Seed borne diseases causes heavy losses in the crops at all stages of growth like seed germination, seedling and maturity of plants. Bio-control technologies have gained momentum in disease control of crop plants, in recent times as these technologies not only minimize or replace the usage of harmful chemical pesticides, but also found to be ecofriendly, environmentally safe, cheaper and efficient in certain disease control programmes. Fungal bio-control agents like Trichoderma spp. successfully used for the control of many seed borne diseases caused by Aspergillus spp., Alternaria spp., Curvularia spp., Colletotrichum spp., Fusarium spp., Pyricularia spp., Helminthosporium spp. etc. in several crops.

1. M.Sc. (Agriculture) Plant
Pathology
N. M. College of Agriculture
Navsari Agricultural University
Navsari (Gujarat)

2. Mr. ANKIT K. CHAUDHARI
M.Sc. (Agri.) Plant Pathology, 2nd Sem.
Reg. No.: 2010113009
Dr. Hemant Sharma
Associate Professor,
Dept. of Plant Pathology,
GABI,
N.A.U., Surat- 395 003.
MAJOR ADVISOR CO-ADVISOR
Dr. G. B. Kalariya
Training Associate (P.P.),
T & V Scheme,
Directorate of Extn. Edu.,
N.A.U., Navsari – 396 450

3.  Introduction
 What is seed borne pathogen & seed borne
diseases ?
 Seed borne diseases result in to
 Transmission of seed borne pathogen
 Site of infection
 Importance of seed borne micro-organism
 What is bio-agent ?
 Ideal characteristics of bio-agents
 Mode of action
 Biological management of seed borne
pathogen through bio-agents
 Conclusion
3

4. Introduction
 Seed borne diseases causes heavy losses in the crops at all
stages of growth like seed germination, seedling and maturity of
plants.
 Bio-control technologies have gained momentum in disease
control of crop plants, in recent times as these technologies not
only minimize or replace the usage of harmful chemical
pesticides, but also found to be ecofriendly, environmentally
safe, cheaper and efficient in certain disease control
programmes.
 Fungal bio-control agents like Trichoderma spp. successfully
used for the control of many seed borne diseases caused by
Aspergillus spp., Alternaria spp., Curvularia spp., Colletotrichum
spp., Fusarium spp., Pyricularia spp., Helminthosporium spp.
etc. in several crops. 4

5.  What is seed borne diseases ?
It means the association of pathogen in, on or with the
seeds may consequently be able to transmit the pathogens
through the seed which as a result, may lead to the
development of a disease in the seedling or plant. e.g., loose
smut of wheat, downy mildew, wilt etc.
 What is seed borne pathogen ?
Any infectious agent association with the seed, having
the potential of causing a disease of a seedling or plant, is
termed as seed borne pathogen. e.g., fungi, bacteria,
nematode, virus etc.
5

6. CROPS DISEASES PATHOGEN
Wheat Loose smut
Karnal bunt
Seedling blight
Ustilago segetum var. tritci
Tilletia indica
Septoria nodorum
Rice Blast
False Smut
Brown/leaf spot
Sheath blight
Pyricularia oryzae
Ustilaginoidea virens
Bipolaris oryzae
Rhizoctonia solani
Cotton Seedling blight
Fusarium Wilt
Black boll rot
Verticillium wilt
Ascochyta gosypii
Fusarium oxysporium f. sp.
Vasinfectum
Diplodia gosypina
Verticillium alboatrum
Maize Leaf blight
White streak in maize
Black bundle
Downy mildew
Bipolaris maydis
Fusarium moniliforme
Cepholosporium maydis
Pernosclerospora maydis
Pearl millet Downy mildew
Smut
Ergot
Sclerospora graminicola
Tolyposporium penicillariae
Claviceps fusiformis
Important seed- borne fungal diseases of major Crops
6

