times have focused on identifying and engineering micro-organisms (i.e., mycorrhiza, bacteria, fungi, and nematodes) that are naturally antagonistic to various plant disease causing pathogens. This approach comes as a more environmentally friendly approach to the application of synthetic pesticides [12, 13]. Among all the organisms, the mycorrhizal fungi are the commonest, largest in biomass and the most important beneficial fungi group. They also combine this with a target specific inhibitory or antagonistic reaction on various soil-borne phytopathogens [3]. By means of changing both the anatomical and morphological structures of plant roots, mycorrhizal fungi improves both the chemical and physical properties on the root-zone environment, hence activating various defensive and disease resistance systems in the plant [14]. Furthermore, they have the abilities to minimize the damage infringed by bacteria, fungi, nematode, as well as other phytopathogens of crops such as Musa nana, Fragaria ananassa, Medicago truncatula, Cucumis sativus, Lycopersicon esculentum, Cucum ismelo, Olea europaea, Zea mays, Citrus reticulata, Solanum tuberosum, among other plants [3, 4, 15].

Most mycorrhizal fungi, usually being present as a biotrophic symbiotic microorganisms in the soil rhizosphere usually have a common invasion and ecological niche as most soil-borne pathogens. This could mean that under fair conditions, there must be a spatial competition between pathogens and most mycorrhizal fungi. In this, mycorrhizal fungi, eg., the Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) have been reported to have the potential of reducing the initial and reinfection rates of most pathogens that infects the root epidemics. For example, various studies have reported some competitive relationships between the AMF and an array of plant pathogens. i.e., bacteria, fungi, and nematodes [16, 17, 18, 19].

Mycorrhizal fungi played some significant roles in regulating plant growth and development. For example, cucumber plants were found to have some higher levels of zeatin, GA, and IAA when it was inoculated with G. terrestris. This increment was further observed to have a bearing with an enhancement in the plant’s resistance ability to Rhizoctonia solanacearum. In general, mycorrhizal fungi proves significant in the development of plants by inducing synthesis of various plant signaling substances, and improving and enhancing activities of enzymes.

Advertisement

3. Mechanism of suppression of mycorrhizae bioprotectants

The production of healthy and disease-free plant and plant products with corresponding higher yield can directly or indirectly be linked with microorganisms in the soil rhizosphere. Due to the number of environmental concerns regarding the use of different biological control agents, and increasing pathogens resistant to pesticides, more stable and environmentally friendly alternatives are now been considered. AM fungi are not only useful as biofertilizers, but also as bio-stimulants due to their antagonistic capabilities against plant pathogens [20]. They are known to established symbiotic relationship with more than 80% of the plant species [21, 22]. In plant disease management, AMF has been considered as one of the reliable and available options as it is found to serve as a bioprotectant and plant stimulant in sustainable food production and ensure reduction in plant pathogen population to acceptable level without harmful effect to the environment. AMF has been used as a biological control agent in the reduction of incidence and severity of bacteria such as Pseudomonas syringae, Erwinia carotovora [23] and fungi such as Fusarium spp. [24], Pythium sp. [25], Verticillium sp. [26], Sclerotinia sp., Phytophthora sp., Macrophomina sp. [27], and nematodes such as Radophulus sp. [28].

There are numerous pathogens in the soil that cause diseases to plants and result in substantial reduction in plant yields. These pathogens have to be controlled to ensure food security around the world. Among the new and sustainable control alternatives is biological control that involve the use of antagonistic organisms to suppress damage activities of other organisms that cause diseases to plants [29]. Among the most promising biological control agents is the rhizosphere-competent fungi called mycorrhizae, which is capable of suppressing the activity of disease-causing organisms both major and minor beside their role in stimulating plant growth response. The roots of most plants are in symbiotic association with certain soil fungi and this association is called mycorrhiza [30]. The mycorrhiza has number of functions that include enhancement of nutrient uptake, improvement of soil structure and plant establishment, protection of plants against environmental stresses and suppression of plant diseases [31].

Plant roots colonization by AMF usually results in the decrease of the incidence and severity of the diseases caused by pathogens. The reduction in damage by AMF maybe as a result of changes in the morphology and plant root growth, biochemical and physiological changes in the plant, histopathological changes in the plant root, mycorrhizosphere effects that results in the modification of microbial population density, activation of host defense mechanisms, parasitism of nematodes by AMF and competition for photosynthetic products and colonization sites [32]. Among the various proposed biocontrol mechanisms for the plant diseases, the most effective biocontrol scheme could either be the result of all the mechanisms working together or as a separate entity. The major limitation in the use of AMF as a biocontrol agent could culminate from its obligate nature, the role of environmental influence on the various mycorrhiza symbiotic associations and limited understanding of the mechanism involved in the interaction processes. The objective of this chapter is therefore to throw more light on the mechanism of suppression of mycorrhizae bioprotectants.

Protection of plants by mycorrhizal fungi against disease causing organisms involves multiple mechanisms that include: production and changes in the exudation pattern, formation of physical barrier (fungal mantle) around the roots and synthesis of anti-fungal compounds by the plant roots in response to mycorrhiza symbiotic association [33]. For example, Paxillus involutus (Ectomycorrhizal fungi) was reported to successfully controlled Fusarium moniliforme and Fusarium oxysporum causing rot disease in Pinus resinosa as well as Pisolithus tinctorius (Ectomycorrhizal fungi) in controlling Phytophthora cinnamomi causing disease in sand pine [34]. Specific form of disease suppression may result from the activity of one or few antagonistic microbes.

The symbiotic association of AMF has been reported to induce plant host defense response both at early and later stage of invasion by the pathogen [35]. There have been reports of quick response in terms of plant host defense to pathogens by the mycorrhizal associated plants compare to those devoid of this symbiotic relationship and for that matter, AMF colonization has been proposed to act as a priming scheme for the pathogen resistance process [36, 37].

