<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article
  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.1 20151215//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.1/JATS-journalpublishing1.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.1" specific-use="sps-1.9" xml:lang="es" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
	<front>
		<journal-meta>
			<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">rmfi</journal-id>
			<journal-title-group>
				<journal-title>Revista mexicana de fitopatología</journal-title>
				<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">Rev. mex. fitopatol</abbrev-journal-title>
			</journal-title-group>
			<issn pub-type="ppub">0185-3309</issn>
			<issn pub-type="epub">2007-8080</issn>
			<publisher>
				<publisher-name>Sociedad Mexicana de Fitopatología A.C.</publisher-name>
			</publisher>
		</journal-meta>
		<article-meta>
			<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.18781/R.MEX.FIT.2405-12</article-id>
			<article-id pub-id-type="other">00005</article-id>
			<article-categories>
				<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
					<subject>Artículo Científico</subject>
				</subj-group>
			</article-categories>
			<title-group>
				<article-title>Sensibilidad <italic>in vitro</italic> de <italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic> y cuatro especies de <italic>Trichoderma</italic>, a fungicidas de uso común en el cultivo de papa (<italic>Solanum tuberosum</italic>)</article-title>
			</title-group>
			<contrib-group>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Herrera-Rodríguez</surname>
						<given-names>Gabriel</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Lugo-García</surname>
						<given-names>Gabriel Antonio</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Irazoqui-Acosta</surname>
						<given-names>María Belén</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Lara- Flores</surname>
						<given-names>José de Jesús</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Armenta-López</surname>
						<given-names>Sara Elodia</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Félix-Gastélum</surname>
						<given-names>Rubén</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref>
					<xref ref-type="corresp" rid="c1">*</xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Beltrán-Peña</surname>
						<given-names>Hugo</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Mora- Romero</surname>
						<given-names>Guadalupe Arlene</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
			</contrib-group>
			<aff id="aff1">
				<label>1</label>
				<institution content-type="original">Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa, Colegio de Ciencias Agropecuarias, Facultad de Agricultura del Valle del Fuerte, Calle 16 S/N Esquina Japaraqui, Juan José Ríos, El Estero, Sinaloa, México. C. P. 81110. </institution>
				<institution content-type="normalized">Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa</institution>
				<institution content-type="orgname">Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa</institution>
				<addr-line>
					<city>El Estero</city>
					<state>Sinaloa</state>
					<postal-code>81110</postal-code>
				</addr-line>
				<country country="MX">Mexico</country>
			</aff>
			<aff id="aff2">
				<label>2</label>
				<institution content-type="original">Junta Local de Sanidad Vegetal del Valle del Fuerte; Lázaro Cárdenas, 315 Pte. Col. Centro, Los Mochis Sinaloa, México C. P. 81200. </institution>
				<institution content-type="normalized">Junta Local de Sanidad Vegetal del Valle del Fuerte</institution>
				<institution content-type="orgname">Junta Local de Sanidad Vegetal del Valle del Fuerte</institution>
				<addr-line>
					<city>Los Mochis</city>
					<state>Sinaloa</state>
					<postal-code>81200</postal-code>
				</addr-line>
				<country country="MX">Mexico</country>
			</aff>
			<aff id="aff3">
				<label>3</label>
				<institution content-type="original">Universidad Autónoma de Occidente, Unidad Los Mochis, Departamento de Ciencias Naturales y Exactas, Boulevard Macario Gaxiola y Carretera Internacional S/N Los Mochis, Sinaloa, México. C. P. 81223.</institution>
				<institution content-type="normalized">Universidad Autónoma de Occidente</institution>
				<institution content-type="orgname">Universidad Autónoma de Occidente</institution>
				<addr-line>
					<city>Los Mochis</city>
					<state>Sinaloa</state>
					<postal-code>81223</postal-code>
				</addr-line>
				<country country="MX">Mexico</country>
			</aff>
			<author-notes>
				<corresp id="c1">
					<label><italic>*</italic></label><bold>
 <italic>Autor de Correspondencia:</italic> 
</bold> Rubén Félix-Gastélum <email>ruben.felix@uadeo.mx</email>
				</corresp>
			</author-notes>
			<pub-date date-type="pub" publication-format="electronic">
				<day>21</day>
				<month>05</month>
				<year>2025</year>
			</pub-date>
			<pub-date date-type="collection" publication-format="electronic">
				<season>May-Aug</season>
				<year>2025</year>
			</pub-date>
			<volume>43</volume>
			<issue>2</issue>
			<elocation-id>RMEXFIT240512</elocation-id>
			<history>
				<date date-type="received">
					<day>30</day>
					<month>05</month>
					<year>2024</year>
				</date>
				<date date-type="accepted">
					<day>27</day>
					<month>03</month>
					<year>2025</year>
				</date>
			</history>
			<permissions>
				<license license-type="open-access" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/" xml:lang="es">
					<license-p>Este es un artículo publicado en acceso abierto bajo una licencia Creative Commons</license-p>
				</license>
			</permissions>
			<abstract>
				<title>RESUMEN</title>
				<p> </p>
				<sec>
					<title>Antecedentes/Objetivo. </title>
					<p>La pudrición blanda de tubérculos de papa, causada por <italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic>, es una enfermedad que se presenta en suelos con altos niveles de humedad y temperaturas superiores a los 30 °C. Para su control se usan principalmente fungicidas sintéticos. Los objetivos del presente trabajo fueron determinar la efectividad biológica de fungicidas sintéticos a diferentes concentraciones contra el hongo y la sensibilidad de cuatro especies de <italic>Trichoderma</italic> a fungicidas de uso común en papa en Sinaloa.</p>
					<p> </p>
				</sec>
				<sec>
					<title>Materiales y Métodos. </title>
					<p>Se determinó la efectividad biológica <italic>in vitro</italic> de nueve fungicidas a las concentraciones de 0.01, 0.1, 1, 10 y 100 ppm contra el crecimiento micelial y formación de esclerocios de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic>; además, se determinó la sensibilidad <italic>in vitro</italic> de <italic>Trichoderma afroharzianum, T. asperelloides</italic>, <italic>T. asperellum</italic> y <italic>T. azevedoi</italic> a 10 fungicidas en las concentraciones de 100, 500, 1000 y 2000 ppm. Los experimentos se repitieron dos veces. Los tratamientos se distribuyeron en un arreglo completamente al azar cuyos datos se sometieron a ANOVA. La comparación de medias fue mediante la prueba de Tukey (p&lt;0.05).</p>
					<p> </p>
				</sec>
				<sec>
					<title>Resultados. </title>
					<p>Tifluzamida y Propineb a la concentración de 0.01 ppm inhibieron el crecimiento micelial de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> en 32.7 y 12.2 %, en forma respectiva. Por otro lado, <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> produjo de 157, 164 y 164 esclerocios por caja de Petri en PDA adicionado con los fungicidas Tifluzamida, Propineb y procloraz, respectivamente a la misma concentración. En cambio, Propineb a la concentración de 100 ppm inhibió el crecimiento micelial de <italic>T. azevedoi, T. afroharzianum, T. asperellum</italic> y <italic>T. asperelloides</italic> de 0, 0, 0 y 54.9 %, en forma respectiva; mientras que la inhibición de crecimiento micelial por Tifluzamida a la misma concentración en <italic>T. azevedoi, T. afroharzianum, T. asperellum</italic> y <italic>T. asperelloides</italic> varió de 0 a 63 %. Los resultados indican que las cuatro especies de <italic>Trichoderma</italic> son compatibles a ambos fungicidas.</p>
					<p> </p>
				</sec>
				<sec>
					<title>Conclusión. </title>
					<p>El efecto de Tifluzamida y Propineb en la inhibición del crecimiento micelial y la formación de esclerocios de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic>, así como la compatibilidad con las cuatro especies de <italic>Trichoderma</italic> con estos fungicidas, indica que la mezcla de <italic>Trichoderma</italic> spp. + los fungicidas, muestra un uso potencial para el control de la pudrición blanda del tubérculo de papa en campo.</p>
				</sec>
			</abstract>
			<kwd-group xml:lang="es">
				<title>Palabras clave:</title>
				<kwd>Producción</kwd>
				<kwd>Calidad</kwd>
				<kwd>Esclerocios</kwd>
				<kwd>Manejo</kwd>
			</kwd-group>
			<counts>
				<fig-count count="2"/>
				<table-count count="14"/>
				<equation-count count="0"/>
				<ref-count count="31"/>
				<page-count count="0"/>
			</counts>
		</article-meta>
	</front>
	<body>
		<sec sec-type="intro">
			<title>Introducción</title>
			<p>El cultivo de papa (<italic>Solanum tuberosum</italic>) ocupa el sexto lugar en producción mundial con 470,409,159 t, obtenidas de 23,514,508 h; los principales países productores de esta hortaliza son China, India, Ucrania, Rusia y Estados Unidos (FAO, 2023); México ocupa el lugar 35 con una producción anual de 1,986,198 t, donde los principales estados productores son Sonora con 612,600 t y Sinaloa con 427,587 t anuales, lo que representa el 52.4 % de la producción nacional, con un valor de producción de 17,426,448,000 (SIAP, 2023). El cultivo es afectado por enfermedades que limitan su producción y calidad (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">Torrance y Talianksy, 2020</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">Singh <italic>et al</italic>., 2021</xref>). Destaca por su importancia la pudrición blanda causada por <italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic> el cual afecta alrededor de 500 especies vegetales, que se agrupan en 100 familias diferentes, destacando al tomate (<italic>Solanum lycopersicum</italic>), pepino (<italic>Cucumis sativus</italic>), cacahuate (<italic>Arachis hypogaea</italic>), papa, entre otros (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">Kator <italic>et al</italic>., 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">Roca <italic>et al</italic>., 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Kumar <italic>et al</italic>., 2018</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">Paparu <italic>et al</italic>., 2020</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Meena <italic>et al</italic>., 2023</xref>). En papa, la pudrición blanda de tubérculos afecta la producción en un 20 %. El hongo presenta hábitos saprofíticos y en el suelo coloniza residuos de cosecha o puede sobrevivir en forma de esclerocios, los cuales se dispersan por medio del agua, maquinaria, residuos vegetales, suelo y animales (Kator <italic>et al</italic>., 2015; Roca <italic>et al</italic>., 2016).</p>
			<p>El manejo tradicional de la pudrición blanda de tubérculos mediante fungicidas sintéticos contamina el medio ambiente y afectan a los seres vivos (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">Widmer, 2019</xref>), y su uso continuo genera resistencia en los fitopatógenos, lo que conduce al incremento de concentraciones para su control (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Ferreira <italic>et al</italic>., 2020</xref>).</p>
			<p>En años recientes, han surgido avances relativos a la utilización de estrategias amigables con el ambiente para el manejo de enfermedades en diversos cultivos, donde sobresale el uso de hongos como de agentes de control biológico (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">Rubayet y Bhuiyan 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B30">Yassin <italic>et al</italic>., 2021</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">Kim <italic>et al</italic>., 2023</xref>)</p>