7. CROPS DISEASES PATHOGEN
Soybean Anthracnose
Pod & stem blight
Purple seed stain
Colletotrichum truncatum
Diaporthe phaseolorum var. sojae
Cercospora kikuchii
Onion Damping off
Downy mildew
Purple blotch
Stemphylium Blight
Botrytis allii
Peronospora destructor
Alternaria porri
Stemphylium vesicarium
Tomato Damping off
Early Blight
Late blight or Fruit rot
Stem rot
Pythium aphanidermatum
Alternaria solani
Phytophthora infestans
Phoma lycopersici
Chilli Anthracnose Colletrotrichum capsici
Chickpea Ascochyta blight
Wilt
Ascochyta rabiei
Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. Ciceri
Sorghum Anthracnose
Grain smut
Downy mildew
Colletotrichum graminicola
Sphacelotheca sorghi
Peronosclerospora sorghi
7

8. Fig.-1: Different fungal seed borne pathogen
Alternaria sp.Aspergillus sp. Curvularia sp.
Helminthosporium sp.
Cercospora sp.
Fusarium sp. Colletotrichum sp. Pyricularia sp. Peronospora sp.

9. Seed borne diseases result into
1. Discoloration
Discoloration of ear head blight
Fusarium graminearum
Sheath rot infection
Sarocladium oxyzae
Seed coat infection
Botrytis spp.
2. Deformation
9

10. 3. Seed abortion
False smut (Ustilaginoidea virens)Bean seed abortion ( Colletotrichum)
Seedling infection with
Apsergillus flavus
Pre-emergence
damping-off of soybean
4. Mortality in nursery condition
10

11. 5. Reduction in germination percentage
7. Changes in nutritional compounds and production of toxins
6. Larger number of unhealthy plants
Karnal bunt (Tilletia indica )
11
Poor plant stand in field

12. TRANSMISSION OF SEED BORNE PATHOGENS
 Externally Seed-borne pathogens:
If a pathogen is located out side the functional part of the seed,
it is externally seed borne such as bunt spores.
 Internally seed borne pathogens:
If pathogen is located in side the functional part of the seed, it
is internally seed borne such as smuts, anthracnose, and blights.
 Seed contamination:
Seed contamination means transmitting pathogen on seed
surface without an active relationship between seed and pathogen.
e.g., downy mildew of soybean.
12

13. SITE OF INFECTION
 Embryo infection
Embryo infection in loose smut of wheat
By Ustilago segetum var. tritici
 Endosperm infection
Endosperm infection in Maize
By Fusarium moniliforme
13

14.  Seed coat infection
Seed coat infection in Bitter gourd
by Botrytis spp.
Karnal bunt in wheat: Tilletia indica
14

15.  Glume (Bract) infection
Glume infection of wheat (strip rust):
Puccinia striformis
Glume infection in Rice:
Bipolaris oryzae
15

16.  Direct
 Role in Agricultural Production
 Biochemical Changes
 Production of Mycotoxins
 Discoloration and shriveling
IMPORTANCE OF SEED BORNE MICRO-ORGANISM
16
 Indirect
 Reduction in Market Value
 Reduction in Processing Quality
 Unacceptability for marketing
seed, both nationally and
internationally
 Introduction of New Diseases
 Respiratory Diseases

17. Fungal
antagonists
• Trichoderma
harzianum
• Trichoderma virens
• Trichoderma
koningii
• Trichoderma
hamatum
• Trichoderma viride
Bacterial
antagonists
• Pseudomonas
fluorescens
• Bacillus subtilis
• Bacillus firmus
• Bradyrhizobium
Actinomycetes
antagonists
• Striptomyces
griseoviridis
• Striptomyces
griseous
• Striptomyces
lavendulae
BIO-AGENTS: The micro-organisms used in biological control of plant
pathogens are known as bio-agents.
17

18. Ideal characteristics of Bio-agents
 It should not be pathogenic to plants, humans and animals.
 It should have broad spectrum activity in control many disease.
 It must be genetically stable.
 Fast growth and sporulation.
 Cultured under artificial media.
 Effective under different environmental conditions.
 It should easily establish in the soil with high persistence and
survival capacity.
 It should have least susceptibility to the different agro chemicals.
18

