Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Research Articles

Vol. 12 No. 3 (2025)

Resistance sources of rice cultivars against Pantoea blight: A new threat to rice cultivation in India

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.7153
Submitted
10 January 2025
Published
26-07-2025

Abstract

The climatic variation in recent times has added a new problem to the rice crop, where leaves and panicles are blighted and the grains remain unfilled. The Pantoea genus is linked to a novel rice disease that induces leaf and panicle blight, adversely affecting rice output and quality. Pantoea dispersa is a Gram-negative bacterium recognized for its extensive environmental adaptation and potential as a plant pathogen and an opportunistic human disease. This study aimed to identify the bacterial pathogen by the 16S rDNA gene, the growth requirement of the bacteria and the resistant cultivar source against the panicle blight disease of rice. The bacterial pathogen was isolated from the Bargarh district of Odisha, India and the isolate was named ODBP1 and identified based on morphological and biochemical characterization. The isolate was amplified in molecular Identification using the universal primer pair 27F and 1492R. Optimization of growth parameters for Pantoea dispersa strain ODBP1 was conducted on M9 minimal medium with various carbon and nitrogen sources added and maintained at different pH and storage conditions. Screening of rice varieties for resistance against Pantoea dispersa, causing panicle blight disease, was scored in 65 paddy cultivars with different durations. None of the varieties showed an immune reaction to Pantoea Blight; only resistant, moderately resistant, moderately susceptible, susceptible and highly susceptible disease reactions were recorded. The yield attributes of highly susceptible late maturing varieties were observed, with disease and disease incidence percentages of 88.72 % and 87.77 %, respectively. By investigating the specific growth requirements of P. dispersa and evaluating the resistance profiles of different rice cultivars, this study aims to bridge gaps in understanding pathogen behaviour and plant defence, contributing to effective integrated disease management strategies that support crop productivity and agricultural resilience.

