ArticleBMC plant biology2026
Controlling root rot and wilt diseases in faba bean (Vicia faba) using bio-filtrates and bio-stimulant substances.
Article in BMC plant biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe effectiveness of certain bio-culture filtrates (Bacillus subtilis, Bacillus megaterium, Pseudomonas fluorescens, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Trichoderma harzianum and Trichoderma viride) and some bio-stimulant substances (humic acid and chitosan) against Rhizoctonia solani (responsible for root rot) and Fusarium oxysporum (responsible for wilt in faba bean) was evaluated under laboratory and greenhouse conditions. Ten isolates of both R. solani and F. oxysporum were tested.
resultsBoth tested pathogens caused harmful effects on the faba bean root structure, and the scanning with an electron microscope showed some hyphal growth. In vitro, all tested bio-filtrates and bio-stimulant substances inhibited the linear growth of both pathogens. Trichoderma filtrates led to the highest reduction, followed by humic acid. In the greenhouse, the lowest values of all disease assessments occurred under Trichoderma culture filtrate followed by Pseudomonas and Bacillus. Trichoderma filtrates were the most effective on catalase, peroxidase, and polyphenol oxidase, while the highest chitinase activity occurred under chitosan treatment. Except for the current plus 50% wp fungicide, all treatments increased chlorophyll a, b, and consequently, total chlorophyll, and humic acid were more effective. Moreover, bacterial culture filtrates were the most effective in increasing carotenoids content; Bacillus ones gave the highest values then Pseudomonas without significant differences between them. Moreover, there is a positive correlation coefficient between the plant resistance (healthy surviving plants) and the antioxidant enzyme activities.
conclusionThe use of Trichoderma vs. Bacillus as bio-culture filtrates or chitosan vs. humic acid as bio-stimulant substances surpassed, in general, the results of most parameters with foliar treatment by current plus 50% wp. The treatment with such materials could be considered as fungicide alternatives favoring Trichoderma or chitosan for controlling root-rot and wilt diseases and enhancing physiological activities in faba beans.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.