19.  Advantages of bio-control
• It is safe to environment and eco system.
• Cheaper than fungicide.
• Highly effective through the crop growth period with high
Rhizosphere competency.
• Easy to deliver.
• Improve plant growth.
• Increase yield.
• Bestowed with high cost benefit ratio.
• There is no risk to pathogen developing resistance and residues
effect in food and ground water.
• They are compatible with bio-fertilizer like Rhizobium and
Azospirillum.
• It is best alternative of chemical fungicides. 19

20. Mode of action
20
Competition
Antibiosis
Mycoparasitism
Induced resistance of the host plant
Siderophore production

21. Competition is an indirect mechanism by which Trichoderma
and other bio-agents are excluded by depletion of food basis or
by physical occupation of site.
In this case the bio-control agent out competes the target organisms for
nutrients and space.
Competition
21
Bio-agent (Trichoderma spp.)

22. Antibiosis
It refers to the inhibition or destruction of the pathogen by the
metabolic product of the antagonist.
22
Bioagents Antibiotic Target pathogen
Trichoderma spp.
Gliovirin,
gliotoxin,viridin,pyrones
Rhizoctonia solani,
Sclerotium rolfsii,
Penicillium spp.
Bacillus spp.
Bacillomycin, Bacillomycin-D,
Mycosubtilin, Zwittermicin
Aspergillus flavus,
Fusarium oxysporium,
Pythium aphanidermatum
Pseudomonas spp.
Pyrrolnitrin,
2,4-diacetyl-phloroglucinol
Pythium spp.,
R. Solani

23. Mechanism of Mycoparasitism
includes interactions like coiling of
hyphae around the pathogen,
penetration by haustoria and lysis.
The Trichoderma recognizes and
attaches to the pathogenic fungus
and designs to extract extra cellular
lytic enzymes like  -1,3,
glucanase, chitinase, protease and
lipase. The host recognition
mechanism is the basis for the
specificity of the antagonists.
Mycoparasitism
23

24. It has been know for decades that once a plant is
infected with a pathogen, that infection triggers some
sort of reaction in the infected host plant that helps
keep it from being infected with other pathogens. The
infected plant becomes more "resistant" to other
infections.
Induced Resistance of the Host Plant
24

25. Siderophore (Greek word: iron carrier) is
defined as relatively low molecular weight, ferric ion
specific chelating agent produced by bacteria and fungi
growing under low iron stress. Fungi, bacteria and
plants producing the siderophores which play
important role in virulence and management of various
plant diseases. e.g., Pseudomonas fluorescens (inhibit
spore germination of Fusarium solani.)
Siderophore production
25

26.  Improved cultural practices
 Plant quarantine
 Application of solar heat and hot water treatment
 Use of bio-control agents/antagonists
 Use of plant and animal derived antifungal compounds
 Use of essential oils
ECOFRIENDLY METHODS FOR SEED BORNE DISEASES MANAGEMENT
26
Management of fungal seed borne diseases:

27. BIOLOGICAL
CONTROL
“Biological control is the reduction
of disease producing activities of
a pathogen, in its active or dormant
stage , by one or more organisms,
accomplished naturally by mass
introduction of one or more
antagonists.”
COOK , BAKER
1974
27

28. 28

29.  Seed treatment is one of the important method of introducing
bio-control agents into soil-plant environment.
 The efficacy of seed treatment depends on the ability of the
antagonist to multiply in the rhizosphere region.
 By this method, different vegetatively propagated materials like
bulbs, tubers, rhizome, sett and seed can be treated with
antagonists to prevent seed, corm decay and seedling blight.
 Seed treatment:
It is process applied to seed, to protect the seeds, assures
seed health and optimum emergence of the seedling in crop.
29
SEED TREATMENT

