Acta Scientific Agriculture (ASAG)(ISSN: 2581-365X)

Research Article Volume 6 Issue 5

Bacillus Subtilis RP24 a Potential Bioagent for Control of Mango Malformation

Usha K1*, Grover M2 and Singh B3

1Division of Fruits and Horticultural Technology, New Delhi, India
2Division of Microbiology, New Delhi, India
3CESCRA, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, India

*Corresponding Author: Usha K, Division of Fruits and Horticultural Technology, New Delhi, India.

Received: March 31, 2022; Published: April 29, 2022


Floral malformation induced by Fusarium mangiferae is an intricate disease and major bottleneck hindering mango productivity in different countries. Our study re-confirmed the identity of pathogen Fusarium mangiferae (KF060921) in causing mango malformation disease under North Indian conditions. Various chemical measures employed to control mango malformation have shown limited success. Biological management of plant diseases by using antagonistic microorganisms is considered a viable alternative to chemical control. The present study was initiated with the hypothesis that the bio-control agents Bacillus subtilis RP24 (EF154418), a gram-positive bacterium and Pseudomonas fluorescens (MTCC 9858), a gram-negative bacterium, can efficiently control F. mangiferae induced mango malformation. In vitro studies demonstrated the capability of B. subtilis RP24, and P. fluorescens, in reducing the proliferation of F. mangiferae Both B. subtilis RP24 and P. fluorescens inhibited the growth of F. mangiferae and suppressed the formation of macro conidia and micro conidia, its primary infective propagules. We further observed the expression of ethylene response factor (ERF) gene (450bp), using the semi quantitative reverse transcriptase (RT) PCR analysis, in the healthy buds, malformed multiple buds and the malformed multiple buds that were treated with B. subtilis RP24 but no ERF expression was detected in the single swollen malformed buds or the malformed multiple buds that were exposed to P. fluorescens (MTCC 9858). Further, the in vivo studies conducted over three consecutive years revealed the potential of B. subtilis RP24 alone in controlling mango malformation disease (82%) when compared with other treatments and control. Although there is the suggestion of antimicrobial activity by B. subtilis RP24, the in-planta control of F. mangiferae may primarily be associated with competitive exclusion. B. subtilis RP24 further reduced 18% of mango malformation that appeared on mango trees after foliar spray, through the expression of ERF transcription factors that triggered senescence and drying of malformed panicles. Hence manual de-blossoming of malformed panicles normally practiced can be avoided.

Keywords: Mangifera Indica; Floral Malformation; Fusarium Mangiferae; Bacillus Subtilis; Pseudomonas Fluorescens; RT-PCR Analysis; Ethylene Signaling; Senescence