In a related defensive mechanism against plant pathogens, AM fungi have been involved in the activation of the plant defense response against pathogens and this include the expression of number of genes with their matching proteins (e.g., phenolics, cellulose deposition, chitinases, hydroxyproline-rich glycoproteins, phytoalexins, peroxidases and proteins relating to pathogenicity) [38, 39]. Both localized and systemic resistance to Phytophthora parasitica has been reported in tomato root system [40], Pathogenesis-related proteins are involved in triggering of the Systemic acquired resistance (SAR) defense mechanism [41]. The pathogen Aphanomyces euteiches causing disease on garden pea was biologically controlled after pre gene activation of the host defense response by mycorrhiza-related chitinolytic enzymes [38].

Mycorrhization have been recorded to change plant root exudation pattern and these alterations could indirectly affect the pathogen through alteration of the pH of soil environment or through production of inhibitory products. In a study involving symbiotic association of strawberry with mycorrhiza fungi, exudates released by the roots of the strawberry had shown to suppress the growth and sporulation of Phytophthora fragariae [42], as well as affect the germination of microconidia produced by Fusarium oxysporum in a related experiment [43, 44]. There is also evidence of direct antagonistic action by AMF against pathogens in the soil rhizosphere [45, 46].

In terms of improvement in the nutritional status or reduction of plant root damage by the pathogen, the increase supply of nutrient by mycorrhiza fungi to plants have been suggested to enhanced their tolerance level to pathogen damage and carbon drain from plants to the pathogen. AMF absorb nutrient via the external network of fungi hypha by solubilizing both macro and micro elements like Mn, Ca, Zn, Cu, N and P [47, 48, 49]. This nutrient uptake ensures healthy growth of the plant due readily or available nutrients supply to the plant that enhances the tolerance or resistance level of the plant to the pathogens [50]. The mycorrhizal fungi increase the rate at which phosphorous is absorbed by increasing the surface area, number of roots, growth and development of plant root hairs. The increase in phosphorous uptake in plant-mycorrhizal symbiotic relationship constitute the major mechanism for the AMF-mediated biocontrol [51].

With regards to the morphological alteration of the plant roots, mycorrhization has been reported to cause some changes in the morphology of the roots in spatial, structural, temporal and quantitative way [52, 53]. The AM produce arbuscles and vesicles both inter and intracellularly within plant root. Any pathogen that encounters with ectomycorrhizal fungus has to first of all deal with the external and multilayer network of hyphae known as mantle and inner cortical cells which serve as physical barrier to invasive pathogens and play a critical role in enhancing the population of the useful microorganisms in the soil with corresponding production of growth promoting elements by PGPRs that increase the plant resistance to pathogens [54, 55, 56]. In aromatic plant (e.g., basil), the root length and toot tip numbers, level of branching and fresh weight of the plant have been reported to be altered independently based on the type of AMF involving in the colonization process [53].

Plant roots colonized by AM fungi have enlarged length and diameter with profuse branches [57, 58]. Plant roots were found to accumulate an increased deposition of lignin and chitinases content [59] as well increase the resistance of plant root system to pathogens when in association with AM fungi. Incidence and severity of diseases caused by Phytophthora parasitica were found to decrease in AMF association with plant as compare with non-mycorrhizal roots [22]. AMF associated plants produced a lot of arginine that were found to suppress Thielaviopsis spore formation and large amount of proteins, phytoalexins and peroxidases [58, 60, 61] that induce plant resistance to pathogens.

AMF is found to prevent infection of the root during root colonization by decreasing the access sites to the pathogen as well as stimulate plant host defense mechanism as it was reported in reducing the incidence and severity of root-knot nematodes [62]. Number of mechanisms have been reported to increase stress tolerance of plants by AM fungi and this include the formation of a complex network hypha by AM fungi around the plant roots that block intruding pathogens. In an apple seedling trial, an apple replant disease triggered by phytotoxic myxomycetes has been successfully suppressed by AM fungi such as Glomus fasciculatum and G. macrocarpum [63]. AMF are also known to provide protection to plants against pathogenic bacteria that affect roots in the soil. Disease caused by P. syringae on tomato plant have been drastically reduced in plant-mycorrhiza symbiotic association [23, 33]. The various protective and suppressive mechanisms involve in this include: indirect effects (chemical interactions; physical protection); and indirect mechanisms e.g., isoflavonoids, increase nutrition uptake by plants; changes in the morphology of the plant roots by increased lignification.

Competition by AMF with pathogens for infection site on the plant root is well documented. In the competition for the site, AMF usually inhabit the location on the plant root surface where the pathogen require to penetrate the root or it pre-establishes itself in the cells so that the site cannot be occupied by any new invasive pathogen [40, 64]. In other cases, Mycorrhizal fungi and pathogens causing plant diseases, more often than not live in the same niche that bring them into physical contact to compete for the limited resources (nutrient and space) in the rhizosphere [65]. AMF is also known to compete with the other pathogens for carbon. The AMF colonize the roots of the plants and make use of the carbohydrate from the plant, thereby leaving limited amount of carbon to be utilized by the competing pathogen and this explains the rationale behind the biocontrol strategy implore by AM fungi [36, 66, 67]. There are diverse AMF species that show different carbon sink strength in the roots of plants associated with mycorrhiza and thus have shown different inhibitory or antagonistic effect against plant pathogens [68, 69]. For example, in nematode trial, Meloidogyne incognita reproduction factor was found to be reduced when in association with AMF prior to inoculation [70]. Elucidation and protective capability of the mycorrhizal symbiotic association with variable expression of the traits in relation to their ability to protect plants have been well documented [16]. AM fungi in association with plants results in biochemical changes in host tissues, reduction in plant stress, uptake of phytonutrients, changes in plant root anatomy and morphology, trigger systemic resistance, and competition for the limited resources such as nutrient and space [40].

