In-vitro antifungal activity of bioagents, organic inputs and fungicides against Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense incting panama wilt of banana

Introduction

Banana (Musa spp.) is one of the most important tropical fruits grown globally and is a major source of food, nutrition and income. India leads global production, contributing about 27 per cent of total output, with Gujarat ranking first in productivity [1,2] . Despite its economic importance, banana cultivation faces severe threats from several diseases, among which Panama wilt, caused by Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense (Foc), is the most destructive [3,4] . The pathogen infects through roots and colonizes vascular tissues, resulting in yellowing, wilting, pseudostem splitting and plant death, leading to yield losses up to 60-90 per cent [5,6] . Historically, Foc Race 1 devastated 'Gros Michel' plantations, while the emergence of Tropical Race 4 (TR4), capable of infecting Cavendish cultivars, now poses a global biosecurity concern [7,8] . In India, both Foc R1 and TR4 have been reported from major banana-growing states, including Gujarat [9,10,11] . Conventional control practices such as soil fumigation, crop rotation and fungicide application have offered limited success against this soilborne pathogen [12,13,14] . The use of resistant cultivars provides some relief, but the emergence of virulent strains restricts their long-term utility. Therefore, eco-friendly strategies such as biological control and organic amendments are gaining significance. Several studies have demonstrated the antagonistic activity of Trichoderma spp. and Pseudomonas fluorescens, as well as the effectiveness of organic inputs and compatible fungicides, in suppressing Panama wilt [15,16,17] . Considering the increasing incidence of Panama wilt in India and the limitations of conventional management, the present study was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy of selected bioagents, organic inputs and fungicides under in-vitro conditions against Foc.

Materials and Methods

The present investigation was conducted in the Department of Plant Pathology, B. A. College of Agriculture, Anand Agricultural University, Anand, Gujarat, during the year 2024-25.

In-vitro Bio-efficacy of Bioagents

The antagonistic potential of five bioagents (Trichoderma harzianum, T. asperellum, T. viride, Bacillus subtilis and Pseudomonas fluorescens) was evaluated in-vitro against Foc using the dual culture technique [18] . Cultures of Trichoderma spp. were obtained from the Department of Plant Pathology, BACA, AAU, Anand; Pseudomonas fluorescens from the Department of Agricultural Microbiology, BACA, AAU, Anand and Bacillus subtilis from the AICRP on Biological Control Research Laboratory, BACA, AAU, Anand. The radial growth of the pathogen was recorded at 24 h intervals, and the per cent growth inhibition (PGI) was calculated using the formula of Vincent (1947) [19] ,

The experiment was conducted in a Completely Randomized Design (CRD) with six treatments and four replications.

In-vitro Bio-efficacy of Organic Inputs

Five organic inputs (Cow-urine, panchagavya, jeevamrutha, beejamrutha and vermiwash) were evaluated in-vitro against Foc using the poisoned food technique [20] . Each input was tested at two concentrations (10% and 15%), while PDA without amendments served as control. Fresh cow urine was collected from the Livestock Research Station, KU, Anand, and vermiwash from the Agronomy Farm, AAU, Anand.

Panchagavya was prepared as per NCOF guidelines [21] , while jeevamrutha and beejaimrutha were prepared following Devvrat (2020) [22] . The experiment was laid out in a CRD with 11 treatments (five inputs × two concentrations + control) and three replications. Radial growth of the pathogen was recorded, and per cent growth inhibition was calculated as described by Vincent (1947) [19] .

In-vitro Bio-efficacy of Fungicides

Nine fungicides were evaluated in-vitro against Foc using the poisoned food technique [20] . Each fungicide was tested at two concentrations (250 ppm and 500 ppm), while PDA without fungicides served as control. The experiment was laid out in CRD with 19 treatments (nine fungicides × two concentrations + control) and three replications. Radial growth of the pathogen was recorded, and per cent growth inhibition was calculated as described by Vincent (1947) [19] .