			<p>Los hongos del género <italic>Trichoderma</italic> son los agentes biológicos más estudiados y usados, debido a los buenos resultados en el control de enfermedades fungosas; esto se debe a la diversidad de mecanismos de acción que poseen (competencia por espacio y nutrientes, micoparasitismo y antibiosis); además, este tipo de hongo antagonista produce metabolitos secundarios que promueven el crecimiento vegetal y activan los mecanismos de defensa de las plantas, e incrementan la producción y calidad de las cosechas (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">Yao <italic>et al</italic>., 2023</xref>). Los tratamientos con este hongo se direccionan a la semilla, plántulas, agua de riego y follaje; por otro lado, existen estudios donde se ha comprobado la compatibilidad de <italic>Trichoderma</italic> con fungicidas sintéticos comerciales, para su uso en mezclas en elcontrol de enfermedades fungosas en diversos cultivos (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">Gonzalez <italic>et al</italic>., 2020</xref>; Manandhar</p>
			<p><italic>et al</italic>., 2020; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">Arain <italic>et al</italic>., 2022</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Dinkwar <italic>et al</italic>., 2023</xref>).</p>
			<p>En México no existen estudios sobre la compatibilidad de especies de <italic>Trichoderma</italic> en mezclas con fungicidas sobre todo dirigidos al control de la pudrición blanda de los tubérculos de papa. Por ello, en el presente trabajo el objetivo fue determinar la efectividad biológica <italic>in vitro</italic> de diferentes concentraciones de fungicidas sintéticos en la inhibición del crecimiento micelial y formación de esclerocios de <italic>S. rolfsii;</italic> así como el efecto <italic>in vitro</italic> de los fungicidas sobre el crecimiento micelial de <italic>Trichoderma afroharzianum, T. asperelloides, T. asperellum</italic> y <italic>T. azevedoi.</italic></p>
		</sec>
		<sec sec-type="materials|methods">
			<title>Materiales y Métodos</title>
			<p>Obtención de aislados. Se utilizaron aislados de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> (Scr4) y de <italic>Trichoderma afroharzianum</italic> (TES24)<italic>, T. asperelloides</italic> (TAM74), <italic>T. asperellum</italic> (TAF75) y <italic>T. azevedoi</italic> (TAI73)<italic>,</italic> proporcionados por el banco microbiológico del Laboratorio de Diagnóstico Fitosanitario de la Junta Local de Sanidad Vegetal del Valle del Fuerte. Los aislados se obtuvieron de suelo de parcelas comerciales donde se sembró papa en ciclos agrícolas previos en los municipios de Ahome, Sinaloa y Caborca, Sonora, México en 2019, 2020 y 2021 (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t1">Cuadro 1</xref>).</p>
			<p>
				<table-wrap id="t1">
					<label>Cuadro 1</label>
					<caption>
						<title>Especies y aislados de <italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic> y <italic>Trichoderma</italic>, sitio y año de colecta y código en el Gen Bank.</title>
					</caption>
					<table cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0">
						<thead>
							<tr>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Especie/aislado</th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Localidad</th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Año de colecta</th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Código en Gen Bank</th>
							</tr>
						</thead>
						<tbody>
							<tr>
								<td>Sclerotium rolfsii /Scr4</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">Ahome, Sinaloa/ 25.701944 -109.043333</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">2019</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">OR514113</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td>T. asperelloides /TES24</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">Caborca, Sonora/31.06666 -112.338333</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">2020</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">OR521164</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td>T. azevedoi /TAI73</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">Ahome, Sinaloa/25.818885 -108.956014</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">2021</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">OR521181</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td>T. afroharzianum/TAF75</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">Ahome, Sinaloa/25.491445 -108.571659</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">2021</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">OR521183</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td>T. asperellum/TAM74</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">Ahome, Sinaloa/ 25.491445 -108.571659</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">2021</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">OR521182</td>
							</tr>
						</tbody>
					</table>
				</table-wrap>
			</p>
			<p><bold>Sensibilidad <italic>in vitro</italic> de <italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic> a nueve fungicidas sintéticos.</bold> En este estudio se evaluó la sensibilidad <italic>in vitro</italic> de un aislado de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> (Scr4) a los siguientes fungicidas: Tifluzamida (Summit Agro México), Tiabendazol (Arysta LifeScience México), Mancozeb (Arysta LifeScience México), Propineb (Bayer Crop Science), Procloraz (Adama, México), Propiconazol (Syngenta Agro), Tolclofos-metil (Valent), Carboxin+Captan (Arysta LifeScience) y Tiofanato de metilo (Arysta LifeScience), contra el crecimiento micelial de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> (Scr4).</p>
			<p>Las pruebas se realizaron mediante la técnica de alimento envenenado (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Dinkwar <italic>et al</italic>., 2023</xref>), en cajas Petri de 90 mm de diámetro, con 20 mL del medio de cultivo Papa Dextrosa Agar (PDA) adicionado con las sustancias de pruebas a las concentraciones: 0.01, 0.1, 1.0, 10 y 100 ppm. Se utilizaron discos de PDA de 5 mm de diámetro con crecimiento micelial activo de tres días de edad de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> y se transfirieron al centro de la caja Petri. Los tratamientos se distribuyeron en un diseño completamente al azar con arreglo factorial 9x5, con cinco repeticiones, donde el primer factor del arreglo fue cada uno de los nueve fungicidas y el segundo factor correspondió a las cinco concentraciones<italic>.</italic> Las cajas se sellaron con papel parafilm y se incubaron a 25 ±2 °C. El tratamiento testigo consistió en cinco cajas Petri con PDA y micelio del hongo sin fungicida.</p>
			<p>La efectividad biológica de los fungicidas sobre el crecimiento micelial de <italic>S. rolfsii,</italic> se determinó mediante la medición de su crecimiento radial cada 24 h, después de la siembra y culminó cuando <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> llenó las cajas Petri sin fungicida.</p>
			<p>El porcentaje de inhibición del crecimiento micelial de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> se calculó de acuerdo con la siguiente ecuación: I= C-T/C X 100, donde: I=Porcentaje de inhibición, C=Crecimiento del patógeno testigo, T=Crecimiento del patógeno en tratamiento (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">Vincent, 1947</xref>). El experimento se repitió en dos ocasiones.</p>
			<p>Efecto de fungicidas sintéticos sobre la formación de esclerocios de <italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic>. Discos de PDA de 5 mm de diámetro con crecimiento micelial activo de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> se transfirieron a cajas Petri de PDA que contenían fungicidas en las mismas concentraciones descritas en la sección anterior. El diseño de los tratamientos fue completamente al azar con arreglo factorial 9x5, con cinco repeticiones, donde el primer factor del arreglo fue cada uno de los nueve fungicidas y el segundo factor correspondió a las cinco concentraciones. El tratamiento testigo consistió en cinco cajas Petri con PDA con crecimiento micelial de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> sin fungicida. El número de esclerocios se determinó a los 21 días después de la siembra. El experimento se desarrolló en dos ocasiones.</p>
			<p>Sensibilidad <italic>in vitro</italic> de especies de <italic>Trichoderma</italic> a 10 fungicidas sintéticos. En este estudio se evaluó la sensibilidad <italic>in vitro</italic> de <italic>T</italic>. <italic>afroharzianum</italic>, <italic>T. asperelloides</italic>, <italic>T. asperellum</italic> y <italic>T. azevedoi</italic> a los fungicidas: 1) Tifluzamida (Summi Agro México), 2) Tiabendazol (Arysta LifeScience México), 3) Mancozeb (Arysta LifeScience México), 4) Propineb (Bayer Crop Science), 5) Procloraz (Adama, México), 6) Propiconazol (Syngenta Agro), 7) Carboxin+Captan (Arysta LifeScience México), 8) Tiofanato de metilo (Arysta LifeScience), 9) Fluazinam (Syngenta Agro) y 10) TCMTB (Summit Agro México)<italic>.</italic></p>
			<p>El ensayo se realizó con base en la técnica descrita por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Dinkwar <italic>et al</italic>. (2023</xref>), para lo cual se utilizaron cajas Petri de 90 mm de diámetro, con 20 mL de PDA conteniendo las sustancias de pruebas a las concentraciones: 100, 500, 1000 y 2000 ppm. Como inóculo, se utilizaron discos de PDA de 5 mm de diámetro con crecimiento micelial activo de cada especie de <italic>Trichoderma</italic>, los cuales se colocaron en el centro de la caja Petri. Los tratamientos se distribuyeron en un diseño experimental completamente al azar con arreglo factorial 4x10x4, con cuatro repeticiones, donde el primer factor del arreglo corresponde a cada una de las especies de <italic>Trichoderma</italic>, el segundo a los 10 fungicidas y el tercero a las cuatro concentraciones de fungicidas<italic>.</italic> Las cajas se sellaron con papel parafilm y se incubaron a 25±2 °C. El tratamiento testigo consistió en cuatro cajas Petri con PDA solo con las especies de <italic>Trichoderma</italic> sin fungicida. El experimento se desarrolló en dos ocasiones.</p>
			<p>La efectividad biológica de los fungicidas sobre el crecimiento micelial de las cuatro especies de <italic>Trichoderma,</italic> se determinó mediante la medición de su crecimiento radial cada 24 h, después de la siembra y culminó cuando cada una de las especies de <italic>Trichoderma</italic> llenó las cajas Petri sin fungicida.</p>
			<p>El porcentaje de inhibición del crecimiento micelial de la especie de <italic>Trichoderma</italic> se calculó de acuerdo con la siguiente formula: I= C-T/C X 100, donde: I=Porcentaje de</p>
			<p>inhibición, C=Crecimiento del antagonista testigo, T=Crecimiento del antagonista en tratamiento (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">Vincent, 1947</xref>).</p>
			<p>Análisis estadísticos de datos. Considerando que los datos del experimento 1 y 2 sobre inhibición del crecimiento radial y de la producción de esclerocios de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> en las diferentes concentraciones de los fungicidas no mostraron diferencias significativas entre ellos, además de que sus varianzas fueron homogéneas, los datos de los dos experimentos se combinaron y se analizaron como uno solo; en seguida se sometieron a ANOVA en el paquete estadístico (SAS 9.0, SAS Institute Inc., North Carolina, EUA). La comparación de medias fue mediante la prueba de Tukey (P=0.05) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">Little y Hills, 1973</xref>). Los datos sobre la inhibición del crecimiento micelial de las cuatro especies de <italic>Trichoderma</italic> por los fungicidas se sometieron a los mismos análisis estadísticos.</p>
		</sec>
		<sec sec-type="results">
			<title>Resultados</title>
			<p><bold>Efectividad biológica <italic>in vitro</italic> de fungicidas sintéticos en la inhibición del crecimiento micelial de <italic>Sclerotium rolfsii.</italic> 