Advertisement

4. Action of AM fungi against plant pathogens

With increasing cost of pesticides and the negative effect of this on human health and the environment as well as pathogen resistance, AM fungi offers potential for more sustainable and environmentally friendlier alternative for sustainable agriculture. These fungi are nevertheless most important habitat of the rhizosphere and their activity has direct influence on disease incidence and severity especially on root diseases [71]. There are several reports of possible use of AM fungi in the biocontrol of plant diseases [72, 73, 74]. One communality among all these reported evidence are that, AM interactions with plant pathogens tends to reduce their damage to plants caused by fungi and nematodes; a symbiotic association with these plants enhances resistance or tolerance.

In the interaction between AM fungi and plant parasitic nematodes (PPM), for instance, the PPM are known to be very common agricultural soil inhabitants world over and cause extensive damages to many crop species. By their actions, they can be ectoparasites or endoparasites (semi-endoparasites and migratory endoparasites), sedentary endoparasites and causes about 50–60% yield losses and many often these damages are aggravated when other pathogens capitalize on them to cause severe diseases.

Both the nematodes and AM fungi tend to stablish relationship in the rhizosphere due to their common interest in nutrient provided by the host plant. The interaction between these two would have opposite effect on growth and yield that will tend to favor the host plant [75].

Also, plant pathogenic fungi are one of the common occupants of the soil matrix and causes wide range soil-borne diseases. The soil serves as host to these pathogens and cause severe damages to the roots of susceptible hosts. Soil-borne diseases caused by phytopathogenic fungi are also difficult to control due to their ability to develop over seasoning structures such as chlamydospore, sclerotia, rhizomorph, etc. The presence of AM fungi and their interaction with these plant pathogenic fungi in the rhizosphere gives the advantage to the AM fungi to exert its s opposite effect/influence on the plant pathogenic fungi thereby protecting the plant from their attacks, promoting plant growth and enhancing yield of the plant [76, 77].

Finally, there also reports on several other plant pathogens establishing opposite relationship with the AM fungi such as the bacteria, mycoplasma, plant viruses etc. thereby reducing disease incidence and severity in their interactions with AM fungi [78, 79].

Advertisement

5. Use of mycorrhizal fungi in plant growth and disease suppression

Plants are major source of energy for both human and animals providing about 80% of food consumed by humans and primary source of nutrition for livestock. Production of adequate food to feed the ever growing global is threatened by the high prevalence of diseases caused by biotic agents such as bacteria, fungi, nematodes, viruses and oomycetes. Plant diseases reduces quantity and quality of yield, thereby affecting food security and safety of produce for consumption. It is estimated that diseases account for yield loss ranging from 13 to 22% with billions in economic losses due to inputs purchase for their management [80]. Yield and storage losses attributed to diseases have significantly been linked to global starvation and malnutrition millions of people [80, 81]. Diseases reduce yield of plants by altering several physiological process such as the absorption and transportation of water and nutrients needed for plant use, photosynthesis, flower and fruit development [82].

Plant diseases results from positive interactions of host, pathogen and environment. To overcome the negative impact of diseases on plant growth, multiple strategies have been developed and successfully used to manipulate host-pathogen interactions to favor growth of the host whilst suppressing reproduction, establishment and transmission of the pathogen. Some of the approaches to controldiseases include the use of chemicals, physical, genetic and cultural means. Host resistant approach is economical, effective and environmentally friendly, however, rapid breakdown due to continuous pathogen evolution limits its use in commercial and modern crop production tilted towards intensification and mono-cropping which provides ideal environment for pathogen evolution. In situations where reliance on resistant varieties to suppress diseases has not been achieved, utilization of chemicals have become inevitable. Chemicals are highly effective but its harsh effect on human and animal health, non-target organisms and the environment resulting from excessive use has unfortunately defeated its mass promotion and utilization. An alternative to chemical pesticide is the use of biological control. According to [83, 84], biological control limits diseases causing pathogen, improves plant immunity, modifies environment through efficient cropping systems. Biological control agents offer advantages over chemical control agents by being antagonistic to specific pathogens with less risk compared to chemical pesticides. Contrary to its benefit, application of BCAs is heavily challenged by several biotic and abiotic factors as well as frequent pathogen evolution which makes field application frequently inconsistent [85]. Notwithstanding this, recent reports have shown that application of mycorrhizal fungi strains as biological control agents is an important option to reduce threats posed by diseases.

Mycorrhizal fungi exists closely with over 80% of plants species on land offering plethora of benefits to its host. These fungi may reside within the cortex of plant roots. Mycorrhiza fungi-host association contributes significantly to carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus cycling in the ecosystem. In addition to these, mycorrhiza fungal activities improve water uptake by increasing quantity of available soil water [86] thereby improving plant productivity, diversity and contributing significantly to plant growth and fitness. According to [87] these fungi alters root morphology by increasing root branching and growth to favor root vigor due to the high nutrient uptake [88] hence influencing plant growth and yield. Mycorrhizal fungi have successfully been used and reported to increase growth and yield of several crops such as carrot [89], yam [90], maize [91].