30. Sr.
No.
Seed treatment
(Boiagents)
* Mean disease
intensity (%)
Disease control (%)
1 Basillus subtilis (0.5%) 38.98 (38.63) 38.62
2 Pseudomonas aeruginosa (0.5%) 39.09 (38.70) 38.45
3 Pseudomonas flurorescens-I (0.5%) 37.19 (38.58) 41.44
4 Trichoderma harzianum (0.5%) 43.74 (41.40) 31.12
5 Trichoderma koningii (0.5%) 44.91 (42.08) 29.28
6 Trichoderma virens (0.5%) 46.29 (42.87) 27.11
7 Trichoderma viride (0.5%) 41.23 (39.95) 35.08
Control 63.50 (52.83) -
S.Em. + 2.55 1366
CD at 5% NS NS
CV% 10.59 10.03
Value in parenthesis are angular transformed value, * Average of three replication
Table-1: Evaluation of different bioagents against purple blotch of onion
(A. porri) under field condions
Rakholiya et al., 2013Navsari 30PDI= ×
Sum of numerical rating
Total number of leaves examined
100
Maximum grade
value (0-5)

31. Sr.
No.
Seed treatments
Pooled per cernt
disease incidence
Per cent disease
control
1 Mancozeb 4.0 g/kg 44.23 (48.66) 31.15
2 Tebuconazole 1.25 g/kg 42.10 (44.95) 36.40
3 Vitavax power 3.0 g/kg 41.05 (43.13) 38.97
4 T. harzianum 10 g/kg 37.43 (36.94) 47.73
5 P. fluorescens 5.0 g/kg 52.38 (62.74) 11.22
6 Chlorpyriphos 25 ml/kg 47.30 (54.01) 23.58
7 Control 57.21 (70.67) ̅
S.E.± 2.01 ̅
C.D. (P=0.05) 5.86 ̅
C.V. 10.69 ̅
Table-2: Effect of seed treatments on incidence of stem and pod rot of groundnut ( Sclerotium rolfsii.)
JAU, Junagadh Rakholiya and Jadeja, 2010
* Data given in parenthesis are
retransformed value
# Mean of three replication
Per cent disease control=
Per cent plants died in control - Per cent plants died in treatment
Per cent plants died in control
31

32. Treatments
Seed treatment/
soak
Dose (%)
Percent Loose
smut Infection
T. viride Slurry 0.4 9.94
T. harzianum Slurry 0.4 11.19
P. fluorescens 6 hr soak 0.4 18.28
Vitavax Dry 0.125 3.53
T. viride + Vitavax Slurry+ dry 0.3+0.125 0.07
T. harzianum+ Vitavax Slurry+ dry 0.3+ 0.125 0.02
P. fluorescence + Vitavax 6 hr soak 4+0.125 0.28
G. Virens 12 hr soak 0.1 % 17.69
G.virens + Vitavax -do-+dry -do-+0.125 0.15
Water soaking 24 hr - 16.92
Nimbecidine Dry 0.5 14.98
Vitavax Dry 0.25 1.58
Untreated Control - - 16.37
CD at 5% 3.54
Infection based on embryo count 19.57
Table-3: Effect of bio-agents on loose smut of wheat (Ustilago segetum var. tritici) under field conditions.
*NT- Not Tested
Arya and Monaco, 2007IARI, Karnal 32

33. Treatments Germination (%)
Pre-emergence
mortality (%)
Post-emergence
mortality (%)
T. viride @ 4 g/kg 83.50 (66.02)* 8.00 (2.82)** 5.00 (2.23)**
T. harzianum @ 4 g/kg 81.00 (64.16) 16.10 (4.01) 7.10 (2.66)
Curcuma longa @ 10 ml/kg 80.00 (63.43) 19.00 (4.35) 7.00 (2.64)
Azadiracta indica @ 10 ml/kg 81.00 (64.16) 20.00 (4.47) 5.10 (2.25)
Carbendazim @ 2 g/kg 82.30 (65.12) 9.00 (3.00) 5.00 (2.23)
Benlate @ 2 g/kg 82.00 (64.90) 11.00 (3.31) 6.00 (2.44)
Thiram @ 3 g/kg 81.80 (64.76) 13.11 (3.61) 8.30 (2.88)
Carbendazim + Thiram (1:2) @ 3g/kg 85.00 (67.21) 7.00 (2.64) 4.10 (2.02)
Control 78.00 (62.03) 20.50 (4.52) 8.50 (2.91)
SEM + 0.14 0.05 0.06
CD (P=0.01) 0.56 0.20 0.25
Table-4: Effects of seed treatment with bio-agents, botanicals and fungicides against Aspergillus niger
in onion
Nagpur Dumbre et al., 2011
*-Arc sine values, **- Square root values
33

