נגישות
menu      
חיפוש מתקדם
תחביר
חפש...
הספר "אוצר וולקני"
אודות
תנאי שימוש
ניהול
קהילה:
אסיף מאגר המחקר החקלאי
פותח על ידי קלירמאש פתרונות בע"מ -
The science, development, and commercialization of postharvest biocontrol products
Year:
2016
Source of publication :
Postharvest Biology and Technology
Authors :
דרובי, סמיר
;
.
Volume :
122
Co-Authors:
Droby, S., Dept. Postharvest Science, Institute of Postharvest and Food Sciences, ARO, The Volcani Center, P.O. Box 6, Bet Dagan, Israel
Wisniewski, M., USDA-ARS, Appalachian Fruit Research Station, Kearneysville, WV, United States
Teixidó, N., IRTA, XaRTA-Postharvest, Edifici FRUITCENTRE, Parc Científic i Tecnològic Agroalimentari de Lleida, Lleida, Catalonia, Spain
Spadaro, D., Dept. Agricultural, Forestry and Food Sciences (DISAFA) and AGROINNOVA Centre of Competence for the Innovation in the Agroenvironmental Sector, University of Torino, Largo Braccini 2, Grugliasco, TO, Italy
Jijakli, M.H., Integrated and Urban Plant Pathology Laboratory, Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech, ULg, Passage des Déportés, 2Gembloux, Belgium
Facilitators :
From page:
22
To page:
29
(
Total pages:
8
)
Abstract:
Postharvest biological control agents as a viable alternative to the use of synthetic chemicals have been the focus of considerable research for the last 30 years by many scientists and several commercial companies worldwide. Several antagonists of postharvest pathogens have been identified and tested in laboratory, semi-commercial, and commercial settings and were developed into commercial products. The discovery and development of these antagonists into a product followed a paradigm in which a single antagonist isolated from one commodity was also expected to be effective on other commodities that vary in their genetic background, physiology, postharvest handling, and susceptibility to pathogens. In most cases, product development was successfully achieved but their full commercial potential was not realized. The low success rate of postharvest biocontrol products has been attributed to several problems, including difficulties in mass production and formulation of the antagonist, the physiological status of the harvested commodity and its susceptibility to specific pathogens. All these factors played a major role in the reduced and inconsistent performance of the biocontrol product when used under commercial conditions. Although many studies have been conducted on the mode of action of postharvest microbial antagonists, our understanding is still very incomplete. In this regard, a systems approach, that takes into account all the components of the biocontrol system, may represent the best approach to investigating the network of interactions that exist. Very little is known about the overall diversity and composition of microbial communities on harvested produce and how these communities vary across produce types, their function, the factors that influence the composition of the microbiota after harvest and during storage, and the distribution of individual taxa. In light of the progress made in recent years in metagenomic technologies, this technology should be used to characterize the composition of microbial communities on fruit and vegetables. Information on the dynamics and diversity of microbiota may be useful to developing a new paradigm in postharvest biocontrol that is based on constructing synthetic microbial communities that provide superior control of pathogens. © 2016 Elsevier B.V.
Note:
Related Files :
Antagonists
biological control
biopesticide
microbiome
Postharvest
עוד תגיות
תוכן קשור
More details
DOI :
10.1016/j.postharvbio.2016.04.006
Article number:
Affiliations:
Database:
סקופוס
Publication Type:
מאמר
;
.
Language:
אנגלית
Editors' remarks:
ID:
31643
Last updated date:
02/03/2022 17:27
Creation date:
17/04/2018 01:04
Scientific Publication
The science, development, and commercialization of postharvest biocontrol products
122
Droby, S., Dept. Postharvest Science, Institute of Postharvest and Food Sciences, ARO, The Volcani Center, P.O. Box 6, Bet Dagan, Israel
Wisniewski, M., USDA-ARS, Appalachian Fruit Research Station, Kearneysville, WV, United States
Teixidó, N., IRTA, XaRTA-Postharvest, Edifici FRUITCENTRE, Parc Científic i Tecnològic Agroalimentari de Lleida, Lleida, Catalonia, Spain
Spadaro, D., Dept. Agricultural, Forestry and Food Sciences (DISAFA) and AGROINNOVA Centre of Competence for the Innovation in the Agroenvironmental Sector, University of Torino, Largo Braccini 2, Grugliasco, TO, Italy
Jijakli, M.H., Integrated and Urban Plant Pathology Laboratory, Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech, ULg, Passage des Déportés, 2Gembloux, Belgium
The science, development, and commercialization of postharvest biocontrol products
Postharvest biological control agents as a viable alternative to the use of synthetic chemicals have been the focus of considerable research for the last 30 years by many scientists and several commercial companies worldwide. Several antagonists of postharvest pathogens have been identified and tested in laboratory, semi-commercial, and commercial settings and were developed into commercial products. The discovery and development of these antagonists into a product followed a paradigm in which a single antagonist isolated from one commodity was also expected to be effective on other commodities that vary in their genetic background, physiology, postharvest handling, and susceptibility to pathogens. In most cases, product development was successfully achieved but their full commercial potential was not realized. The low success rate of postharvest biocontrol products has been attributed to several problems, including difficulties in mass production and formulation of the antagonist, the physiological status of the harvested commodity and its susceptibility to specific pathogens. All these factors played a major role in the reduced and inconsistent performance of the biocontrol product when used under commercial conditions. Although many studies have been conducted on the mode of action of postharvest microbial antagonists, our understanding is still very incomplete. In this regard, a systems approach, that takes into account all the components of the biocontrol system, may represent the best approach to investigating the network of interactions that exist. Very little is known about the overall diversity and composition of microbial communities on harvested produce and how these communities vary across produce types, their function, the factors that influence the composition of the microbiota after harvest and during storage, and the distribution of individual taxa. In light of the progress made in recent years in metagenomic technologies, this technology should be used to characterize the composition of microbial communities on fruit and vegetables. Information on the dynamics and diversity of microbiota may be useful to developing a new paradigm in postharvest biocontrol that is based on constructing synthetic microbial communities that provide superior control of pathogens. © 2016 Elsevier B.V.
Scientific Publication
You may also be interested in