Biocontrol by mycorrhizal strains against multiple diseases is achieved by triggering defense mechanisms in the host to improve plant tolerance to pathogens. Earlier studies [92, 93, 94] have shown improved tolerance and suppressive ability of plants to vascular diseases caused by Fusarium, Verticillium and Bacteria. Other studies have demonstrated improved tolerance of cucumber, olive, date palm, and tomato seedlings to fusarium and bacteria wilt following application of mycorrhizal strains [95, 96]. Research findings by [21, 97] showed that multiple root branching resulting from root alteration due to interaction with host reduced infection of Phytophthora fragariae in strawberry. Root necrosis in cowpea caused by Rhizoctonia solani and Pythium aphanidermatum in pepper were reported to decrease in the presence of both Glomus clarum and Gnypeta deserticola. Although most success has been achieved in the use of Mycorrhizal fingi (MF) to manage soil borne fungal pathogens, other works have reported on their biocontrol potential against aerial pathogens like Alternaria solani in tomato [37] and other necrotrophic and biotrophic pathogens [98]. Apart from fungal pathogens, suppression of Plant Parasitic Nematodes (PPN) by MF has been reported in plants such as banana, coffee and tomato [99, 100]. Similarly, [101, 102] concluded that AMF can attack soybean cyst nematodes and reduce severity of nematode infection in crops such as soybeans, cotton, cucumbers, tomatoes and citrus. MF antagonizes activities of PPN by reducing infection, reproduction and enhances tolerance. Although many research outputs have concluded on the biocontrol potential of MF, mass application in the field is sporadic due to variability in performance, on host, pathogen isolate and environmental condition [103]. There is the need therefore to improve communication on the efficacy and safety associated with MF application biocontrol agents.

Advertisement

6. Mycorrhizal fungi for sustainable agricultural systems

Sustainable agricultural systems use available natural resources to achieve acceptable level of productivity, food quality, and quantity without compromising the environmental impacts [27]. As defined, sustainable agriculture is the use of ecological sound, economic viable and socially responsible practices to obtain higher productivity, numerous plant health practices contribute to sustainable agriculture through the control of soil-borne diseases by increasing soil microbial activity thereby enhancing symbiosis, competition, and parasitism within the rhizosphere [104, 105]. The current research focus has been the search for suitable alternatives to the use commercial synthetic pesticides. Many have been achieved though, but the efficient exploration of microorganisms to improve soil fertility and at the same time enhancing plant growth and protection is being pursued.

To improve crop protection, synthetic pesticides have been used extensively to mitigate effects of pest and diseases, over reliance has been a problem and therefore biological processes that will enhance plant health such as mycorrhizae, earthworm and other symbionts should be encouraged [106, 107]. Mycorrhizae association with plants are beneficial for sustainable agriculture as they reduce pests and diseases infestation [7].

Advertisement

7. Conclusion

This chapter has demonstrated that Mycorrhizae fungi especially AM fungi play critical role in plant protection. Apart from making nutrient available for the plant uptake, AM fungi provide protection to the plant thereby enhancing plant growth and yield. The AM fungi live symbiotically with the plant by benefiting from nutrient rich environment provided by the plant in the rhizosphere and the plant also benefit from the AM fungi through deprivation of other pathogen from getting direct contact with the plant thereby enhancing its ability to resist pathogens attack.