Statistical Analysis

Data for all experiments were analyzed statistically, and the critical difference (C.D.) at a 5% significance level was calculated to compare treatment means.

Results

In-vitro Bio-efficacy of Bioagents against Foc

All tested bioagents exhibited a significant inhibitory effect on the mycelial growth of Foc. Trichoderma harzianum showed the highest inhibition (70.27%), followed by T. viride (70.00%) and T. asperellum (51.94%). The bacterial antagonists Pseudomonas fluorescens and Bacillus subtilis showed 50.55 per cent and 46.91 per cent inhibition, respectively. The untreated control recorded full growth (90 mm) with no inhibition (Table 1; Fig 1).

Discussion

The study highlights the effectiveness of different strategies for managing Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense. Among bioagents, Trichoderma harzianum was most effective, which agrees with earlier reports [23,24] . The moderate efficacy of T. asperellum, P. fluorescens and B. subtilis suggests their potential in combination for broader control. Organic inputs like jeevamrutha and beejamrutha showed strong inhibition, supporting findings of [25,26] . Cow urine and panchagavya showed moderate suppression, while Vermiwash was least effective, indicating that these inputs may serve as supplementary tools. Among fungicides, carbendazim, propiconazole, tebuconazole + trifloxystrobin, and carbendazim + mancozeb recorded complete inhibition, consistent with previous studies [27,28,29] . Difenoconazole and fluopyram + tebuconazole were highly effective, while protectants like azoxystrobin showed only moderate activity. Overall, fungicides remain the most potent suppressants, but integration with bioagents and organic inputs offers a sustainable strategy for long-term management of Panama wilt.

Conclusion

The present investigation revealed significant variation in the antifungal activity of bioagents, organic inputs, and fungicides against Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense. Among bioagents, Trichoderma harzianum emerged as the most effective antagonist, while jeevamrutha and beejamrutha performed best among organic inputs at higher concentrations. Fungicides such as carbendazim, propiconazole, tebuconazole + trifloxystrobin, and carbendazim + mancozeb provided complete inhibition of Foc under in-vitro conditions, confirming their superior efficacy. However, considering sustainability, integration of effective bioagents and organic inputs along with judicious use of fungicides can offer a reliable strategy for long-term management of Panama wilt in banana cultivation.

Acknowledgement

AcknowledgmentsThe authors sincerely acknowledge the Department of Plant Pathology, Anand Agricultural University, Anand, for providing the necessary laboratory facilities and microbial cultures. We also thank the Department of Agricultural Microbiology and the Biological Control Research Laboratory, BACA, AAU, Anand, for providing bacterial cultures. We declare no conflict of interest related to this work.

