The inhibitory effect of the various seed coating substances against rice seed borne fungi and their shelf-life during storage.
Pitipong Thobunluepop
文献索引:Pak. J. Biol. Sci. 12(16) , 1102-10, (2009)
全文:HTML全文
摘要
Presently, chemical seed treatments are in discussion due to their directly or indirectly impacts on human health or other living organisms. They may also negatively affect the ecosystem and the food chain. In rice seeds, chemicals may cause phytotoxic effects including seed degradation. Eugenol is the main component of clove (Eugenia caryophillis) oil, which was proved to act simultaneously as bactericide, virocide and especially fungicide. The in vitro study was aimed to compare the inhibitory effect of the following seed treatment substances against seed borne fungi and their shelf-life during 12 months of storage; conventional captan (CA), chitosan-lignosulphonate polymer (CL), eugenol incorporated into chitosan-lignosulphonate polymer (E+CL) and control (CO). The obtained results of fungi inhibition were classified in three groups, which showed at first that CA treatment led to a better, i.e., longer, inhibitory effect on Alternaria padwickii, Rhizoctonia solani, Curvularia sp., Aspergillus flavus and Aspergillus niger than E+CL. Secondly, E+CL coating polymer showed the longest inhibitory effect against Bipolaris oryzae and Nigrospora oryzae compared to CA and CL coating polymer. Finally, both CA and E+CL coating polymer had non-significant difference inhibitory effect on Fusarium moniliforme. The variant of CL coating polymer for seed coating was only during the first 6 months of storage able to inhibit all species of the observed seed borne fungi, whereas CA and E+CL coating polymer were capable to inhibit most of the fungi until 9 months of storage.
相关化合物
相关文献:
2014-01-01
[J. AOAC Int. 97(4) , 1012-20, (2014)]
2011-01-01
[Shokuhin Eiseigaku Zasshi 52(2) , 121-9, (2011)]
2012-03-01
[J. Appl. Toxicol. 32(3) , 194-201, (2012)]
2011-01-15
[Environ. Sci. Technol. 45(2) , 554-60, (2011)]
2009-02-01
[J. Econ. Entomol. 102(1) , 20-9, (2009)]