Advertisement

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1. Mozafar A, Anken T, Ruh R, Frossard E. Tillage intensity, mycorrhizal and non mycorrhizal fungi, and nutrient concentrations in maize, wheat, and canola. Agronomy Journal. 2000;92:1117-1124
  2. 2. Carter MR, Campbell AJ. Influence of tillage and liquid swine manure on arbuscular mycorrhiza to reduce the stressful effects of soil compaction on corn (Zea mays L.) growth. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 2006;39:2014-2026
  3. 3. Allsup CM, Lankau RA, Paige KN. Herbivory and soil water availability induce changes in arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal abundance and composition. Microbial Ecology. 2022;84(1):141-152. DOI: 10.1007/s00248-021-01835-3
  4. 4. Razak NA, Gange AC. Multitrophic interactions between arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi, foliar endophytic fungi and aphids. Microbial Ecology (Springer). 2021:1-11. DOI: 10.1007/s00248-01937-y
  5. 5. Miransari M, Bahrami HA, Rejali F, Malakouti MJ, Torabi H. Using arbuscular mycorrhiza to reduce the stressful effects of soil compaction on corn (Zea mays L.) growth. Soil Biology and Biochem. 2007;39:2014-2026
  6. 6. St-Arnaud M, Vujanovic V. Effects of the arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis on plant diseases and pests. In: Hamel C, Plenchette C, editors. Mycorrhizae in Crop Production. New York: Haworth; 2007. pp. 67-122
  7. 7. Smith SE, Read DJ. Mycorrhizal symbiosis. London: Academic; 1997
  8. 8. Aliasgarzad N, Neyshabouri MR, Salimi G. Effects of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and Bradyrhizobium japonicum on drought stress of soybean. Biologia. 2006;61:324-328
  9. 9. Covacevich F, Echeverría HE, Andreoli YE. Micorrización vesículo arbuscular espontánea entrigoen función de la disponibilidad de fósforo. Ciencia del Suelo. 1995;13:47-51
  10. 10. Al-Karaki GN, Al-Raddad A, Clark RB. Water stress and mycorrhizal isolate effects on growth and nutrient acquisition of wheat. Journal of Plant Nutrition. 1998;21:891-902
  11. 11. Huang NX, Enkegaard A, Osborne LS, Ramakers PMJ, Messelink GJ, Pijnakker J, et al. The banker plant method in biological control. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences. 2011;30:259-278
  12. 12. Larkin RP, Fravel DR. Mechanisms of action and dose response relationships governing biological control of Fusarium wilt of tomato by non-pathogenous Fusarium spp. Phytopathology. 1999;89:1152-1161
  13. 13. Meyer SLF, Roberts DP. Combinations of biocontrol agents for management of plant-parasitic nematodes and soil-borne plant pathogenic fungi. Journal of Nematology. 2002;34:1-8
  14. 14. Aseel DG, Rashad YM, Hammad SM. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi trigger transcriptional expression of flavonoid and chlorogenic acid biosynthetic pathways genes in tomato against tomato mosaic virus. Scientific Reports. 2019;9:9692. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-46281-x
  15. 15. Begum N, Qin C, Ahanger MA, Raza S, Khan MI, Ashraf M, et al. Role of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in plant growth regulation: Implications in abiotic stress tolerance. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2019;10:1068
  16. 16. Whipps JM. Prospects and limitations for mycorrhizas in biocontrol of root pathogens. Canadian Journal of Botany. 2004;1227:1198-1227
  17. 17. Castillo P, Nico AI, Azcón-Aguilar C, Del Río Rincón C, Calvet C, Jiménez-Díaz RM. Protection of olive planting stocks against parasitism of root-knot nematodes by arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Plant Pathology. 2006;55:705-713
  18. 18. Tabin T, Arunachalam A, Shrivastava K, Arunachalam K. Effect of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on damping-off disease in Aquilaria agallocha Roxb. Seedlings. Tropical Ecology. 2009;50:243-248
  19. 19. Zhou J, Chai X, Zhang L, George TS, Wang F, Feng G. Different arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi co-colonizing on a single plant root system recruit distinct microbiomes. mSystems. 2020;5(6):e00929-e00920
  20. 20. Whipps JM. Microbial interactions and biocontrol in the rhizosphere. Journal of Experimental Botany. 2001;52:487-511
  21. 21. Norman JR, Atkinson D, Hooker JE. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal-induced 704 alteration to root architecture in strawberry and induced resistance to the root pathogen 705 Phytophthora fragariae. Plant and Soil. 1996;185:191-198
  22. 22. Vigo C, Norman JR, Hooker JE. Biocontrol of the pathogen Phytophthora parasitica by arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi is a consequence of effects on infection loci. Plant Pathology. 2000;49:509-514
  23. 23. García-Garrido JM, Ocampo JA. Effect of VA mycorrhizal infection of tomato on damage cuased by Pseudomonas syringae. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 1989;21:165-167
  24. 24. Sohrabi M, Mohammadi H, Mohammadi AH. Influence of AM fungi, Glomus mosseae and Glomus intraradices on Chickpea growth and root-rot disease caused by Fusarium solani f. sp. pisi under greenhouse conditions. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology. 2015;17:1919-1929
  25. 25. El-Mohamedy RSR. Biological control of Pythium root rot of broccoli plants under greenhouse conditions. International Journal of Agricultural Technology. 2012;8:1017-1028
  26. 26. Mason TBS. Assessing direct and indirect effects of the fungicide Flutriafol on Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in controlling cotton root rot [Master thesis] Texas Tech University. 2015. pp. 88
  27. 27. Harrier LA, Watson CA. The potential role of arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi in the bioprotection of plants against soil-borne pathogens in organic and/or other sustainable farming systems. Pest Management Science. 2004;60:149-157
  28. 28. Jaizme-Vega MC, Tenoury P, Pinochet J, Jaumot M. Inter-actions between the root knot nematode Meloidogyne incognita and Glomus mosseae in banana. Plant and Soil. 1997;196:27-35