34. Treatments
Germination (%)
Pre-emergence
mortality (%)
Post-emergence
mortality (%)
T. viride @ 4 g/kg 85.00 (67.21)* 7.30 (2.70)** 6.20 (2.48)**
T. harzianum @ 4 g/kg 84.00 (66.24) 9.20 (3.03) 5.30 (2.30)
Curcuma longa @ 10 ml/kg 80.00 (63.43) 14.00 (3.74) 6.00 (2.44)
Azadiracta indica @ 10 ml/kg 81.00 (64.16) 13.00 (3.60) 5.00 (2.23)
Carbendazim @ 2 g/kg 83.50 (66.03) 10.00 (3.16) 6.00 (2.44)
Benlate @ 2 g/kg 84.00 (66.42) 9.00 (3.00) 6.00 (2.44)
Thiram @ 3 g/kg 86.90 (68.78) 7.00 (2.64) 4.00 (2.00)
Carbendazim + Thiram (1:2) @ 3g/kg 88.00 (69.73) 8.00 (2.82) 2.00 (1.41)
Control 79.90 (63.36) 16.00 (4.00) 10.00 (3.16)
SEM + 0.47 0.07 0.08
CD (P=0.01) 1.85 0.28 0.28
Table-5: Effects of seed treatment with bio-agents, botanicals and fungicides against Curvularia lunata in
onion
Nagpur Dumbre et al., 2011
*-Arc sine values, **- Square root values
34

35. Table-6: Effect of Bio-agents, aqueous plant extracts and fungicides seed treatment on wilt incidence in
chickpea (Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. ciceri) in sick soil.
Sr. No. Treatments Wilt incidence (%)
% Wilt
Reduction over
control
1. Trichoderma viride 28.19(32.07)* 53.02
2. Bacillus subtilis 30.01 (33.22) 49.99
3. Azadirachata indica (1:1, w/v) 32.66 (34.85) 45.58
4. Lantana camara (1:1, w/v) 37.17 (37.57) 38.06
5. Carbendanzim @ 2g/kg seeds 26.38 (30.90) 56.04
6. Thiram @ 2g/kg seeds 28.73 (32.41) 52.12
7. T. viride + Carbendanzim 2g/kg 27.15 (31.40) 54.76
8. T. viride + Thiram 2g/kg seeds 28.05 (31.98) 53.26
9. Control 60.01 (50.77) ---
* Figures in parenthesis are arcsine-transformed values.
Nagpur Kamdi et al., 2012 35
‘F’ test Sig.
SE (m) ± 0.48
CD (P= 0.05) 1.45

36. In vitro efficacy of bio-agents against
seed borne pathogen
36

37. Sr. No. Boiagents
Per cent Mean
inhibition*
Antagonism index**
1 Trichoderma harzianum 91.13 ++++
2 Trichoderma hamatum 83.86 ++++
3 Trichoderma koningii 88.85 ++++
4 Trichoderma virens 85.35 ++++
5 Trichoderma viride 94.71 ++++
Control 0.00 -
S.Em. + 0.30
CD at 5% 0.94
* Average of four replications, **Antagonism index,
+= No antagonism, ++weak , +++ moderate, ++++ severe.
Navsari Rakholiya et al., 2013
Table-7: Per cent growth inhibition of Alternaria porri by different fungal
bioagents in vitro
37