</bold> En el análisis de varianza factorial entre fungicidas mostró diferencias significativas (F=65687.3, P≤ 0.0001). También se reflejaron diferencias significativas (F=141381, P≤ 0.0001) entre las concentraciones de fungicidas. La interacción de fungicidas y sus concentraciones también fue significativa (F=9142.35, P≤ 0.0001), lo que implica una sensibilidad diferencial de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> a las concentraciones de los fungicidas en estudio (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t2">Cuadro 2</xref>).</p>
			<p>
				<table-wrap id="t2">
					<label>Cuadro 2</label>
					<caption>
						<title>Análisis de varianza factorial del porcentaje de inhibición <italic>in vitro</italic> del crecimiento micelial de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> a cuatro concentraciones de nueve fungicidas.</title>
					</caption>
					<table cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0">
						<thead>
							<tr>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Fuente</th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">GL</th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Suma de cuadrados</th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Valor de F</th>
							</tr>
						</thead>
						<tbody>
							<tr>
								<td>Fungicidas</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">8</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">174055.4360z</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">65687.3b</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td>Concentraciones de fungicidas</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">4</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">187313.2096</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">141381</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td>Fungicidas X concentraciones de fungicidas</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">32</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">96900.0220</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">9142.35</td>
							</tr>
						</tbody>
					</table>
					<table-wrap-foot>
						<fn id="TFN1">
							<p>zEl análisis de varianza se efectuó con datos transformados a la forma Arc sin<sup>-1</sup> usando el tipo III de la suma de cuadrados de los procedimientos de modelo lineal generalizado (GLM) de SAS. b= Efecto significativo a P≤ 0.0001.</p>
						</fn>
					</table-wrap-foot>
				</table-wrap>
			</p>
			<p>La inhibición del crecimiento micelial de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> por los fungicidas Tifluzamida, Propineb y Propiconazol a la concentración de 0.01 ppm varió de 5.7 a 32.7 %, con diferencias significativas (P = 0.05) entre tratamientos, mientras que el resto de los fungicidas a las mismas concentraciones no ejercieron inhibición en el crecimiento micelial del hongo, mientras que la inhibición ejercida por los fungicidas Tifluzamida, Carboxin+Captan, Propiconazol, Propineb, Procloraz y Tiabendazol a las concentraciones 0.1 ppm varió de 6.8 a 78.1 %, con diferencias significativas (P=0.05) entre estos; a su vez los tratamientos mostraron diferencias con respecto al resto de los fungicidas, donde no ocurrió la inhibición del crecimiento micelial del hongos (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t3">Cuadro 3</xref>).</p>
			<p>
				<table-wrap id="t3">
					<label>Cuadro 3</label>
					<caption>
						<title>Porcentaje de inhibición promedio <italic>in vitro</italic> del crecimiento radial de <italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic>, causado por varios fungicidas sintéticos.</title>
					</caption>
					<table cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0">
						<thead>
							<tr>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th colspan="6" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Porcentaje de inhibición de crecimiento micelial</th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<th colspan="2" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">ppm</th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
							</tr>
						</thead>
						<tbody>
							<tr>
								<td> </td>
								<td style="text-align:center">Tifz</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">Prop</td>
								<td>Prp</td>
								<td>C+C</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">Prc</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">Tia</td>
								<td>Tol</td>
								<td>Man</td>
								<td>Tio</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td>0.01</td>
								<td>32.7* a**</td>
								<td>12.2 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">5.7 c</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">0.0 d</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">0.0 d</td>
								<td>0.0 d</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">0.0 d</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">0.0 d</td>
								<td>0.0 d</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td style="text-align:center">0.1</td>
								<td>78.1 a</td>
								<td>15.0 d</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">18.2 c</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">64.2 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">14.0 d</td>
								<td>6.8 e</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">0.0 f</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">0.0 f</td>
								<td>0.0 f</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td style="text-align:center">1.0</td>
								<td>90.7 b</td>
								<td>16.0 e</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">48.0 d</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">93.1 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">15.8 e</td>
								<td>7.1 f</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">61.4 c</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">0.0 g</td>
								<td>0.0 g</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td>10</td>
								<td>92.4 b</td>
								<td>26.9 d</td>
								<td>100 a</td>
								<td>100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">33.0 c</td>
								<td>17.5 f</td>
								<td>100 a</td>
								<td>20.7 e</td>
								<td>6.6 g</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td>100</td>
								<td>93.0 b</td>
								<td>41.1 d</td>
								<td>100 a</td>
								<td>100 a</td>
								<td>100 a</td>
								<td>20.9 e</td>
								<td>100 a</td>
								<td>75.0 c</td>
								<td>8.1 f</td>
							</tr>
						</tbody>
					</table>
					<table-wrap-foot>
						<fn id="TFN2">
							<p>zTif =Tifluzamida, Pro = Propineb, Prp= Propiconazol, C+C = Carboxin+Captan, Prc = Procloraz, Tia = Tiabendazol, Tol = Tolclofos-metil, Man = Mancozeb y Tio =Tiofanato de metilo.</p>
						</fn>
					</table-wrap-foot>
				</table-wrap>
			</p>
			<p>*El número en las filas expresa el promedio del porcentaje de inhibición del crecimiento micelial <italic>de S. rolfsii</italic> por cada uno de los fungicidas. **Medias con una letra común en las hileras no son significativamente diferentes (P=0.05) al someterse a la prueba de Tukey.</p>
			<p>Los fungicidas Tifluzamida, Propineb, Propiconazol, Carboxin+Captan, Tolclofos- metil Procloraz y Tiabendazol, a la concentración de 1 ppm, ejercieron inhibición del crecimiento micelial de 7.1-93.1 %, con diferencias significativas (P=0.05) entre tratamientos; resaltando Tifluzamida y Carboxin+Captan en su efectividad biológica, mientras que Mancozeb y Tiofanato de metilo no inhibieron el crecimiento micelial del hongo (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t3">Cuadro 3</xref>).</p>
			<p>La concentración de 10 ppm, en todos los fungicidas inhibió el crecimiento micelial del hongo, resaltando por su eficacia Propiconazol, Carboxin+Captan y Tolclofos-metil, los cuales inhibieron el 100 % del crecimiento micelial, sin diferencias significativas (P=0.05) entre estos tratamientos, pero si las hubo con respecto al resto de los fungicidas donde el crecimiento micelial varió de 6.6 a 92.4 %, donde la Tifluzamida mostró el mayor efecto inhibitorio (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t3">Cuadro 3</xref>).</p>
			<p>Fue evidente la inhibición del crecimiento micelial de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> por los fungicidas Tifluzamida, Propiconazol, Carboxin+Captan, Procloraz y Tolclofos-metil a la concentración de 100 ppm, con inhibición del crecimiento micelial de 93.0 a 100 %, con diferencias significativas (P=0.05) entre estos tratamientos. La inhibición micelial por los fungicidas Propineb, Tiabendazol, Mancozeb y Tiofanato de metilo varió de 8.1 a 75.0 % con diferencias significativas (P=0.05) entre éstos y a su vez con el resto de los fungicidas (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t3">Cuadro 3</xref>).</p>
			<p><bold>Efecto <italic>in vitro</italic> de fungicidas sintéticos sobre la formación <italic>in vitro</italic> de esclerocios de <italic>Sclerotium rolfsii.</italic> 
</bold> Se reflejaron diferencias significativas (F=2524.74, P≤ 0.0001) en la producción de esclerocios de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> en PDA con los diferentes fungicidas químicos. Las cinco concentraciones también mostraron diferencias significativas (F=10146.5, P≤ 0.0001) en la producción de las estructuras de resistencia del hongo. La interacción entre los fungicidas y sus concentraciones, también fue significativa (F=642.22, P≤ 0.0001) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t4">Cuadro 4</xref>).</p>
			<p>
				<table-wrap id="t4">
					<label>Cuadro 4</label>
					<caption>
						<title>Análisis de varianza factorial de producción de esclerocios por <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> en PDA con cinco concentraciones de nueve fungicidas.</title>
					</caption>
					<table cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0">
						<thead>
							<tr>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Fuente </th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">GL </th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Suma de cuadrados</th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Valor de F</th>
							</tr>
						</thead>
						<tbody>
							<tr>
								<td>Fungicidas </td>
								<td style="text-align:center">9 </td>
								<td>386.840642* </td>
								<td>2524.74b </td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td>Concentraciones de fungicidas</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">4 </td>
								<td>1554.645170* </td>
								<td>10146.5 </td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td>Fungicidas X concentraciones de fungicidas</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">36 </td>
								<td>98.400870* </td>
								<td>642.22 </td>
							</tr>
						</tbody>
					</table>
					<table-wrap-foot>
						<fn id="TFN3">
							<p>*El análisis de varianza se efectuó con datos transformados a la forma Raíz cuadrada usando el tipo III de la suma de cuadrados en los procedimientos de GLM de SAS. b= Efecto significativo a P≤ 0.0001.</p>
						</fn>
					</table-wrap-foot>
				</table-wrap>
			</p>
			<p>La producción de esclerocios varió de 157 a 180 por caja Petri en PDA con los diferentes fungicidas en la concentración de 0.01 ppm. El menor número de esclerocios ocurrió en el medio de cultivo con Tifluzamida, Propineb y Procrolaz, los cuales no mostraron diferencias significativas (P=0.05) entre ellos, pero si las hubo con respecto al resto de los fungicidas y el testigo sin fungicida donde se contabilizaron 182 esclerocios por caja Petri (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t5">Cuadro 5</xref>).</p>
			<p>
				<table-wrap id="t5">
					<label>Cuadro 5. Producción</label>
					<caption>
						<title>de esclerocios de <italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic> por caja Petri con PDA adicionado con las diferentes concentraciones de nueve fungicidas.</title>
					</caption>
					<table cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0">
						<thead>