  29. 29. Pal KK, McSpadden Gardener B. Biological control of plant pathogens. The Plant Health Instructor (APSnet). 2006:1-29. DOI: 10.1094/PHI-A-2006-1117-02
  30. 30. Marschner P, Rengel Z. Nutrient cycling in terrestrial ecosystems. In: Marschner P, Rengel Z, editors. Nutrient Cycling in Terrestrial Ecosystems. Soil Biology. Vol. 10. New York: Springer; 2007. XX +397p. ISBN: 978-3-540-68026-0
  31. 31. Barea JM. Mycorrhiza/bacteria interactions on plant growth promotion. In: Ogoshi A, Kobayashi L, Homma Y, Kodama F, Kondon N, Akino S, editors. Plant Growth-promoting Rhizobacteria, Present Status and Future Prospects. Paris: OECD; 1997. pp. 150-158
  32. 32. Siddiqui ZA, Mahmood I. Role of plant symbionts in nematode management: A Review. Bioresource Technology. 1995;54:217-226
  33. 33. Garcia-Garrido JM, Tribak M, Rejon-Palomares A, Ocampo JA, Garcia-Romera I. Hydrolytic enzymes and ability of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi to colonize roots. Journal of Experimental Botany. 2000;51:1443-1448
  34. 34. Ross EW, Marx DM. Susceptibility sand pine to Phytophthora cinnamomi. Phytopathology. 1972;62:1197-1200
  35. 35. García-Garrido JM, Ocampo JA. Regulation of the plant defence response in arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis. Journal of Experimental Botany. 2002;53:1377-1386
  36. 36. Azcón-Aguilar C, Jaizme-Vega MC, Calvet C. The contribution of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi to the control of soil-borne plant pathogens. In: Gianinazzi S, Schüepp H, Barea JM, Haselwandter K, editors. Mycorrhizal technology in agriculture. Switzerland: Birkhäuser; 2002. pp. 187-197
  37. 37. Pozo MJ, Azcón-Aguilar C. Unraveling mycorrhiza-induced resistance. Current Opinion in Plant Biology. 2007;4:393-398
  38. 38. Slezack S, Negrel J, Bestel-Corre G, Dumas-Gaudot E, Gianinazzi S. Purification and partial amino acid sequencing of a mycorrhiza-related chitinase isoform from Glomus mosseae inoculated roots of Pisum sativum L. Planta. 2001;213:781-787
  39. 39. Guillon C, St-Arnould M, Hamel C, Jabaji-Hare SH. Differential and systemic alteration of defence-related gene transcript levels in mycorrhizal bean plants with Rhizoctonia solani. Canadian Journal of Botany. 2002;80:305-315
  40. 40. Cordier C, Pozo MJ, Barea MJ, Gianinazzi S, Gianinazzi-Pearson V. Cell defense responses associated with localized and systemic resistance to Phytophthora parasitica induced in tomato by an arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus. Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions. 1998;11:1017-1028
  41. 41. Ryals JA, Neuenschwander UM, Willts MG, Molina A, Steiner HY, Hunt MD. Systemic acquired resistance. Plant Cell. 1996;8:1809-1819
  42. 42. Norman JR, Hooker JE. Sporulation of Phytophthora fragariae shows greater stimulation by exudates of non-mycorrhizal than by mycorrhizal strawberry roots. Mycological Research. 2000;104:1069-1073
  43. 43. Scheffknecht S, Mammerler R, Steinkellner S, Vierheilig H. Root exudates of mycorrhizal tomato plants exhibit a different effect on microconidia germination of Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. lycopersici than root exudates from non-mycorrhizal tomato plants. Mycorrhiza. 2006;16:365-370
  44. 44. Scheffknecht S, St-Arnaud M, Khaosaad T, Steinkellner S, Vierheilig H. An altered root exudation pattern through mycorrhization affecting microconidia germination of the highly specialized tomato pathogen Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. lycopersici (Fol) is not tomato specific but also occurs in Fol non-host plants. Canadian Journal of Botany. 2007;85:347-351
  45. 45. St-Arnaud M, Hamel C, Caron M, Fortin JA. Endomycorrhizes VA etsensibilité aux maladies: Synthèse de lalittérature et mécanismesd’interactionprobables. In: Charest C, Bernier R, editors. Mycorrhizal symbiosis. Frelighsburg, QC: Orbis; 1995. pp. 51-87
  46. 46. Filion M, St-Arnaud M, Fortin JA. Direct interaction between the arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus Glomus intraradices and different rhizosphere microorganisms. The New Phytologist. 1999;141:525-533
  47. 47. Parniske M. Arbuscular mycorrhiza: The mother of plant root endosymbiosis. Nature Reviews Microbiology. 2008;6:763-775
  48. 48. Baum C, El-Tohamy W, Gruda N. Increasing the productivity and product quality of vegetable crops using arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi: A review. Scientia Horticulturae (Amsterdam). 2015;187:131-141
  49. 49. Clark RB, Zeto SK. Mineral acquisition by arbuscular mycorrhizal plants. Journal of Plant Nutrition. 2000;23:867-902
  50. 50. Singh N, Singh D, Singh N. Effect of Glomus bagyaraji inoculation and phosphorus amendments on Fusarium wilt of chickpea. Agricultural Research Journal. 2017;54:236-243
  51. 51. Bodker L, Kjoller R, Rosendahl S. Effect of phosphate and the arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus Glomus intraradices on disease severity of root rot of peas (Pisum sativum) caused by Aphanomyces euteiches. Mycorrhiza. 1998;8:169-174
  52. 52. Berta G, Trotta A, Fusconi A, Hooker JE, Munro M, Atkinson D, et al. Arbuscular mycorrhizal induced changes to plant growth and root system morphology in Prunus cerasifera. Tree Physiology. 1995;15:281-293
  53. 53. Copetta A, Lingua G, Berta G. Effects of three AM fungi on growth, distribution of glandular hair, and of essential oil production in Ocimum basilicum L. var. Genovese. Mycorrhiza. 2006;16:485-494
  54. 54. Hakeem KR, Akhtar MS, Abdullah SNA. Plant, Soil and Microbes.1, Implications in Crop Science. Vol. 1. Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing AG; 2016. p. 366
  55. 55. Linderman RG. Mycorrhizal interactions with the rhizosphere microflora: The mycorrhizosphere effect. Phytopathology. 1988;78:366-371
  56. 56. Sylvia DM, Sinclair WA. Suppressive influence of Laccaria laccata on Fusarium oxysporum and on Douglas-fir seedlings. Phytopathology. 1983;73:384-389