38. Sr. No. Fungal antagonist
Mean per cent growth
inhibition*
1 Trichoderma viride-II 96.21
2 Trichoderma harzianum-II 90.58
3 Trichoderma harzianum-I 85.00
4 Trichoderma viride-I 72.84
5 Aspergillus niger 60.44
Control 0.00
S.Em. + 0.91
CD at 5% 2.73
JAU, Junagadh Bhaliya and Jadeja , 2013
* Mean of four replications
Table-8: Growth inhibition of Fusarium solani by different fungal
antagonists.
38

39. Sr. No. Antagonists
Average growth
diameter of
pathogen (mm)
Per cent growth
inhibition
1 Trichoderma viride 15.33 60.69
2 Trichoderma harzianum 16.33 58.12
3 Trichoderma longibrachyatum 26.33 32.48
4 Aspergillus niger 18.33 53.00
5 Gliocladium virens 33.00 15.38
6 Chaetomium globosum 29.66 23.94
7 Bacillus subtilis 18.33 53.00
8 Pseudomonas fluorescens 17.33 55.66
9 Control 39.00 -
S.Em. + 0.68 -
C.D at 5% 2.00 -
C.V. % 4.9 -
Table-9: Screening of antagonists against Colltotrichum gloeosporiodies in vitro
(Dual culture) method
Navsari Deshmukh,2009 39

40. Table-10: Antagonism by different Trichoderma isolates to Fusarium moniliformae (Sugarcane
wilt disease) in vitro condition
Table-10: Antagonism by different Trichoderma isolates to Fusarium moniliformae (Sugarcane
wilt disease) in vitro condition
Treat. No
Trichoderma
isolates
Antagonism index
to F. moniliformae
(after 5 days)
Average colony
diameter of
F. moniliformae
(mm)
Per cent growth
inhibition
T1 TCN - 1 + + + (strong) 20.33 71.23
T2 TCN – 2 + + + (strong) 24.33 65.57
T3 TCN – 6 + + + (strong) 22.67 67.92
T4 TCN – 8 + + + + (severe) 14.00 80.19
T5 TCN – 9 + + + (strong) 22.33 68.40
T6 TCN – 11 + + + + (severe) 13.67 80.66
T7 TCN – 12 + + + + (severe) 12.00 83.02
S. Em. ± 0.70
C.D. @ 5% 2.06
CV (%) 4.89
+ weak , ++ moderate, +++ strong, ++++ severe. (Watanabe 1984) Pandya et al.., 2009Navsari 40

41. Strains of
Pseudomonas
fluorescens
*Colony diameter of
Fusarium
oxysporum f.sp.
cubense (mm)
Per cent inhibition of
mycelial growth over
control
Pf-1 24.00c 73.19
Pf-2 25.75b 71.25
Pf-3 22.33d 75.06
Pf-4 21.33e 76.18
Pf-m 18.50f 79.34
Control 89.55a -
Table 11: In vitro efficacy of Pseudomonas fluorescens against
Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense (Banana wilt /panama wilt)
Table 11: In vitro efficacy of Pseudomonas fluorescens against
Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense (Banana wilt /panama wilt)
*Mean of four replication
Means followed by common latter are not significantly different at DMRT (0.05%) level
Saravana et al., 2010TNAU, Kovilpatti 41

42. SEED
BIO-PRIMING
42

43. What is Bio-priming or Biological Seed
Treatment ?
Bio-priming is a process of biological
seed treatment that refers combination of
seed hydration (physiological aspect of
disease control) and inoculation (biological
aspect of disease control) of seed with
beneficial organism to protect seed.
It is an ecological approach using
selected fungal antagonists against the soil
and seed-borne pathogens. Biological seed
treatments may provide an alternative to
chemical control.
SEED BIO-PRIMING
43

44. Soaked seed were then drawn out from the solution and drying.
Kept this seeds in to suspension for 5-10 min
Kept this culture for over night , then next day required amount of seeds are mixed
properly with culture medium
500 ml culture are sufficient for treating a 1 ha of seeds
Add bio-agent in this solution and properly mixed it.
Dissolve 100g jaggery in to 1litre of water and prepare solution
Procedure of seed bio-priming
Sabalpara et al.(2009-10)
44