							<tr>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th colspan="4" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Fungicida/número de esclerociosz</th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<th colspan="2" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">ppm</th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
							</tr>
						</thead>
						<tbody>
							<tr>
								<td> </td>
								<td>Tify</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">Prc</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">Pro</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">Tol</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">Prp</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">C+C</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">Tia</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">Man</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">Tio</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">Tes</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td>0.01</td>
								<td>157 c*</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">164 cb</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">164 cb</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">171 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">173 ab</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">174 ab</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">174 ab</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">178 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">180 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">182 a</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td style="text-align:center">0.1</td>
								<td>147c</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">162 cb</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">163 abc</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">164 abc</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">171 ab</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">148 c</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">167 ab</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">161 cb</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">162 cb</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">182 a</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td style="text-align:center">1</td>
								<td>0 e</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">92 c</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">69 d</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">148 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">162 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">93 c</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">161 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">78 d</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">148 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">182 a</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td>10</td>
								<td>0 g</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">75 d</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">0 g</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">30 e</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">129 c</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">0 g</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">146 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">22 f</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">131 c</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">182 a</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td>100</td>
								<td>0 d</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">0 d</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">0 d</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">9 c</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">0 d</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">0 d</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">132 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">0 d</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">129 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">182 a</td>
							</tr>
						</tbody>
					</table>
					<table-wrap-foot>
						<fn id="TFN4">
							<p>yTif =Tifluzamida, Prc = Procloraz, Pro = Propineb, Tol = Tolclofos-metil, Prp= Propiconazol, C+C = Carboxin+Captan, TC</p>
						</fn>
						<fn id="TFN5">
							<p>= TCMTB, Tia = Tiabendazol, Man = Mancozeb, Flu = Fluazinam, Tio =Tiofanato de metilo y Testigo sin fungicida. zEsclerocios en PDA con diferentes concentraciones de fungicidas a los 21 días después de la siembra. *Medias con una letra común en las hileras no son significativamente diferentes (P=0.05) de acuerdo al procedimiento de Tukey.</p>
						</fn>
					</table-wrap-foot>
				</table-wrap>
			</p>
			<p>A la concentración de 0.1 ppm Tifluzamida y Carboxin+Captan ejercieron el mayor efecto en la inhibición de formación de esclerocios con 147 y 148 de ellos, respectivamente por caja Petri. En el resto de los tratamientos la producción de esclerocios varió de 161 a 171, con diferencias significativas (P = 0.05) entre ellos.</p>
			<p><italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic> no formó esclerocios en la concentración de 1 ppm de Tifluzamida, sin embargo, el número de esclerocios por caja Petri varió de 69 a 162 en el medio de cultivo con la misma concentración en los diferentes fungicidas. Hubo diferencias significativas (P = 0.05) entre estos tratamientos y con el respecto al tratamiento testigo, donde se produjeron 182 esclerocios por caja Petri.</p>
			<p>No se formaron esclerocios en PDA con la concentración de 10 ppm de Tifluzamida, Propineb y Carboxin+Captan, pero si se produjeron en el medio con el resto de los fungicidas a la misma concentración, con diferencias significativas (P = 0.05) entre tratamientos, donde el número de esclerocios varió de 22 a 146 por caja Petri. La menor eficacia la mostró el Tiabendazol, pues este tratamiento mostró la mayor cantidad esclerocios.</p>
			<p>A la concentración de 100 ppm de Tifluzamida, Procloraz, Propineb, Propiconazol, Carboxin+Captan y Mancozeb inhibieron en su totalidad la formación de esclerocios, sin diferencias significativas (P=0.05) entre tratamientos, pero si las hubo con respecto al número de esclerocios (9 a 132) que se produjeron en el medio con los fungicidas Tolclofos-metil, Tiabendazol y Tiofanato metílico a la misma concentración.</p>
			<p><bold>Sensibilidad <italic>in vitro</italic> de cuatro especies de <italic>Trichoderma</italic> a 10 fungicidas sintéticos.</bold> En el análisis de varianza factorial, las cuatro especies de <italic>Trichoderma</italic> mostraron diferencias significativas (F=9576.97, P≤ 0.0001) en el porcentaje de inhibición del crecimiento micelial. Las especies del hongo presentaron una respuesta diferencial a los fungicidas incluidos en el presente estudio; de igual forma, los 10 fungicidas mostraron diferencias significativas (F=177350, P≤ 0.0001) en la inhibición de las especies de <italic>Trichoderma</italic>. También hubo diferencias significativas (F=24772.8, P≤ 0.0001) entre las concentraciones. La interacción entre los 10 fungicidas y sus cuatro respectivas concentraciones también fue significativa (F=5208, P≤ 0.0001); de manera similar, la interacción de las especies de <italic>Trichoderma</italic> y los 10 fungicidas también resultó significativas (F=4212.90, P≤ 0.0001). La interacción entre las especies de <italic>Trichoderma</italic> y las cuatro concentraciones de los fungicidas evaluadas arrojó diferencias significativas (F=1173.88, P≤ 0.0001). Por último, la interacción especies de <italic>Trichoderma</italic> X fungicidas X concentraciones de fungicidas también fue significativa (1211.06, P≤ 0.0001) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t6">Cuadro 6</xref>).</p>
			<p>
				<table-wrap id="t6">
					<label>Cuadro 6</label>
					<caption>
						<title>Análisis de varianza factorial del porcentaje de inhibición <italic>in vitro</italic> del crecimiento micelial de cuatro especies de <italic>Trichoderma</italic> por cuatro concentraciones de diez fungicidas.</title>
					</caption>
					<table cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0">
						<thead>
							<tr>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Fuente</th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">GL</th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Suma de cuadrados</th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Valor de F</th>
							</tr>
						</thead>
						<tbody>
							<tr>
								<td>Especies de Trichoderma</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">3</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">4044.8603*</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">9576.97b</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td>Fungicidas</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">9</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">74904.1540*</td>
								<td>177350</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td>Concentraciones de fungicidas</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">3</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">10462.8481*</td>
								<td>24772.8</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td>Fungicidas X concentraciones de fungicidas</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">27</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">2199.9104*</td>
								<td>5208.70</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td>Especies de Trichoderma X fungicidas</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">27</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">1779.3305*</td>
								<td>4212.90</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td>Especies de Trichoderma X concentraciones de fungicidas</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">9</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">495.7913*</td>
								<td>1173.88</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td>Especies de Trichoderma X fungicidas X concentraciones de fungicidas</td>
								<td>81</td>
								<td style="text-align:right">511.4926*</td>
								<td>1211.06</td>
							</tr>
						</tbody>
					</table>
					<table-wrap-foot>
						<fn id="TFN6">
							<p>*El análisis de varianza se efectuó con datos transformados a la forma Arc sen<sup>-1</sup> usando el tipo III de la suma de cuadrados de los procedimientos de GLM de SAS. b= Efecto significativo a P≤ 0.0001.</p>
						</fn>
					</table-wrap-foot>
				</table-wrap>
			</p>
			<p>Los fungicidas Propineb y Tifluzamida a la concentración de 100 ppm no ejercieron inhibición <italic>in vitro</italic> del desarrollo micelial de <italic>T. azevedoi</italic> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="f1">Figura 1</xref> A y B); el resto de los fungicidas ejercieron inhibición del desarrollo micelial de 30.8 a 100 %, con diferencias significativas entre tratamientos (P=0.05). <italic>T. azevedoi</italic> mostró sensibilidad a 2000 ppm, particularmente en el caso de Propineb. Al incrementar las concentraciones de 500 a 2000 ppm, ocurrió una marcada inhibición del desarrollo micelial por Tifluzamida, pero sin inhibir el desarrollo micelial en forma total. En contraste, Fluazinam (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="f1">Figura 1</xref> C) y resto de los fungicidas inhibieron el desarrollo micelial de <italic>T. azevedoi</italic> de 88.9 a 100 %, con diferencias significativas (P=0.05) entre tratamientos (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t7">Cuadro 7</xref>).</p>
			<p>
				<fig id="f1">
					<label>Figura 1</label>
					<caption>
						<title>Inhibición del crecimiento micelial de cuatro especies de <italic>Trichoderma</italic> en PDA adicionado con fungicidas sintéticos<bold>.</bold> A) <italic>T. azevedoi+</italic>Propineb 100 ppm; B) <italic>T. azevedoi</italic>+Tifluzamida 100 ppm; C) <italic>T. azevedoi+</italic>Fluazinam 100 ppm; D) <italic>T. afroharzianum+</italic>Propineb 100 ppm; E) <italic>T. afroharzianum+</italic>Propiconazol 100 ppm; F) <italic>T. asperellum</italic>+Propineb 100 ppm; G) <italic>T. asperellum+</italic>Tiabendazol 100 ppm; H) <italic>T. asperelloides+</italic>Tifluzamida 100 ppm; I) <italic>T. asperelloides+</italic>TCMTB 100 ppm.</title>