References

1. Anonymous. FAOSTAT [Internet]. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; 2022.https://www.fao.org
2. Anonymous. Indiastat: Banana statistics [Internet]. New Delhi: Indiastat; 2023.https://www.indiastat.com
3. Stover RH. Fusarial wilt (Panama disease) of bananas and other Musa species. Kew (UK): Commonwealth Mycological Institute; 1962.
4. Ploetz RC. Management of Fusarium wilt of banana: a review with special reference to Tropical Race 4. Crop Prot. 2015;73:7-15.
5. Ploetz RC, Jones DR, Sebasigari K, Tushemereirwe WK. Panama disease on East African highland bananas. Fruits. 1994;49(4):253-60.
6. Bhuvanendra KH, Udaya SA, Nayaka C, Kini SR, Shetty HS, Prakash HS. Biochemical characterization of Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense isolates from India. Afr J Biotechnol. 2010;9(4):523-30.
7. Ploetz RC. Panama disease: an old nemesis rears its ugly head part 2. The Cavendish era and beyond. Plant Health Prog. 2006;7(1):36.
8. Maryani N, Lombard L, Poerba YS, Subandiyah S, Crous PW, Kema GHJ. Phylogeny and genetic diversity of the banana Fusarium wilt pathogen Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense in the Indonesian centre of origin. Stud Mycol. 2019;92(1):155-94.
9. Thangavelu R, Mostert D, Gopi M, Devi PG, Padmanaban B, Molina AB, et al. First detection of Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense tropical race 4 (TR4) on Cavendish banana in India. Eur J Plant Pathol. 2019;154:777-86.
10. Damodaran T, Mishra VK, Jha SK, Gopal R, Rajan S, Ahmed I. First report of Fusarium wilt in banana caused by Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense tropical race 4 in India. Plant Dis. 2019;103(5):1022.
11. Thangavelu R, Amaresh H, Gopi M, Loganathan M, Nithya B, Ganga Devi P, et al. Geographical distribution, host range and genetic diversity of Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense causing Fusarium wilt of banana in India. J Fungi. 2024;10(12):887.
12. Su HJ, Hwang SC, Ko WH. Fusarial wilt of Cavendish bananas in Taiwan. Plant Dis. 1986;70(9):814-8.
13. Herbert JA, Marx D. Short-term control of Panama disease of bananas in South Africa. Phytophylactica. 1990;22(3):339-41.
14. Lakshmanan P, Selvaraj P, Mohan S. Efficacy of different methods for the control of Panama disease. Trop Pest Manag. 1987;33(4):373-6.
15. Fravel D, Olivain C, Alabouvette C. Fusarium oxysporum and its biocontrol. New Phytol. 2003;157(3):493-502.
16. Weller DM, Raaijmakers JM, Gardener BBM, Thomashow LS. Microbial populations responsible for specific soil suppressiveness to plant pathogens. Annu Rev Phytopathol. 2002;40(1):309-48.
17. Thangavelu R, Gopi M, Mustaffa MM. Management of Fusarium wilt of banana using bioagents. Indian Phytopathol. 2004;57(2):202-6.
18. Dennis C, Webster J. Antagonistic properties of species groups of Trichoderma II. Production of volatile antibiotics. Trans Br Mycol Soc. 1971;57:363-9.
19. Vincent JM. Distortion of fungal hyphae in presence of certain inhibitors. Nature. 1947;159:850.
20. Nene YL, Thapliyal PN. Fungicides in plant disease control. 3rd ed. New York: International Science Publisher; 1993. p. 331.
21. Anonymous. Organic agriculture in India [Internet]. Ghaziabad: National Centre of Organic Farming (NCOF); 2017 [cited 2025 Aug 26]. Available from:https://ncof.dacnet.nic.in
22. Devvrat A. Subhash Palekar Prakrutik Krushi. Gandhinagar: Department of Agriculture, Government of Gujarat; 2020.
23. Napitupulu TF, Joko T, Subandiyah S, Sumardiyono C. Antagonistic activity of Trichoderma spp. against Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense. Biodiversitas. 2019;20(7):2002-8.
24. Shukla PK, Kumari N, Damodaran T, Ahmad I, Rajan S, Jha SK. Antagonistic potential of Trichoderma spp. against Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense TR4. Indian J Agric Sci. 2024;94(1):65-71.
25. Rani SS, Hegde YR. Effect of organic amendments on Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense inciting banana wilt. Environ Ecol. 2016;34(2):503-7.
26. Kaur G, Rana SK. Efficacy of organic inputs against Fusarium graminearum causing head scab of wheat. Plant Dis Res. 2022;37(1):70-4.
27. Somu R, Naik MK, Patil PV. In-vitro evaluation of fungicides and bioagents against Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense. Plant Arch. 2014;14(1):401-4.
28. Nayak AK. Evaluation of fungicides against Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense inciting banana wilt. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci. 2017;6(10):3339-45.
29. Niwas R, Yadav R, Meena R. Evaluation of fungicides and bioagents against Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense under in-vitro conditions. J Pharmacogn Phytochem. 2020;9(5):156-60.