45.  Seed bio-priming has potential advantages over simple control coating
of seeds as it results in rapid and uniform seedling emergences.
 It involves slurry treatment of seeds with bio-agent in the presence of
gum arabica, jaggery and/or FYM powder and subjected to incubation
under high moisture for 24 to 48 hrs, results in improved performance
of bio-control agents against seed and soil-borne diseases.
 When the seeds are treated with bio-agents like Trichoderma and
Pseudomonas, it forms a thin layer around the seed surface, thus
making the pathogens difficult to enter or invade.
 Bio-primed seeds could tolerate adverse soil conditions better.
45

46. Table-12: Effect of bio-primining in controlling pre-emergence damping-off caused by
Colletotrichum truncatum infection in soybean seeds under the field condition
Treatment
Pre-emergence damping-off
First trial Second trial
Disease
incidence (%)
Disease
reduction (%)
Disease
incidence
(%)
Disease
reduction
(%)
Chemo-primed with Benlate 40.0 43.4 29.0 44.1
Bio-primed with
P. aeruginosa
39.0 48.6 25.0 51.9
Bio-primed with
T. harzianum
43.5 42.8 27.5 46.8
Bio-primed with T. virens 50.5 33.5 34.5 33.4
Bio-primed with the mixture
of T. virens and T. harzianum
44.0 42.1 27.5 46.9
Hydro-primed 76.0 0.0 52.0 0.0
Non-primed 84.0 - 59.5 -
Mean of three trials (each trial: five replicates/treatment, ten plants/replicate)
Begum et al., 2010Malaysia 46

47. Table-13: Effect of bio-primining in controlling post-emergence damping-off caused by
Colletotrichum truncatum infection in soybean seeds under the field condition
Treatment Post-emergence damping-off
First trial Second trial
Disease
incidence
(%)
Disease
reduction
(%)
Disease
incidence
(%)
Disease
reduction
(%)
Chemo-primed with Benlate 2.5 65.0 0.5 96.9
Bio-primed with
P. aeruginosa
2.5 65.0 0.5 97.2
Bio-primed with
T. harzianum
5.5 35.0 2.5 85.1
Bio-primed with T. virens 5.5 35.0 0.5 96.9
Bio-primed with the mixture
of T. virens and T. harzianum
6.0 35.0 2.5 85.1
Hydro-primed 9.0 0.0 17.0 0.0
Non-primed 10.0 - 14.0 -
Mean of three trials (each trial: five replicates/treatment, ten plants/replicate)
Begum et al., 2010Malaysia 47

48. Table-14: Effect of seed bio-priming of leaf spot (A. alternata) of greengram.
Data outside the parameter parenthesis are ARCSIN transformed data; Data inside the parameter
parenthesis are original value, PDI- percent disease intensity, PDC- present disease control
Deshmukh,2012Navsari 48
Sr.
No.
Treatment
PDI (leaf spot : A. alternata)
35 DAS 65 DAS
2010 2011 POOLED PDC 2010 2011 POOLED PDC
1. T. viride
9.57
(2.77)
9.45
(2.69)
9.51
(2.73)
75.09
21.24
(13.12)
20.22
(11.95)
20.74
(12.54)
55.28
2. T. harzianum
9.40
(2.67)
9.27
(2.59)
9.33
(2.63)
76.00
21.11
(12.97)
20.09
(11.80)
20.61
(12.39)
55.81
3. T. fasiculatum
9.91
(2.96)
9.79
(2.89)
9.85 (2.93) 73.27
21.36
(13.27)
20.35
(12.10)
20.86
(12.68)
54.78
4. P. fluorescens-I
13.00
(5.06)
12.94
(5.01)
12.97
(5.04)
54.01
23.02
(15.29)
22.05
(14.10)
22.54
(14.69)
47.61
5. P. fluorescens-II
12.61
(4.77)
12.54
(4.71)
12.57
(4.74)
56.75
23.02
(15.29)
22.05
(14.10)
22.54
(14.69)
47.61
6. P. aeruginosa
9.74
(2.86)
9.62
(2.79)
9.68 (2.83) 74.18
21.30
(13.20)
20.29
(12.02)
20.80
(12.61)
55.03
7.
Seeds with
hydration priming
13.94
(5.80)
13.89
(5.76)
13.91
(5.78)
47.26
23.26
(15.59)
22.30
(14.40)
22.78
(14.99)
46.54
8.
Control (without
treatment)
19.32
(10.95)
19.33
(10.96)
19.33
(10.96)
------
32.03
(28.13)
31.92
(27.95)
31.97
(28.04)
-------
S.Em. ± 0.75 0.76 0.48 --- 0.68 0.70 0.43 ---
C. D. at 5 % 2.26 2.31 1.37 --- 2.10 2.14 1.27 ---
C. V. % 10.65 10.96 10.8 --- 5.58 6.00 5.79 ---
YT --- --- NS --- --- --- NS ---