					</caption>
					<graphic xlink:href="2007-8080-rmfi-43-02-RMEXFIT240512-gf1.png"/>
				</fig>
			</p>
			<p>
				<table-wrap id="t7">
					<label>Cuadro 7</label>
					<caption>
						<title>Porcentaje de inhibición promedio <italic>in vitro</italic> del crecimiento radial de cuatro especies de <italic>Trichoderma</italic>, causado por varios fungicidas sintéticos.</title>
					</caption>
					<table cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0">
						<thead>
							<tr>
								<th rowspan="2" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								<th rowspan="2" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> ppm</th>
								<th colspan="10" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Porcentaje de inhibición de crecimiento micelial</th>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Proz</th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Tif</th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Man</th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">C+C</th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Flu</th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">TC</th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Prp</th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Prc</th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Tia</th>
								<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Tio</th>
							</tr>
						</thead>
						<tbody>
							<tr>
								<td rowspan="4">T. azevedoi</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100</td>
								<td>0.0 e</td>
								<td>0.0 e</td>
								<td>30.8 d</td>
								<td>73.0 c</td>
								<td>88.9 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td style="text-align:center">500</td>
								<td>0.0 e</td>
								<td>33.4 e</td>
								<td>53.0 d</td>
								<td>90.4 c</td>
								<td>90.7 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td style="text-align:center">1000</td>
								<td>0.0 e</td>
								<td>54.8 d</td>
								<td>56.5 c</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td>92.2 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td style="text-align:center">2000</td>
								<td>58.0 e</td>
								<td>78.9 c</td>
								<td>66.4 d</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td>93.9 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td rowspan="4">T. afroharzianum</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100</td>
								<td>0.0 g</td>
								<td>63.3 e</td>
								<td>37.3 f</td>
								<td>82.2 d</td>
								<td>92.1 c</td>
								<td>97.3 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td style="text-align:center">500</td>
								<td>0.0 f</td>
								<td>69.6 d</td>
								<td>54.2 e</td>
								<td>85.5 c</td>
								<td>92.9 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td style="text-align:center">1000</td>
								<td>0.0 f</td>
								<td>82.0 d</td>
								<td>57.4 e</td>
								<td>87.8 c</td>
								<td>94.3 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td style="text-align:center">2000</td>
								<td>88.6 c</td>
								<td>87.0 c</td>
								<td>73.4 d</td>
								<td>97.0 b</td>
								<td>95.5 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td rowspan="4">T. asperellum</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100</td>
								<td>0.0 e</td>
								<td>0.0 e</td>
								<td>36.7 d</td>
								<td>43.7 c</td>
								<td>95.0 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td style="text-align:center">500</td>
								<td>0.0 e</td>
								<td>0.0 e</td>
								<td>42.8 d</td>
								<td>78.3 c</td>
								<td>97.0 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td style="text-align:center">1000</td>
								<td>36.2 f</td>
								<td>47.4 d</td>
								<td>45.9 e</td>
								<td>87.6 c</td>
								<td>97.8 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td style="text-align:center">2000</td>
								<td>38.5 f</td>
								<td>73.7 d</td>
								<td>48.2 e</td>
								<td>92.2 c</td>
								<td>98.5 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td rowspan="4">T. asperelloides</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100</td>
								<td>54.9 e</td>
								<td>58.0 c</td>
								<td>57.3 d</td>
								<td>23.2 f</td>
								<td>94.6 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td style="text-align:center">500</td>
								<td>56.3 d</td>
								<td>58.7 c</td>
								<td>58.6 c</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td>96.1 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td style="text-align:center">1000</td>
								<td>58.1 e</td>
								<td>69.4 c</td>
								<td>62.0 d</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td>97.1 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td style="text-align:center">2000</td>
								<td>61.1 e</td>
								<td>80.0 c</td>
								<td>68.3 d</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td>97.8 b</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
								<td style="text-align:center">100 a</td>
							</tr>
						</tbody>
					</table>
					<table-wrap-foot>
						<fn id="TFN7">
							<p>zPro = Propineb, Tif =Tifluzamida, Man = Mancozeb, C+C = Carboxin+Captan, Flu = Fluazinam, TC = TCMTB, Prp= Propiconazol, Prc = Procloraz, Tia = Tiabendazol y Tio =Tiofanato de metilo.</p>
						</fn>
						<fn id="TFN8">
							<p>*El número en las filas expresa el promedio del porcentaje de inhibición del crecimiento micelial <italic>T. azevedoi, T. afroharzianum</italic>,</p>
						</fn>
						<fn id="TFN9">
							<p><italic>T. asperellum</italic> y <italic>T. asperelloides</italic> por cada uno de los fungicidas.</p>
						</fn>
						<fn id="TFN10">
							<p>**Medias con una letra común en las hileras no son significativamente diferentes (P=0.05) Tukey.</p>
						</fn>
					</table-wrap-foot>
				</table-wrap>
			</p>
			<p>Al igual que en <italic>T. azevedoi</italic>, <italic>T. afroharzianum</italic> no mostró sensibilidad a Propineb a las concentraciones de 100 (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="f1">Figura 1</xref> D), 500 y 1000 ppm<italic>,</italic> pero si mostró sensibilidad a 2000 ppm. La inhibición del crecimiento micelial de <italic>T. afroharzianum</italic> se incrementó de manera gradual al incrementar las concentraciones de los fungicidas Tifluzamida, Mancozeb, Caboxin+Captan y Fluazinam. Los fungicidas Propiconazol (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="f1">Figura 1</xref> E), Procloraz, Tiabendazol y Tiofanato de metilo a las concentraciones de 100 a 2000 ppm inhibieron el 100 % del crecimiento micelial del antagonista.</p>
			<p>Los fungicidas Propineb (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="f1">Figura 1</xref> F) y Tifluzamida a la concentración de 100 y 500 ppm no ejercieron efecto inhibitorio <italic>in vitro</italic> sobre el crecimiento micelial de <italic>T. asperellum</italic>; el hongo sólo presentó sensibilidad a la concentración de 1000 y 2000 ppm de ambos fungicidas; en cambio, Mancozeb y Carboxin+Captan ejercieron inhibición del crecimiento micelial de 36.7 a 92.2 %. El resto de los fungicidas ejerció inhibición <italic>in vitro</italic> de 95.0 al 100 % (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t7">Cuadro 7</xref>; <xref ref-type="fig" rid="f1">Figura 1</xref> G) independientemente de sus concentraciones.</p>
			<p>El crecimiento micelial de <italic>T. asperelloides</italic> fue inhibido por las diferentes concentraciones de todos los fungicidas. Los fungicidas Propineb, Tifluzamida (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="f1">Figura 1</xref> H) y Mancozeb redujeron el crecimiento micelial 54.9 a 80.0 %; la mezcla de Carboxin+Captan a la concentración de 100 ppm inhibió el crecimiento micelial en 23.2 %, pero la misma combinación de fungicidas a las concentraciones de 500, 1000 y 2000 ppm inhibió el crecimiento micelial un 100 % (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="f1">Figura 1</xref> I); resultados similares se observaron cuando se utilizaron el resto de los fungicidas a las mismas concentraciones, donde la inhibición del crecimiento micelial varió de 94.6 a 100 % (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t7">Cuadro 7</xref>).</p>
		</sec>
		<sec sec-type="discussion">
			<title>Discusión</title>
			<p>En el presente estudio Tifluzamida ejerció un mayor efecto <italic>in vitro</italic> sobre el crecimiento micelial de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> sobre todo en la dosis de 0.1 y 0.01 ppm en las cinco concentraciones estudiadas; aun cuando no existen estudios de referencia sobre el efecto de este fungida sobre la inhibición <italic>in vitro</italic> del crecimiento micelial del hongo, estudios en China indicaron que el mismo fungicida tiene efecto preventivo contra la pudrición blanda en <italic>Dendrobium officinale</italic> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">Yajun <italic>et al</italic>., 2018</xref>).</p>
			<p>De igual manera, Propineb inhibió en un 41.1 % el crecimiento micelial del hongo, lo que coincide con estudios previos donde se utilizó la concentración de 100 ppm de dicho fungicida (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">Shirsole <italic>et al</italic>., 2019</xref>), el cual inhibió el 75.4 % del crecimiento micelial de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> obtenido de garbanzo (<italic>Cicer arietinum</italic>) en la india; por otro lado, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Vikram <italic>et al</italic>. (2023</xref>) evaluaron la misma molécula a 150 ppm, e inhibió 17.7 % el crecimiento micelial del hongo de plantas de trigo (<italic>Triticum</italic> spp.) en la india, lo cual contrasta con los resultados del presente estudio. Por otro lado, Mancozeb mostró inhibición del fitopatógeno un 75.0 % a la concentración de 100 ppm, lo que coincide con Shirsole <italic>et al</italic>. (2019) quienes encontraron que este fungicida inhibió el crecimiento del hongo en un 100 % a la misma concentración; mientras que Vikram <italic>et al</italic>. (2023) encontraron que el fungicida a 50 y 150 ppm, inhibió el crecimiento micelial del hongo en un 57 y 100 %, en forma respectiva. En cambio, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">Das <italic>et al</italic>. (2014</xref>) reportaron una inhibición de 20 % a 100 ppm, lo que contrastó con Chandra <italic>et al</italic>. (2020), quienes registraron que el mismo fungicida a 250 ppm inhibió 6.3 % del crecimiento micelial del hongo proveniente de plantas de tomate en la India. En este estudio la mezcla Carboxin+Captan inhibió totalmente a <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> a las concentraciones de 10 y 100 ppm, lo que contrastó con los resultados de Das <italic>et al</italic>. (2014), quienes determinaron que Carboxin en mezcla con Tiram, inhibió el crecimiento del hongo en un 86.4 y 100 %, respectivamente, a las mismas dosis, lo que podría deberse a una sinergia al combinar ambas moléculas.</p>
			<p>Propiconazol ejerció efecto inhibitorio del hongo comparable con resultados consignados por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">Das <italic>et al</italic>. (2014</xref>) quienes evaluaron a 1, 10 y 100 ppm de dicha molécula, lo que inhibió en 27.2, 55.5 y 88.0 %, respectivamente, del crecimiento de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> aislado de plantas de berenjena (<italic>Solanum melongena</italic>) en la India; resultados similares fueron obtenidos por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Prasad <italic>et al</italic>. (2017</xref>) en la India, quienes encontraron que este mismo fungicida inhibió el 100 % del crecimiento micelial del hongo obtenido de plantas de tomate a la concentración de 150 ppm. Lo que contrasta con los resultados de Das <italic>et al.</italic> (2014) quienes indicaron que el fungicida no inhibió al crecimiento micelial del patógeno a 1, 10 y 50 ppm, pero si inhibió (19.4 %) a la concentración de 100 ppm, lo que coincide con los resultados del presente estudio donde el fungicida inhibió un 100 % a la concentración de 100 ppm.</p>