  57. 57. Schellenbaum L, Gianinazzi S, Gianinazzi-Pearson V. Comparison of acid so1uble protein synthesis in roots of endomycorrhizal wild type Pisum sativum and corresponding isogenic mutants. Journal of Plant Physiology. 1992;141:2-6
  58. 58. Hooker JE, Black KE, Perry RL, Atkinson D. Arbuscular mycorrhizal induced alteration to root longevity of poplar. Plant and Soil. 1995;172:327-329
  59. 59. Ziedan EH, Elewa IS, Mostafa MH, Sahab AF. Application of mycorrhizae for controlling root diseases of sesame. First International Congress MCOMED. Moracoo, 11-13 October 2010. 2010. p. 97
  60. 60. Baltruschat H, Schănbeck F. Studies on the influence of endotrophic mycorrhizae on the injection of tobacco by Thielaviopsis basicala. Phytopathology Z. 1975;84:172-188
  61. 61. Morandi D, Bailey JA, Gianinazzi-Pearson V. Isoflavonoid accumulation in soybean roots infected with vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Physiological and Molecular Plant Pathology. 1984;24:357-364
  62. 62. Linderman RG. Role of VAM fungi in biocontrol. In: Pfleger FL, Linderman RG, editors. Mycorrhizae and Plant Health. St Paul: APS Press; 1994. pp. 1-26
  63. 63. Catska V. Interrelationship between vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhiza and rhizosphere microflora in apple replant disease. Biologia Plantarum. 1994;36:99-104
  64. 64. Cordier C, Gianinazzi S, Gianinazzi-Pearson V. Colonization pattern of root tissue by Phytophthora nicotianae var. parasitica related to reduced disease in mycorrhizal tomato. Plant Soil. 1998a;185:223-232
  65. 65. Smith GS. The role of phosphorous nutrition in interactions of vesicular arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi with soil-borne nematodes and fungi. Phytopathology. 1988;78:371-374
  66. 66. Singh R, Adholeya A, Mukerji KG. Mycorrhiza in control of soil-borne pathogens. In: Mukerji KG, Chamola BP, Singh J, editors. Mycorrhizal Biology. New York: Kluwer; 2000. pp. 173-196
  67. 67. Xavier LJC, Boyetchko SM. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in plant disease control. In: Arora DK, editor. Fungal Biotechnology in Agricultural, Food, and Environmental Applications. New York: Dekker; 2004. pp. 183-194
  68. 68. Lerat S, Lapointe L, Gutjahr S, Piché Y, Vierheilig H. Carbon partitioning in a split-root system of arbuscular mycorrhizal plants is fungal and plant species dependent. The New Phytologist. 2003a;157:589-595
  69. 69. Lerat S, Lapointe L, Piché Y, Vierheilig H. Variable carbon sink strength of different Glomus mosseae strains colonizing barley roots. Canadian Journal of Botany. 2003b;81:886-889
  70. 70. Dos Anjos ÉCT, Cavalcante UMT, Gonçalves DMC, Pedrosa EMR, Santos V, Maia LC. Interactions between an arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus (Scutellospora heterogama) and the rootknot nematode (Meloidogyne incognita) on sweet passion fruit (Passi- flora alata). Brazilian Archives of Biology and Technology. 2010;53:801-809
  71. 71. Linderman RG. VA mycorrhizae and soil microbial interactions. In: Bethelenfalvay GJ, Linderman RG, editors. Mycorrhizae in Sustainable Agriculture. Vol. 54. Madison, WI: ASA Special Publication; 1992. pp. 45-70
  72. 72. Mukerji KG. Mycorrhiza in control of plant pathogens: Molecular approaches. In: Mukerji KG, Chamola BP, Upadhyay RK, editors. Bio-technological Approaches in Biocontrol of Plant Pathogens. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum; 1999. pp. 135-155
  73. 73. Siddiqui ZA, Mahmood I, Khan MW. VAM fungi as prospective biocontrol agents for plant parasitic nematodes. In: Bagyaraj DJ, Verma A, Khanna KK, Kehri HK, editors. Modern Approaches and Innovations in Soil Management. Rastogi: Meerut, India; 1999. pp. 47-58
  74. 74. Barea JM, Pozo MJ, Azcon R, Azcon-Aguilar C. Microbial co-operation in the rhizosphere. Journal of Experimental Botany. 2005;56:1761-1778
  75. 75. Siddiqui ZA, Akhtar MS. Synergistic effects of antagonistic fungi and a plant growth promoting rhizobacterium, an arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus, or composted cow manure on the populations of Meloidogyne incognita and growth of tomato. Biocontrol Science and Technology. 2008;18:279-290
  76. 76. Akhtar MS, Siddiqui ZA. Biocontrol of a root-rot disease complex of chickpea by Glomus intraradices, Rhizobium sp. and Pseudomonas straita. Crop Protection. 2008a;27:410-417
  77. 77. Akhtar MS, Siddiqui ZA. Glomus intraradices, Pseudomonas alcaligenes, Bacillus pumilus as effective biocontrol agents for the root-rot disease complex of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Journal of General Plant Pathology. 2008b;74:53-60
  78. 78. MingQin G, Yu C, FengZhen W. Resistance of the AM fungus Eucalyptus seedlings against Pseudomonas solanacearum. Forest Research. 2004;17:441-446
  79. 79. Garcia-Chapa M, Batlle A, Lavina A, Camprubi A, Estaun V, Calvet C. Tolerance increase to pear decline Phytoplasma in mycorrhizal OHF-333 pear root stock. In: Llacer G, editor. XIX Int. Symp. on Virus and Virus Like Diseases of Temperate Fruit Crops-Fruit Tree Diseases. Valencia, Spain: International Society for Horticultural Science (Paper presented in July 21-25, 2003); 2004
  80. 80. Savary S, Willocquet L, Pethybridge SJ, Esker P, McRoberts N, Nelson A. The global burden of pathogens and pests on major food crops. Nature Ecology & Evolution. 2019;3:430-439
  81. 81. FAO, IFAD, and WFP. The state of food insecurity in the world. Meeting the 2015 international hunger targets: Taking stock of uneven progress. Rome: FAO. 2015
  82. 82. Al-Sadi AM. Impact of plant diseases on human health. International Journal of Nutrition, Pharmacology, Neurological Diseases [serial online]. 2017;7:21-22 Available from: https://www.ijnpnd.com/text.asp?2017/7/2/21/205287
  83. 83. Bragard C, Caciagli P, Lemaire O, Lopez-Moya JJ, MacFarlane S, Peters D, et al. Status and prospects of plant virus control through interference with vector transmission. Annual Review of Phytopathology. 2013, 2013;51:177-201
