SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS OF MICROBIAL ANTAGONISTS AND ...

Recent reports In the field of blocontrol in controlling crop diseases includethe use ofantagonrstlc m~crobes e~ther slngly or in comblnat~on w~th a low dose of thechemical pestlcldes or botanicals Hlolog~cal control by means of bacter~a holds greatprornlws for wntrolllng fungal diseases Fluorescent pseudomonads are non-sporeforming bacter~a and thus are sensltlve to des~ccation and other adverse environmentalconditions The challenge IS to Improve the b~ocontrol systems to make them morerellableSc\eral studies havc ~dent~fied agents ~hich are used as d~sease antagonlstsAntagon~sm that trcurs hetween fungal pathogens and fungi. hacter~a or plants offersoppoflunltl~? lo exploit new rncxk.s of' actlon Betng a partner In the Integratedmanegemnt s)i?slrm huse 01' 10% cost of development, small scale marketproduct~on and pafllcularl) l~rs commsrc~al competltton. th~s 1s complemented for theW~t~onal approach for the protcvtron of cereals. rice, grape\ines and top fruitsKwcnt ach~cvernenls In the lii?ld ol' hloconuol of crop dlseases are encouragmg.l.!nch (1988) rrponcd tk swccsst'ul wc of hlocontrol agents One bacterial spxtesand fivc fungal y s l t s utre avarlablr on small scale to grown tor management offungal disease S~ncv then lot oi antagonlsts wre commrclal~zed for the control ofyb~hrunr. Hh:wtanro and ~~u.wrrum spr?c~es (Man~n. I W4) Accord~ng to Powell(IW3) the n~ahl~shcd h~olog~cal control agent 1s less ellicunt and less rel~able butsafer than chem~cal control It IULS P narro\+rr range of actl\ IF and can he I~m~ted h)the t).~ of crop or the en\ IronmwntSo h: rmllsilc one should not exwt a venhcMd mnpc of pcs~ or dlwax control from the hiologlcal agents In terms ofcnntmllinp m)or PISor pest complexes In rnqor crop In a wide range ofenvironments SIW bmlogtcal c-ontrol agents are. h!their nature. more l~m~ted thanthe equivalent chemtcals. the~r uw necds to he laqelod carefully. hased upon an