			<p>Con relación a la producción de esclerocios por <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> en PDA, Tifluzamida, Procloraz, Propineb, Propiconazol, Carboxin+Captan y Mancozeb inhibieron la formación de esclerocios a la concentración de 100 ppm, lo cual contrastó con los fungicidas del grupo de los Benzimidazoles (Tiabendazol y Tiofanato de metilo). Estudios previos indican que el Tiabendazol a la concentración de 4,000 inhibió la formación de esclerocios de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> obtenidos de plantas de cebolla (<italic>Allium cepa</italic>), chile (<italic>Capsicum annuum</italic>), tomate y cebada (<italic>Hordeum vulgare</italic>) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Pérez-Moreno <italic>et al</italic>., 2009</xref>), lo que coincide los resultados con esta investigación ya que la disminución en la formación de esclerocios estuvo relacionada con el incremento de las concentraciones del fungicida. Por otra parte, estudios adicionales indicaron que la evaluación <italic>in vitro</italic> de Mancozeb a 2,000 ppm redujo de 545 a 272 esclerocios de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> obtenidos de plantas de berenjena en Bangladesh (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B22">Siddique <italic>et al</italic>., 2016</xref>), dichos resultados contrastan con lo obtenido en el presente estudio, ya que a 100 ppm se inhibió completamente la producción de esclerocios, lo cual indica variabilidad en la sensibilidad del hongo a esta molécula. Los resultados del presente estudio sugieren que Tifluzamida, Procloraz, Propineb, Propiconazol, Carboxin+Captan y Mancozeb pueden reducir la producción de esclerocios <italic>in vitro</italic>, lo que indica que estos fungicidas muestran potencial para la disminución de dichas estructuras en campo.</p>
			<p>Los fungicidas, Propineb, Tifluzamida y Mancozeb mostraron el menor efecto en el crecimiento micelial de <italic>T. azevedoi, T. afroharzianum, T. asperellum</italic> y <italic>T. asperelloides,</italic> con respuesta diferencial de estas especies a los fungicidas y a sus respectivas concentraciones. En general, <italic>T. azevedoi</italic> y <italic>T. afroharzianum</italic> mostraron el menor efecto inhibitorio por las diferentes concentraciones de Propineb. Estos resultados concuerdan con los señalados por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Manandhar <italic>et al</italic>. (2020</xref>), quienes, en Nepal, determinaron que <italic>T. harzianum</italic> y el aislado T22 <italic>in vitro</italic> a 100 ppm no se inhibieron por Propineb, mientras que <italic>T. asperellum</italic>, <italic>T. viride</italic> y el aislado T69 fueron inhibidos en un 13.1, 28.7 y 0.8 %, respectivamente; estos aislados se obtuvieron de la rizosfera de hortalizas en Nepal. Estos mismos autores registraron que Mancozeb a 100 ppm inhibió un 10.8, 16.2, 28.3, 31.2 y</p>
			<p>46.6 %, a <italic>T. harzianum</italic>, <italic>T. viride</italic>, <italic>T. asperellum,</italic> T22 y T69, respectivamente, lo que contrasta con los hallazgos de González <italic>et al</italic>. (2020), quienes registraron que <italic>Trichoderma reesei</italic> no fue inhibido a 100 ppm.</p>
			<p>En el presente estudio Propiconazol inhibió el 100 % del crecimiento micelial de las cepas de <italic>Trichoderma</italic> a concentración de 100 ppm. En contraste, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">Zapata <italic>et al</italic>. (2023</xref>), encontraron que después de cinco días del inicio del estudio, el mismo fungicida a 1.25 mL L<sup>-1</sup> inhibió 31 % el crecimiento micelial de <italic>T</italic>. <italic>koningiopsis</italic> (Tri-cotec® WG en Colombia). Esto mismos autores registraron que Fluazinam inhibió 39.6 % a las dosis de 1 mL L<sup>-1</sup>, lo que contrasta con lo obtenido en este estudio, ya que la inhibición del crecimiento micelial de las cuatro especies de <italic>Trichoderma</italic> varió de 88.9 a 98.5 %. También registraron que Procloraz y el Tiabendazol inhibieron completamente el crecimiento micelial, lo cual también coincide con nuestros resultados.</p>
			<p>La diferencia en la sensibilidad de los aislados de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> y las especies de <italic>Trichoderma</italic> a los diferentes fungicidas evaluadas en este estudio y comparadas con otros trabajos de investigación podría deberse al uso constante de los fungicidas en los diferentes cultivos, donde la exposición del hongo a estos productos varía de acuerdo a manejo agronómico de la especie vegetal y a través del tiempo el hongo se adapta a altas dosis de fungicidas sintéticos, para el manejo de la enfermedad (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Pérez-Moreno <italic>et al</italic>., 2009</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Chaparro <italic>et al</italic>., 2011</xref>).</p>
			<p>Los resultados del presente estudio abren nuevas líneas de investigación relacionadas con estudios de efectividad de los fungicidas a nivel de invernadero y campo; en este sentido, se debe determinar la efectividad de las moléculas que resultaron eficientes en la inhibición <italic>in vitro</italic> de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic>. También se debe de evaluar la etapa fenológica del cultivo más adecuada, así como la concentración y el número de aplicaciones para el manejo en campo de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> causante de la pudrición blanda del tubérculo de papa.</p>
			<p>La combinación de las especies de <italic>Trichoderma</italic> con los fungicidas Propineb y Tifluzamida y el efecto <italic>in vitro</italic> de éstos contra <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> representa una opción para el productor en el control de la pudrición blanda del tubérculo de papa. Este enfoque se ha practicado para el control de esta enfermedad en el cultivo de papa (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">Rubayet y Bhuiyan, 2016</xref>). Futuros proyectos deberían de orientarse hacia la disminución de la concentración de los fungicidas al mezclarse con especies antagónicas de <italic>Trichoderma</italic>, con el objetivo de reducir la contaminación del medio ambiente y sobre todo la de los tubérculos.</p>
		</sec>
		<sec sec-type="conclusions">
			<title>Conclusiones</title>
			<p>Los resultados indican que Thifluzamide (0.01 ppm) inhibió de manera más eficiente el crecimiento micelial de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> (32.7%) que Propineb (12.2%). Ambos fungicidas disminuyeron la producción de esclerocios por del patógeno (157-164 esclerocios/caja Petri), mientras que la media dicha estructura de dicha estructura de resistencia fue de 182 esclerocios por caja Petri. En <italic>Trichoderma</italic> spp., Propineb (100 ppm) sólo afectó a <italic>T. asperelloides</italic> (54.9% de inhibición del crecimiento micelial), mientras Thifluzamide mostró efectos variables (0-63%), confirmando su compatibilidad con las especies de <italic>Trichoderma</italic>. Estos hallazgos sugieren que: 1) Thifluzamide es más efectivo contra <italic>S. rolfsii</italic>, pero requiere combinarse con otras estrategias para reducir la formación de esclerocios; 2) Ambos fungicidas pueden integrarse con <italic>Trichoderma</italic> en programas de manejo integrado, al mostrar baja toxicidad sobre Trichoderma spp.; 3) La selectividad de los fungicidas varía según la cepa de <italic>Trichoderma</italic>, destacando la necesidad de evaluaciones específicas. Se recomienda optimizar dosis y formulaciones para mejorar el control de <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> sin comprometer los agentes de biocontrol, priorizando esquemas que combinen ambos enfoques para un manejo sostenible.</p>
		</sec>
	</body>
	<back>
		<ref-list>
			<title>Referencias</title>
			<ref id="B1">
				<mixed-citation> Arain, U., Dars, M., Ujjan, A., Bozdar, H., Rajput, A., Shahzad, S. 2022. Compatibility of myco-fungicide isolate (<italic>Trichoderma harzianum</italic>Rifai) with fungicides and their<italic>in-vitro</italic>synergism assessment. <italic>Pakistan Journal of Phytophatology</italic> 34 147-155 10.33866/phytopathol.034.02.0763 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.33866/phytopathol.034.02.0763">https://doi.org/10.33866/phytopathol.034.02.0763</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Arain</surname>
							<given-names>U.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Dars</surname>
							<given-names>M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Ujjan</surname>
							<given-names>A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Bozdar</surname>
							<given-names>H.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Rajput</surname>
							<given-names>A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Shahzad</surname>
							<given-names>S.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2022</year>
					<article-title>Compatibility of myco-fungicide isolate (Trichoderma harzianum Rifai) with fungicides and their in-vitro synergism assessment</article-title>
					<source>Pakistan Journal of Phytophatology</source>
					<volume>34</volume>
					<fpage>147</fpage>
					<lpage>155</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.33866/phytopathol.034.02.0763</pub-id>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.33866/phytopathol.034.02.0763">https://doi.org/10.33866/phytopathol.034.02.0763</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B2">
				<mixed-citation> Chaparro, A., Carvajal, L., Orduz, S. 2011. Fungicide tolerance of<italic>Trichoderma asperelloides</italic>and<italic>T. harzianum</italic>strains. <italic>Agricultural Sciences</italic> 2 301-307 10.4236/as.2011.23040 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.4236/as.2011.23040">https://doi.org/10.4236/as.2011.23040</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Chaparro</surname>
							<given-names>A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Carvajal</surname>
							<given-names>L.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Orduz</surname>
							<given-names>S.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2011</year>
					<article-title>Fungicide tolerance of Trichoderma asperelloides and T. harzianum strains</article-title>
					<source>Agricultural Sciences</source>
					<volume>2</volume>
					<fpage>301</fpage>
					<lpage>307</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/as.2011.23040</pub-id>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.4236/as.2011.23040">https://doi.org/10.4236/as.2011.23040</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B3">
				<mixed-citation> Chandra Sekhar, J., Jai Prakash Mishra, , Rajendra Prasad, , Vedukola Pulla Reddy, , Sunil Kumar, , Ankita Thakur, , Joginder, P. 2020. Isolation and<italic>in vitro</italic>evaluation of biocontrol agents, fungicides and essential oils against stem blight of tomato caused by<italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic>(Curzi) C.C Tu and Kimber. <italic>Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry</italic> 9 700-705 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.phytojournal.com/archives/2020/vol9issue3/PartK/9-3-28-316.pdf">https://www.phytojournal.com/archives/2020/vol9issue3/PartK/9-3-28-316.pdf</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Chandra Sekhar</surname>
							<given-names>J.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Jai Prakash Mishra</surname>
							<given-names/>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Rajendra Prasad</surname>
							<given-names/>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Vedukola Pulla Reddy</surname>
							<given-names/>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Sunil Kumar</surname>
							<given-names/>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Ankita Thakur</surname>
							<given-names/>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Joginder</surname>
							<given-names>P.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2020</year>