  84. 84. Poveda J, Abril-Urias P, Escobar C. Biological control of plant-parasitic nematodes by filamentous fungi inducers of resistance: Trichoderma, mycorrhizal and endophytic fungi. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2020;11:992
  85. 85. Muhsen TAA, Mahdi SYA-A, Batoal ZA. Effect of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi as a biocontrol agent and organic matter against fusarium wilt in tomato. Journal of Genetic and Environmental Resources Conservation. 2015;3(3):237-224
  86. 86. Boutaj H, Meddich A, Wahbi S, Moukhli A, El Alaoui-Talibi Z, Douira A, et al. Improvement of growth and development of olive tree by mycorrhizal autochthonous inoculum. Research Journal of Biotechnology. 2020;15:76-84
  87. 87. Gutjahr C, Paszkowski U. Multiple control levels of root system remodeling in arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2013;4:204. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2013.00204
  88. 88. Schouteden N, De Waele D, Panis B, Vos CM. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi for the biocontrol of plant-parasitic nematodes: A review of the mechanisms involved. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2015;6:1280 ISSN: 1664-302X
  89. 89. Kim SJ, Eo J, Lee E, Park H, Eom A. Effects of arbuscular mycorrhizal Fungi and soil conditions and crop plant growth. Mycobiology. 2017;45(1):20-24
  90. 90. Oyetunji OJ, Osonubi O. The roles of improved cropping systems and an arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus on yam productivity in degraded soil. Crop Research. 2008;35:245-254
  91. 91. Olowe OM, Olawuyi OJ, Sobowale AA, Odebode AC. Role of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi as biocontrol agents against Fusarium verticillioides causing ear rot of Zea mays L. (Maize). Current Plant Biology. 2018;15:30-37
  92. 92. Kumari B, Mallick MA, Solanki MK, Solanki AC, Hora A, Guo W. Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR): Modern Prospects for Sustainable Agriculture. In: Ansari R, Mahmood I, editors. Plant Health Under Biotic Stress. Singapore: Springer; 2019. DOI: 10.1007/978-981-13-6040-4_6
  93. 93. Bidellaoui B, Segarra G, Hakkou A, Trillas MI. Beneficial effects of Rhizophagus irregularis and Trichoderma asperellum strain T34 on growth and fusarium wilt in tomato plants. Journal of Plant Pathology. 2019;101:121-127. DOI: 10.1007/s42161-018-0159-y
  94. 94. Wang Y, Bao X, Li S. Effects of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on rice growth under different flooding and shading regimes. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2020;12:752-756
  95. 95. Meddich A, Ait El Mokhtar M, Bourzik W, et al. Optimizing Growth and Tolerance of Date Palm (Phoenix dactylifera L.) to Drought, Salinity, and Vascular Fusarium-Induced Wilt (Fusarium oxysporum) by Application of Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi (AMF). In: Giri B, Prasad R, Varma A, editors. Root Biology. Soil Biology 52. Cham: Springer; 2018
  96. 96. Ait Rahou Y, Ait El Mokhtar M, Anli M, Boutasknit A, Ben-Laouane R, Douira A, et al. Use of mycorrhizal fungi and compost for improving the growth and yield of tomato and its resistance to Verticillium dahlia. Archives of Phytopathology and Plant Protection. 2020;54(13-14):665-690
  97. 97. Gamalero E, Pivato B, Bona E, Copetta A, Avidano L, Lingua G, et al. Interactions between a fluorescent pseudomonad, anarbuscular mycorrhizal fungus and a hypovirulent isolate of Rhizoctonia solani affect plant growth and root architecture of tomato plants. Plant Biosystems - An International Journal Dealing with all Aspects of Plant Biology. 2010;144:582-591. DOI: 10.1080/11263504.2010.489315
  98. 98. Veresoglou SD, Rillig CM. Suppression of fungal and nematodes plant pathogens through arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Biology Letters. 2012;8(2):214-217
  99. 99. Alban R, Guerrero R, Toro M. Interactions between a root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne exigua) and arbuscular mycorrhizae in coffee plant development (Coffea arabica). American Journal of Plant Sciences. 2013;4:19-23. DOI: 10.4236/ajps.2013.47A2003
  100. 100. Koffi MC, Vos C, Draye X, Declerck S. Effects of Rhizophagus irregularis MUCL41833 on the reproduction of Radopholus similisin banana plantlets grown under in vitro culture conditions. Mycorrhiza. 2013;23:279-288. DOI: 10.1007/s00572-012-0467-6
  101. 101. Rodrigues E, Silva MT, Calandrelli A, Miamoto A, Rinaldi LK, Moreno BP. Pre-inoculation with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi affects essential oil quality and the reproduction of root lesion nematode in Cymbopogon citratus. Mycorrhiza. 2021;31:613-623
  102. 102. De Sá CSB, Campos MAS. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi decrease Meloidogyne enterolobii infection of Guava seedlings. Journal of Helminthology. 2020;2020, 94:e183
  103. 103. Salvioli A, Bonfante P. Systems biology and “omics” tools: A cooperation for next-generation mycorrhizal studies. Plant Science. 2013;203-204:107-114. DOI: 10.1016/j.plantsci.2013.01.001
  104. 104. Jawson MD, Franzluebbers AJ, Deborah K, Galusha DK, Aiken RM. Soil fumigation within monoculture and rotations: Response of corn and mycorrhizae. Agronomy Journal. 1993;85(6):1174-1180
  105. 105. Knudsen KA, Soler AP, Johnson KR, Wheelock MJ. Interaction of alpha-actinin with the cadherin/catenin cell-cell adhesion complex via alpha-catenin. Journal of Cell Biology. 1995;130:67-77
  106. 106. Woomer PL, Swift MJ. The Biological Management of Tropical Soil Fertility. Chichester, UK: Wiley/UK: TSBF and Sayce; 1994
  107. 107. Swift MJ. Toward the second paradigm: Integrated biological management of soil. Paper presented for the FERTBIO Conference, Brazil 1998

Written By

Stephen Larbi-Koranteng, Frederick Kankam, Joseph Adomako and Muntala Abdulai

Submitted: 28 October 2022 Reviewed: 15 November 2022 Published: 09 December 2022