References

  1. 1. Guha S. Pocket Book of Agricultural Statistics. Directorate of Economics & Statistics New Delhi: Government of India Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, Department of Agriculture, Cooperation & Farmers Welfare; 2021. https://foodprocessingindia.gov.in/uploads/publication/Agricultural‐statistics‐at‐a‐Glance‐2020.pdf
  2. 2. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.India at a Glance, [internet]. 2024 [cited 2025 Feb 25]. Available from:https://www.fao.org/india/fao‐in‐india/ india‐at‐a‐glance/en/
  3. 3. Lv L, Luo J, Ahmed T, Zaki HE, Tian Y, Shahid MS, et al. Beneficial effect and potential risk of Pantoea on Rice Production. Plants 2022;11:2608. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11192608
  4. 4. Doni F, Ishak MN, Suhaimi NS, Syaputri Y, Han L, Mohamed Z, et al. Leaf blight disease of rice caused by Pantoea: profile of an increasingly damaging disease in rice. Tropical Plant Pathol. 2023;48(1):1–0. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40858–022–00540–x
  5. 5. González AD, Franco MA, Contreras N, Galindo–Castro I, Jayaro Y, Graterol E. First report of Pantoea agglomerans causing rice leaf blight in Venezuela. Plant Dis. 2015;99(4):552. https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS–07–14–0736–PDN
  6. 6. Toh WK, Loh PC, Wong HL. First report of leaf blight of rice caused by Pantoea ananatis and Pantoea dispersa in Malaysia. Plant Disease. 2019;103(7):1764. https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS–12–18–2299–PDN
  7. 7. Azizi MM, Ismail SI, Ina–Salwany MY, Hata EM, Zulperi D. The emergence of Pantoea species as a future threat to global rice production. J Plant Protect Res. 2020:327–35. https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/full/10.5555/20210129246
  8. 8. Doni F, Suhaimi NS, Irawan B, Mohamed Z, Mispan MS. Associations of Pantoea with rice plants: as friends or foes?. Agriculture. 2021;11(12):1278. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11121278
  9. 9. Cother, E J, Noble, D H, Herrington, M E. Pantoea spp. associated with brown rot of rice seedlings in New South Wales. Australes Plant Pathol. 2004;33(4), 559–60. https://www.proquest.com/openview/6fcd4de8155c51e78ace64fff0ef0645/1?pq origsite=gscholar&cbl=2026366&diss=y
  10. 10. Toh WK, Loh PC, Wong HL. First report of leaf blight of rice caused by Pantoea ananatis and Pantoea dispersa in Malaysia. Plant Dis. 2019;103(7):1764 https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS–12–18–2299–PDN
  11. 11. Coutinho TA, Venter SN. Pantoea ananatis: an unconventional plant pathogen. Mol Plant Pathol. 2009;10(3):325–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1364–3703.2009.00542.x
  12. 12. Banu S, Khan AA, Kader MA, Hossain MM, Rahman MM. First report of Pantoea dispersa causing grain rot disease of rice in Bangladesh. New Dis Rep. 2024;49(1):e12255. https://doi.org/10.1002/ndr2.12255
  13. 13. Selvakumar G, Kundu S, Joshi P, Nazim S, Gupta AD, Mishra PK, et al. Characterization of a cold–tolerant plant growth–promoting bacterium Pantoea dispersa 1A, isolated from a sub–alpine soil in the North Western Indian Himalayas. World J Microbiol Biotech. 2008;24:955–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11274–007–9558–5
  14. 14. Jena B, Senapati AK, Kumar S, Panda AG, Boblina B, Barik OP. First report of Pantoea dispersa causing leaf, panicle and grain blight in India. New Dis Rep. 20231;47(2):e12190. https://doi.org/10.1002/ndr2.12190
  15. 15. Azizi MM, Ismail SI, Ina–Salwany MY, Hata EM, Zulperi D. The emergence of Pantoea species as a future threat to global rice production. J Pl Protect Res. 2020;327–35.
  16. 16. Jiang L, Jeong JC, Lee JS, Park JM, Yang JW, Lee MH, et al. Potential of Pantoea dispersa as an effective biocontrol agent for black rot in sweet potato. Sci Rep. 2019. 9(1). p.16354. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598–019–52804–3
  17. 17. Feng Y, Shen D, Song W. Rice endophyte Pantoea agglomerans YS19 promotes host plant growth and affects allocations of host photosynthates. J App Microbiol. 2019;100(5): 938–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365–2672.2006.02843.x
  18. 18. Narayanasamy P. Plant Pathogen Detection and Disease Diagnosis. Routledge; 2001. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781482270952
  19. 19. Weller‐Stuart T, De Maayer P, Coutinho T. Pantoea ananatis: genomic insights into a versatile pathogen. Molecular Pl Patho.2017;18(9):1191–98.https://doi.org/10.1111/mpp.12517
  20. 20. Coutinho TA, Venter SN. Pantoea ananatis: an unconventional plant pathogen. Mol Plant Pathol. 2009;10(3):325–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1364–3703.2009.00542.x