					<article-title>Isolation and in vitro evaluation of biocontrol agents, fungicides and essential oils against stem blight of tomato caused by Sclerotium rolfsii (Curzi) C.C Tu and Kimber</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry</source>
					<volume>9</volume>
					<fpage>700</fpage>
					<lpage>705</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.phytojournal.com/archives/2020/vol9issue3/PartK/9-3-28-316.pdf">https://www.phytojournal.com/archives/2020/vol9issue3/PartK/9-3-28-316.pdf</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B4">
				<mixed-citation> Das, N. C., Dutta, B. K., Ray, D. C. 2014. Potential of some fungicides on the growth and development of<italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic>Sacc.<italic>in vitro</italic>. <italic>International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications</italic> 4 1-5 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://www.ijsrp.org/research-paper-1214/ijsrp-p3624.pdf">http://www.ijsrp.org/research-paper-1214/ijsrp-p3624.pdf</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Das</surname>
							<given-names>N. C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Dutta</surname>
							<given-names>B. K.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Ray</surname>
							<given-names>D. C.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2014</year>
					<article-title>Potential of some fungicides on the growth and development of Sclerotium rolfsii Sacc. in vitro</article-title>
					<source>International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications</source>
					<volume>4</volume>
					<fpage>1</fpage>
					<lpage>5</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://www.ijsrp.org/research-paper-1214/ijsrp-p3624.pdf">http://www.ijsrp.org/research-paper-1214/ijsrp-p3624.pdf</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B5">
				<mixed-citation> Dinkwar, G., Yadav, V., Kumar, A., Nema, S., Mishra, S. 2023. Compatibility of fungicides with potent<italic>Trichoderma</italic>isolates. <italic>International Journal of Plant and Soil Science</italic> 35 1934-1948 10.9734/ijpss/2023/v35i183475 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.9734/ijpss/2023/v35i183475">https://doi.org/10.9734/ijpss/2023/v35i183475</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Dinkwar</surname>
							<given-names>G.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Yadav</surname>
							<given-names>V.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Kumar</surname>
							<given-names>A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Nema</surname>
							<given-names>S.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Mishra</surname>
							<given-names>S.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2023</year>
					<article-title>Compatibility of fungicides with potent Trichoderma isolates</article-title>
					<source>International Journal of Plant and Soil Science</source>
					<volume>35</volume>
					<fpage>1934</fpage>
					<lpage>1948</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.9734/ijpss/2023/v35i183475</pub-id>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.9734/ijpss/2023/v35i183475">https://doi.org/10.9734/ijpss/2023/v35i183475</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B6">
				<mixed-citation> FAO, Organización de la Naciones Unidas para la Alimentación y la Agricultura 2022. FAOSTAT. www.fao.org/faostat/es/#data/QC/visualize <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.fao.org/faostat/es/#data/QC/visualize">https://www.fao.org/faostat/es/#data/QC/visualize</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="webpage">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<collab>FAO, Organización de la Naciones Unidas para la Alimentación y la Agricultura</collab>
					</person-group>
					<year>2022</year>
					<article-title>FAOSTAT</article-title>
					<source>www.fao.org/faostat/es/#data/QC/visualize</source>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.fao.org/faostat/es/#data/QC/visualize">https://www.fao.org/faostat/es/#data/QC/visualize</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B7">
				<mixed-citation> Ferreira, F., Herrmann, A., Calabrese, C., Bello, F., Vázquez, D., Musumeci, M. 2020. Effectiveness of<italic>Trichoderma</italic>strains isolated from the rhizosphere of citrus tree to control<italic>Alternaria alternata</italic>,<italic>Colletotrichum gloeosporioides</italic>and<italic>Penicillium digitatum</italic>A21 resistant to pyrimethanil in post‐harvest oranges (<italic>Citrus sinensis</italic>L. (Osbeck)). <italic>Journal of Applied Microbiology</italic> 129 712-727 10.1111/jam.14657 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/jam.14657">https://doi.org/10.1111/jam.14657</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Ferreira</surname>
							<given-names>F.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Herrmann</surname>
							<given-names>A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Calabrese</surname>
							<given-names>C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Bello</surname>
							<given-names>F.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Vázquez</surname>
							<given-names>D.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Musumeci</surname>
							<given-names>M.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2020</year>
					<article-title>Effectiveness of Trichoderma strains isolated from the rhizosphere of citrus tree to control Alternaria alternata, Colletotrichum gloeosporioides and Penicillium digitatum A21 resistant to pyrimethanil in post‐harvest oranges (Citrus sinensis L. (Osbeck))</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Applied Microbiology</source>
					<volume>129</volume>
					<fpage>712</fpage>
					<lpage>727</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/jam.14657</pub-id>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/jam.14657">https://doi.org/10.1111/jam.14657</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B8">
				<mixed-citation> Gonzalez, M., Magdama, F., Galarza, L., Sosa, D., Romero, C. 2020. Evaluation of the sensitivity and synergistic effect of<italic>Trichoderma reesei</italic>and mancozeb to inhibit under<italic>in vitro</italic>conditions the growth of<italic>Fusarium oxysporum</italic>. <italic>Communicative and Integrative Biology</italic> 13 160-169 10.1080/19420889.2020.1829267 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2020.1829267">https://doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2020.1829267</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Gonzalez</surname>
							<given-names>M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Magdama</surname>
							<given-names>F.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Galarza</surname>
							<given-names>L.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Sosa</surname>
							<given-names>D.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Romero</surname>
							<given-names>C.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2020</year>
					<article-title>Evaluation of the sensitivity and synergistic effect of Trichoderma reesei and mancozeb to inhibit under in vitro conditions the growth of Fusarium oxysporum</article-title>
					<source>Communicative and Integrative Biology</source>
					<volume>13</volume>
					<fpage>160</fpage>
					<lpage>169</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/19420889.2020.1829267</pub-id>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2020.1829267">https://doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2020.1829267</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B9">
				<mixed-citation> Kator, L., Zakki, Y., Ona, D. 2015. <italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic>; causative organism of southern blight, stem rot, white mold and sclerotia rot disease. <italic>Annals of Biological Research</italic> 6 78-89 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343268195_Sclerotium_rolfsii_Causative_organism_of_southern_blight_stem_rot_white_mold_and_sclerotia_rot_disease">https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343268195_Sclerotium_rolfsii_Causative_organism_of_southern_blight_stem_rot_white_mold_and_sclerotia_rot_disease</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Kator</surname>
							<given-names>L.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Zakki</surname>
							<given-names>Y.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Ona</surname>
							<given-names>D.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2015</year>
					<article-title>Sclerotium rolfsii; causative organism of southern blight, stem rot, white mold and sclerotia rot disease</article-title>
					<source>Annals of Biological Research</source>
					<volume>6</volume>
					<fpage>78</fpage>
					<lpage>89</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343268195_Sclerotium_rolfsii_Causative_organism_of_southern_blight_stem_rot_white_mold_and_sclerotia_rot_disease">https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343268195_Sclerotium_rolfsii_Causative_organism_of_southern_blight_stem_rot_white_mold_and_sclerotia_rot_disease</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B10">
				<mixed-citation> Kim, S., Lee, Y., Balaraju, K., Jeon, Y. 2023. Evaluation of<italic>Trichoderma atroviride</italic>and<italic>Trichoderma longibrachiatum</italic>as biocontrol agents in controlling red pepper anthracnose in Korea. <italic>Frontiers in Plant Science</italic> 14 1-15 10.3389/fpls.2023.1201875 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1201875">https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1201875</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Kim</surname>
							<given-names>S.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Lee</surname>
							<given-names>Y.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Balaraju</surname>
							<given-names>K.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Jeon</surname>
							<given-names>Y.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2023</year>
					<article-title>Evaluation of Trichoderma atroviride and Trichoderma longibrachiatum as biocontrol agents in controlling red pepper anthracnose in Korea</article-title>
					<source>Frontiers in Plant Science</source>
					<volume>14</volume>
					<fpage>1</fpage>
					<lpage>15</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fpls.2023.1201875</pub-id>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1201875">https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1201875</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B11">
				<mixed-citation> Kumar, R., Ghatak, A., Bhagat, A. 2018. Assessing fungicides for seedling protection of cucumber to collar rot disease caused by<italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic>. <italic>International Journal Plant Protection</italic> 11 10-17 10.15740/HAS/IJPP/11.1/10-17 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.15740/HAS/IJPP/11.1/10-17">https://doi.org/10.15740/HAS/IJPP/11.1/10-17</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Kumar</surname>
							<given-names>R.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Ghatak</surname>
							<given-names>A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Bhagat</surname>
							<given-names>A.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2018</year>
					<article-title>Assessing fungicides for seedling protection of cucumber to collar rot disease caused by Sclerotium rolfsii</article-title>
					<source>International Journal Plant Protection</source>
					<volume>11</volume>
					<fpage>10</fpage>
					<lpage>17</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.15740/HAS/IJPP/11.1/10-17</pub-id>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.15740/HAS/IJPP/11.1/10-17">https://doi.org/10.15740/HAS/IJPP/11.1/10-17</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B12">
