Comparative Evaluation of Two Commercial Propolis Extracts as Plant  Defense Activator and Antimicrobial Agent Against Pseudomonas  syringae pv. tomato (Pst) strain DC3000

Melda ATEŞ; Nazlı ÖZKURT; Yasemin BEKTAŞ

doi:https://doi.org/10.19159/tutad.890935

Makale detayları

Comparative Evaluation of Two Commercial Propolis Extracts as Plant Defense Activator and Antimicrobial Agent Against Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato (Pst) strain DC3000

Yazarlar:

Melda ATEŞ | Nazlı ÖZKURT | Yasemin BEKTAŞ

Yayıncı:

Siirt University

Dergi:

Turkish Journal of Agricultural Research 2021 Vol.8 Issue 2, pp.213-219

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

6/2021

Belge Dili:

İngilizce

Document ID (Org No.):

2000715039

Sıklık:

Üç Yıllık

eISSN:

2528-858X

pISSN:

2148-2306

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.19159/tutad.890935

Özet:

 

Propolis is a natural bee product that protects the beehives from internal and external factors. It is a natural-complex compound with a wide potential use as an antimicrobial, anti-fungal, and anti-inflammatory effect. The role of propolis as a plant protection agent and an alternative to pesticides is an unexplored area. Here, two different commercially available propolis extracts were evaluated for antibacterial effects on Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato (Pst) strain DC3000. Also, the activities of defense response genes WRKY70 and CaBP22 in Arabidopsis thaliana under propolis application were compared. According to the results, each propolis extract and dose had a different effect on gene expressions as well as antibacterial activity. One of the commercial brands had a significant effect at all doses while another brand’s propolis extract had its activity at only 1% concentration. Propolis reduced bacterial growth up to 93% with a 2% concentration. For the first time, propolis is also evaluated for its capacity as a plant defense activator agent and it induced WRKY70 and CaBP22 gene expression. The differences in gene expression and bacterial growth inhibition levels suggest the importance of the origins of propolis, such as plant species and regions it collected. While preliminary in nature, these results suggest a significant potential of propolis in plant protection in commercial and organic agriculture.

 

Propolis is a natural bee product that protects the beehives from internal and external factors. It is a natural-complex compound with a wide potential use as an antimicrobial, anti-fungal, and anti-inflammatory effect. The role of propolis as a plant protection agent and an alternative to pesticides is an unexplored area. Here, two different commercially available propolis extracts were evaluated for antibacterial effects on Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato (Pst) strain DC3000. Also, the activities of defense response genes WRKY70 and CaBP22 in Arabidopsis thaliana under propolis application were compared. According to the results, each propolis extract and dose had a different effect on gene expressions as well as antibacterial activity. One of the commercial brands had a significant effect at all doses while another brand’s propolis extract had its activity at only 1% concentration. Propolis reduced bacterial growth up to 93% with a 2% concentration. For the first time, propolis is also evaluated for its capacity as a plant defense activator agent and it induced WRKY70 and CaBP22 gene expression. The differences in gene expression and bacterial growth inhibition levels suggest the importance of the origins of propolis, such as plant species and regions it collected. While preliminary in nature, these results suggest a significant potential of propolis in plant protection in commercial and organic agriculture.

Makale detayları

Comparative Evaluation of Two Commercial Propolis Extracts as Plant Defense Activator and Antimicrobial Agent Against Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato (Pst) strain DC3000

Yazarlar: Melda ATEŞ | Nazlı ÖZKURT | Yasemin BEKTAŞ

Yayıncı: Siirt University

Dergi: Turkish Journal of Agricultural Research 2021 Vol.8 Issue 2, pp.213-219

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 6/2021

Belge Dili: İngilizce

Document ID (Org No.): 2000715039

Sıklık: Üç Yıllık

eISSN: 2528-858X

pISSN: 2148-2306

DOI: https://doi.org/10.19159/tutad.890935

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Melda ATEŞ | Nazlı ÖZKURT | Yasemin BEKTAŞ

Yayıncı:

Siirt University

Dergi:

Turkish Journal of Agricultural Research 2021 Vol.8 Issue 2, pp.213-219

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

6/2021

Belge Dili:

İngilizce

Document ID (Org No.):

2000715039

Sıklık:

Üç Yıllık

eISSN:

2528-858X

pISSN:

2148-2306

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.19159/tutad.890935