  21. 21. Kini K, Agnimonhan R, Dossa R, Silué D, Koebnik R. Genomics–informed multiplex PCR scheme for rapid Identification of rice–associated bacteria of the genus Pantoea. Plant Dis. 2021;105(9):2389–94. https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS–07–20–1474–RE
  22. 22. Shivappa R, Navadagi DB, Baite MS, Yadav MK, Rathinam PS, Umapathy K, et al. Emerging Minor diseases of rice in India: Losses and management strategies. Int Adv Rice Res. 2021:1–22. https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/79212
  23. 23. Montero M, Rahimpour M, Viale AM, Almagro G, Eydallin G, Sevilla A, et al. Systematic production of inactivating and non–inactivating suppressor mutations at the relA locus that compensate for the detrimental effects of complete spot loss and affect glycogen content in Escherichia coli. PloS One. 2014;9(9):e106938.https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0106938
  24. 24. Kini K, Agnimonhan R, Wonni I, Silue D. An efficient inoculation technique to assess the pathogenicity of Pantoea species associated with bacterial blight of rice. Bio–protocol. 2020;10(17):e3740. http://doi:10.21769/BioProtoc.3740
  25. 25. Madigan MT, Martinko JM, Parker J. Brock biology of microorganisms. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1997.
  26. 26. Catara V, Bella P. Bacterial diseases. In: Maria LG, Ramon A, Philippe CN, editors. Integrated pest and disease management in greenhouse crops. Springer; 2020. p. 33–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/978–3–030–22304–5_2
  27. 27. Meidute S, Demoling F, Bååth E. Antagonistic and synergistic effects of fungal and bacterial growth in soil after adding different carbon and nitrogen sources. Soil Biol Biochem. 2008;40(9):2334–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2008.05.011
  28. 28. Yang WT, Yi YJ, Xia B. Unveiling the duality of Pantoea dispersa: a mini review. Sci Tot Environ. 2023;873:162320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.162320
  29. 29. Brock TD, Madigan MT, Martinko JM, Parker J. Biology of microorganisms, 7th ed. Upper Saddle River, Prentice Hall, New Jersey. 1994; 648:650.
  30. 30. Lahtinen S, Ouwehand AC, Salminen S, von Wright A, editors. Lactic acid bacteria: microbiological and functional aspects. CRC Press; 2011. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780824752033
  31. 31. Kosgey ZC. Sources of FHB resistance, genetics and mapping of stem rust resistance in Kenyan and Ethiopian spring wheat germplasm. Doctoral [dissertation[ University of Minnesota; 2009. https://www.proquest.com/openview/6b19e0e13832a48c504ff2bf74b48b8b/1?pq–origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
  32. 32. Davis KE, Joseph SJ, Janssen PH. Effects of growth medium, inoculum size and incubation time on culturability and isolation of soil bacteria. App Environ Microbiol. 2005;71(2):826–34. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.71.2.826–834.2005
  33. 33. Costa SG, Déziel E, Lépine F. Characterization of rhamnolipid production by Burkholderia glumae. Lett Appl Microbiol. 2011;53(6):620–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472–765X.2011.03154.x
  34. 34. Adamberg K, Kask S, Laht TM, Paalme T . The effect of temperature and pH on the growth of lactic acid bacteria: a pH–auxostat study. Int J Food Microbiol. 2003. 85(1–2):171–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168–1605(02)00537–8
  35. 35. Ngalimat MS, Mohd Hata E, Zulperi D, Ismail SI, Ismail MR, Mohd Zainudin NA, et al. A laudable strategy to manage bacterial panicle blight disease of rice using biocontrol agents. J Basic Microbiol. 2023;63(11):1180–95. https://doi.org/10.1002/jobm.202300182
  36. 36. Quibod IL, Atieza–Grande G, Oreiro EG, Palmos D, Nguyen MH, Coronejo ST, et al. The Green Revolution shaped the population structure of the rice pathogen Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae. ISME J. 2020;14(2):492–505. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41396–019–0545–2
  37. 37. Meena M, Swapnil P, Divyanshu K, Kumar S, Harish, Tripathi YN, et al. PGPR‐mediated induction of systemic resistance and physiochemical alterations in plants against the pathogens: Current perspectives. J Basic Microbiol. 2020; 60(10):828–61. https://doi.org/10.1002/jobm.202000370
  38. 38. Dong Q, Chang X. Research progress on the impact of climate change on maize in China. Adv Resource Res. 2023;3(3):65–82. https://doi.org/10.50908/arr.3.3_65
  39. 39. Mizobuchi R, Fukuoka S, Tsuiki C, Tsushima S, Sato H. Evaluation of major rice cultivars for resistance to bacterial seedling rot caused by Burkholderia glumae and Identification of Japanese standard cultivars for resistance assessments. Breeding Sci. 2020;70(2):221 https://doi.org/10.1270/jsbbs.19117

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.