  1. Schoeman MH., et al. “Integrated control of mango blossom malformation in South Africa”. South African Journal of Plant and Soil 36 (2018) 1-6.
  2. Usha K., et al. “Hormonal profiling of the Fusarium mangiferae infected mango buds in relation to mango malformation”. Scientia Horticulturae 254 (2019): 148-154.
  3. Yadav A., et al. “Correction to: Transcriptome analysis of flowering genes in mango (Mangifera indica) in relation to floral malformation”. Journal of Plant Biochemistry and Biotechnology 29 (2020): 571-572.
  4. Usha K., et al. “Antifungal activity of Datura stramonium, Calotropis gigantea and Azadirachta indica against Fusarium mangiferae and floral malformation in mango”. European Journal of Plant Pathology 124 (2009): 637-657.
  5. Usha K., et al. “Scanning electron microscopic studies on floral malformation in mango”. Scientia Horticulturae 71 (1997): 127-130.
  6. Calvo-Garrido C., et al. “Survival of the biological control agent Candida’s sake CPA-1 on grapes under the influence of abiotic factors”. Journal of Applied Microbiology 117 (2014): 800-811.
  7. Abdullah MT., et al. “Biological control of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Lib.) de Bary with Trichoderma harzianum and Bacillus amyloliquefaciens”. Crop Protection 27 (2008): 1354-1359.
  8. Zhao Y., et al. “Antagonistic Action of Bacillus subtilis Strain SG6 on Fusarium graminearum”. PLoS One 9 (2014): e92486.
  9. Adam M., et al. “Bacterial antagonists of fungal pathogens also control root-knot nematodes by induced systemic resistance of tomato plants”. PLoS One 9 (2014): e90402.
  10. Ntushelo K., et al. “The Mode of Action of BacillusSpecies against Fusarium graminearum, Tools for Investigation, and Future Prospects”. Toxins 11.10 (2019):
  11. Bakker PAHM., et al. “Induced systemic resistance by fluorescent Pseudomonas spp”. Phytopathology 97 (2007): 239-243.
  12. Haas D and Defago G. “Biological control of soil-borne pathogens by fluorescent pseudomonads”. Nature Reviews Microbiology 3 (2005): 307-319.
  13. O'Sullivan DJ and O'Gara F. “Traits of fluorescent Pseudomonas involved in suppression of plant root pathogens”. Microbiological Reviews 56 (1992): 662-676.
  14. Iqbal N., et al. “Ethylene role in plant growth, development and senescence: Interaction with other phytohormones”. Frontiers in Plant Science 8 (2017): 475.
  15. Pierik R., et al. “The Janus face of ethylene: growth inhibition and stimulation”. Trends in Plant Science 11 (2006): 176-183.
  16. Weingart H and Voelksch B. “Ethylene production by Pseudomonas syringae pathovars in vitro and in planta”. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 63 (1997): 156-161.
  17. Leslie JF and Summerell BA. “The Fusarium laboratory manual”. Oxford, UK (2006): 259-269.
  18. Skovgaard K., et al. “Evolution of Fusarium oxysporum sp. vasinfectum races inferred from multigene genealogies”. Phytopathology 91 (2001): 1231-1237.
  19. Kumar S., et al. “MEGA3: Integrated software for Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis and sequence alignment”. Briefings in Bioinformatics 5 (2004): 50-163.
  20. Iqbal ZM., et al. “RAPD analysis of Fusarium isolates causing mango malformation disease in Pakistan”. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology 22 (2006): 1161-1167.
  21. Grover M., et al. “Molecular and biochemical approaches for characterization of antifungal trait of a potent biocontrol agent Bacillus subtilis RP24”. Current Microbiology 60 (2010): 99-106.
  22. Nawrot CK. “The Use of Interactions in Dual Cultures in vitro to evaluate the Pathogenicity of Fungi and Susceptibility of Host Plant Genotypes”. Environmental Biotechnology (2013): 287-301.
  23. Kumar P., et al. “Biocontrol potential of Trichoderma species against mango malformation pathogens”. Archives of Phytopathology and Plant Protection 45 (2012): 1237-1245.
  24. Huang JY., et al. “Infection with pathogens transmitted commonly through food and the effect of increasing use of culture-independent diagnostic tests on surveillance-foodborne diseases active surveillance network, 10 U.S. Sites, 2012-2015”. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 65 (2016): 368-371.
  25. Elmo M., et al. “A method for determining the concentration of ethylene in the gas phase of vegetative plant tissues”. Plant Physiology 46 (1970): 352-354.
  26. Kanehisa M and Goto S. “KEGG: kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes”. Nucleic Acids Research 28 (2000): 27-30.
  27. McDonnell G and Russell AD. “Antiseptics and disinfectants: activity, action, and resistance”. Clinical Microbiology Reviews 12 (1999): 147-179.