49. Sr.
No
Treatment
PDI ( Anthracnose : C. capsici)
35 DAS 65 DAS
2010 2011 POOL PDC 2010 2011 POOL PDC
1 T. viride
6.02
(1.10 )
5.77
(1.01 )
5.89
(1.05 )
78.57
15.64
(7.27 )
15.63
(7.26 )
15.64
(7.27 )
64.31
2 T. harzianum
5.26
(0.84 )
4.96
(0.75 )
5.11
(0.79 )
83.88
14.92
(6.63 )
14.91
(6.62 )
14.92
(6.63 )
67.45
3 T. faciculatum 5.39 (1.65) 7.20 (1.57)
7.30
(1.61)
67.14 16.50 (8.07) 16.48 (8.05)
16.49
(8.06)
60.43
4 P. fluorescens-I 7.72 (1.80) 7.54 (1.72)
7.63
(1.76)
64.08 17.69 (9.24) 17.66 (9.20)
17.68
(9.22)
54.74
5 P. fluorescens-II 7.47 (1.69) 7.29 (1.61)
7.38
(1.65)
66.33 17.47 (9.01) 17.44 (8.98)
17.45
(9.00)
55.82
6 P. aeruginosa 6.78 (1.40) 6.57 (1.31)
6.68
(1.35)
72.45 15.69 (7.31) 15.67 (7.30)
15.68
(7.30)
64.16
7
Seeds with hydration
priming
7.80 (1.84) 7.62 (1.76)
7.71
(1.80)
63.27 18.17 (9.73) 18.14 (9.69)
18.16
(7.91)
52.33
8
Control (without
treatment)
12.76 (4.88) 12.81 (4.92)
12.78
(4.90)
---
26.95
(20.53)
26.71
(20.20)
26.83
(2.037)
---
S.Em ± 0.60 0.62 0.61 --- 0.76 0.72 0.46 ---
C.D. at 5 % 1.83 1.89 1.12 --- 2.31 2.18 1.35 ---
C.V % 13.33 14.12 13.73 --- 7.38 7.00 7.19 ---
YT --- --- NS --- --- --- NS ---
Table-15: Effect of seed bio-priming on anthracnose (C. capsici) in greengram.
Data outside the parameter parenthesis are ARCSIN transformed data; Data inside the parameter parenthesis are original value, PDI- percent disease intensity, PDC- present disease
control
Navsari Deshmukh,2012 49

50.  From the foregoing discussion it can be concluded that,
Biological control of seed borne pathogens is one such
approach in which bacteria, fungi and secondary products
of biological origin are being used to control plant
diseases.
 The action of biological agents on the seed surface seems
to be more effective than soil application of fungal
antagonists.
 Seed and seed bio-priming by T. harzianum, T. viride, T.
virens, B. Subtilis, P. aeruginosa, and P. fluorescens as
seed treatment can be successfully used to reduce the seed
borne pathogen inoculums gave better plant stand and
increasement in yield attributes.
CONCLUSIONCONCLUSION
50