  28. Frabetti A., et al. “Experimental evaluation of the efficacy of sanitation procedures in operating rooms”. American Journal of Infection Control 37 (2009): 658-664.
  29. Baysal OC., et al. “An inhibitory effect of a new Bacillus subtilis strain (EU07) against Fusarium oxysporum sp. radicis-lycopersici”. Physiological and Molecular Plant Pathology 73 (2008): 25-32.
  30. Manjula K and Podile AR. “Production of fungal cell wall degrading enzymes by a biocontrol strain of Bacillus subtilis AF1”. Indian Journal of Experimental Biology 43 (2005): 892-896.
  31. Piggot PJ and Hilbert DW. “Sporulation of Bacillus subtilis”. Current Opinion in Microbiology 7 (2004): 579-586.
  32. Grover M., et al. “Comparison between Bacillus subtilis RP24 and its antibiotic-defective mutants”. World Journal Microbiology Biotechnology8 (2009): 1329-1335.
  33. Huang CJ., et al. “Identification of an antifungal chitinase from a potential biocontrol agent, Bacillus cereus”. Journal of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Research 38 (2018): 82-88.
  34. Trivedi P., et al.In vitro evaluation of antagonistic properties of Pseudomonas corrugate”. Microbiological Research 163 (2008): 329-336.
  35. Srividya S., et al. “Multifarious antagonistic potentials of rhizosphere associated bacterial isolates against soil borne diseases of Tomato”. Asian Journal of Plant Science and Research 2 (2012): 180-186.
  36. Hamon MA and Beth AL. “The sporulation transcription factor Spo0A is required for biofilm development in Bacillus subtilis”. Molecular Microbiology 42 (2001): 1199-1209.
  37. Stanley NR., et al. “Identification of catabolite repression as a physiological regulator of biofilm formation by Bacillus subtilis by use of DNA microarrays”. Journal of Bacteriology 185 (2003): 1951-1957.
  38. Vandini A., et al. “Hard surface biocontrol in hospitals using microbial-based cleaning products”. PLoS One 9 (2014): e108598.
  39. Sparado D and Droby S. “Development of biocontrol products for post-harvest diseases of fruit: the importance of elucidating the mechanisms of action of yeast antagonists”. Trends in Food Science and Technology 47 (2016): 39-49.
  40. Khan N., et al. “Antifungal Activity of BacillusSpecies Against Fusarium and Analysis of the Potential Mechanisms Used in Biocontrol”. Frontiers in Microbiology 9 (2018):
  41. Iordachescu M and Verlinden S. “Transcriptional regulation of three EIN3-like genes of carnation (Dianthus caryophyllus cv. Improved White Sim) during flower development and upon wounding, pollination, and ethylene exposure”. Journal of Experimental Botany 56 (2005): 2011-2018.
  42. Olsen A., et al. “Ethylene resistance in flowering ornamental plants-improvements and future perspectives”. Horticulture Research 2 (2015): 15038.
  43. Ansari MW., et al. “First evidence of ethylene production by Fusarium mangiferae associated with mango malformation”. Plant Signaling and Behavior 8 (2013): e22673.
  44. Thakore Y. “The biopesticide market for global agricultural use”. Industrial Biotechnology 2 (2006): 194-208.
  45. Zhao J., et al. “Fungal pretreatment of unsterilized yard trimmings for enhanced methane production by solid-state anaerobic digestion”. Bioresource Technology 158 (2014): 248-252.
  46. Liu W., et al. “An ethylene response factor (MxERF4) functions as a repressor of Fe acquisition in Malus xiaojinensis”. Scientific Reports 8 (2018): 1068.


Citation: Usha K., et al. "Bacillus Subtilis RP24 a Potential Bioagent for Control of Mango Malformation". Acta Scientific Agriculture 6.5 (2022): 75-99.


Copyright: © 2022 Usha K., et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.


Acceptance rate32%
Acceptance to publication20-30 days
Impact Factor1.014

Indexed In

News and Events

  • Certification for Review
    Acta Scientific certifies the Editors/reviewers for their review done towards the assigned articles of the respective journals.
  • Submission Timeline for Upcoming Issue
    The last date for submission of articles for regular Issues is July 10, 2024.
  • Publication Certificate
    Authors will be issued a "Publication Certificate" as a mark of appreciation for publishing their work.
  • Best Article of the Issue
    The Editors will elect one Best Article after each issue release. The authors of this article will be provided with a certificate of "Best Article of the Issue"
  • Welcoming Article Submission
    Acta Scientific delightfully welcomes active researchers for submission of articles towards the upcoming issue of respective journals.

Contact US