				<mixed-citation> Little, T. M., Hills, F. J. 1973. Agricultural Experimentation Design and Analysis. <italic>John Wiley and Sons</italic> 350 New York, USA </mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Little</surname>
							<given-names>T. M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Hills</surname>
							<given-names>F. J.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>1973</year>
					<chapter-title>Agricultural Experimentation Design and Analysis</chapter-title>
					<source>John Wiley and Sons</source>
					<fpage>350</fpage>
					<lpage>350</lpage>
					<publisher-loc>New York, USA</publisher-loc>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B13">
				<mixed-citation> Manandhar, R., Timila, D., Karkee, S., Baidya, S. 2020. Compatibility study of<italic>Trichoderma</italic>isolates with chemical fungicides. <italic>The Journal of Agriculture and Environment</italic> 21 9-18 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://moald.gov.np/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/The-Agriculture-and-Environment-VOL-21-2020-final.pdf#page=17">https://moald.gov.np/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/The-Agriculture-and-Environment-VOL-21-2020-final.pdf#page=17</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Manandhar</surname>
							<given-names>R.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Timila</surname>
							<given-names>D.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Karkee</surname>
							<given-names>S.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Baidya</surname>
							<given-names>S.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2020</year>
					<article-title>Compatibility study of Trichoderma isolates with chemical fungicides</article-title>
					<source>The Journal of Agriculture and Environment</source>
					<volume>21</volume>
					<fpage>9</fpage>
					<lpage>18</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://moald.gov.np/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/The-Agriculture-and-Environment-VOL-21-2020-final.pdf#page=17">https://moald.gov.np/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/The-Agriculture-and-Environment-VOL-21-2020-final.pdf#page=17</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B14">
				<mixed-citation> Meena, P. N., Meena, A. K., Ram, C. 2023. Morphological and molecular diversity in<italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic>Sacc., infecting groundnut (<italic>Arachis hypogaea</italic>L.). <italic>Discover Agriculture</italic> 1 1-11 10.1007/s44279-023-00003-0 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s44279-023-00003-0">https://doi.org/10.1007/s44279-023-00003-0</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Meena</surname>
							<given-names>P. N.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Meena</surname>
							<given-names>A. K.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Ram</surname>
							<given-names>C.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2023</year>
					<article-title>Morphological and molecular diversity in Sclerotium rolfsii Sacc., infecting groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.)</article-title>
					<source>Discover Agriculture</source>
					<volume>1</volume>
					<fpage>1</fpage>
					<lpage>11</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s44279-023-00003-0</pub-id>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s44279-023-00003-0">https://doi.org/10.1007/s44279-023-00003-0</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B15">
				<mixed-citation> Paparu, P., Acur, A., Kato, F., Acam, C., Nakibuule, J., Nkuboye, A., Musoke, S., Mukankusi, C. 2020. Morphological and pathogenic characterization of<italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic>, the causal agent of southern blight disease on common bean in Uganda. <italic>Plant Disease</italic> 104 2130-2137 10.1094/PDIS-10-19-2144-RE <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-10-19-2144-RE">https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-10-19-2144-RE</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Paparu</surname>
							<given-names>P.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Acur</surname>
							<given-names>A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Kato</surname>
							<given-names>F.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Acam</surname>
							<given-names>C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Nakibuule</surname>
							<given-names>J.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Nkuboye</surname>
							<given-names>A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Musoke</surname>
							<given-names>S.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Mukankusi</surname>
							<given-names>C.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2020</year>
					<article-title>Morphological and pathogenic characterization of Sclerotium rolfsii, the causal agent of southern blight disease on common bean in Uganda</article-title>
					<source>Plant Disease</source>
					<volume>104</volume>
					<fpage>2130</fpage>
					<lpage>2137</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1094/PDIS-10-19-2144-RE</pub-id>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-10-19-2144-RE">https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-10-19-2144-RE</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B16">
				<mixed-citation> Pérez-Moreno, L., Villalpando-Mendiola, J. J., Castañeda-Cabrera, C., Ramírez-Malagón, R. 2009. Sensibilidad<italic>in vitro</italic>de<italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic>Saccardo, a los fungicidas comúnmente usados para su combate. <italic>Revista Mexicana de Fitopatología</italic> 27 11-17 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&amp;pid=S0185-33092009000100002">https://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&amp;pid=S0185-33092009000100002</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Pérez-Moreno</surname>
							<given-names>L.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Villalpando-Mendiola</surname>
							<given-names>J. J.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Castañeda-Cabrera</surname>
							<given-names>C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Ramírez-Malagón</surname>
							<given-names>R.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2009</year>
					<article-title>Sensibilidad in vitro de Sclerotium rolfsii Saccardo, a los fungicidas comúnmente usados para su combate</article-title>
					<source>Revista Mexicana de Fitopatología</source>
					<volume>27</volume>
					<fpage>11</fpage>
					<lpage>17</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&amp;pid=S0185-33092009000100002">https://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&amp;pid=S0185-33092009000100002</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B17">
				<mixed-citation> Prasad, M., Sagar, B., Devi, G., Rao, S. 2017. <italic>In vitro</italic>evaluation of fungicides and biocontrol agents against damping off disease caused by<italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic>on tomato. <italic>International Journal of Pure Applied Bioscience</italic> 5 1247-1257 10.18782/2320-7051.5144 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.18782/2320-7051.5144">https://doi.org/10.18782/2320-7051.5144</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Prasad</surname>
							<given-names>M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Sagar</surname>
							<given-names>B.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Devi</surname>
							<given-names>G.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Rao</surname>
							<given-names>S.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2017</year>
					<article-title>In vitro evaluation of fungicides and biocontrol agents against damping off disease caused by Sclerotium rolfsii on tomato</article-title>
					<source>International Journal of Pure Applied Bioscience</source>
					<volume>5</volume>
					<fpage>1247</fpage>
					<lpage>1257</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.18782/2320-7051.5144</pub-id>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.18782/2320-7051.5144">https://doi.org/10.18782/2320-7051.5144</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B18">
				<mixed-citation> Roca, L., Raya, M., Luque, F., Agustí, C., Romero, J., Trapero, A. 2016. First report of<italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic>causing soft rot of potato tubers in Spain. <italic>Plant Disease</italic> 100 2535-2535 10.1094/PDIS-12-15-1505-PDN <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-12-15-1505-PDN">https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-12-15-1505-PDN</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Roca</surname>
							<given-names>L.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Raya</surname>
							<given-names>M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Luque</surname>
							<given-names>F.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Agustí</surname>
							<given-names>C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Romero</surname>
							<given-names>J.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Trapero</surname>
							<given-names>A.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2016</year>
					<article-title>First report of Sclerotium rolfsii causing soft rot of potato tubers in Spain</article-title>
					<source>Plant Disease</source>
					<volume>100</volume>
					<fpage>2535</fpage>
					<lpage>2535</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1094/PDIS-12-15-1505-PDN</pub-id>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-12-15-1505-PDN">https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-12-15-1505-PDN</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B19">
				<mixed-citation> Rubayet, M. T., Bhuiyan, M. K. A. 2016. Integrated management of stem rot of potato caused by<italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic>. <italic>Bangladesh Journal Plant Pathology</italic> 32 7-14 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328476753_INTEGRATED_MANAGEMENT_OF_STEM_ROT_OF_POTATO_CAUSED_BY_SCLEROTIUM_ROLFSII#fullTextFileContent">https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328476753_INTEGRATED_MANAGEMENT_OF_STEM_ROT_OF_POTATO_CAUSED_BY_SCLEROTIUM_ROLFSII#fullTextFileContent</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Rubayet</surname>
							<given-names>M. T.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Bhuiyan</surname>
							<given-names>M. K. A.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2016</year>
					<article-title>Integrated management of stem rot of potato caused by Sclerotium rolfsii</article-title>
					<source>Bangladesh Journal Plant Pathology</source>
					<volume>32</volume>
					<fpage>7</fpage>
					<lpage>14</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328476753_INTEGRATED_MANAGEMENT_OF_STEM_ROT_OF_POTATO_CAUSED_BY_SCLEROTIUM_ROLFSII#fullTextFileContent">https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328476753_INTEGRATED_MANAGEMENT_OF_STEM_ROT_OF_POTATO_CAUSED_BY_SCLEROTIUM_ROLFSII#fullTextFileContent</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B20">
				<mixed-citation> Shirsole, S. S., Khare, N., Lakpale, N., Kotasthane, A. S. 2019. Evaluation of fungicides against<italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic>Sacc. incitant of collar rot of chickpea. <italic>The Pharma Innovation Journal</italic> 8 310-316 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.thepharmajournal.com/archives/2019/vol8issue12/PartF/8-12-18-288.pdf">https://www.thepharmajournal.com/archives/2019/vol8issue12/PartF/8-12-18-288.pdf</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Shirsole</surname>
							<given-names>S. S.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Khare</surname>
							<given-names>N.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Lakpale</surname>
							<given-names>N.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Kotasthane</surname>
							<given-names>A. S.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2019</year>
					<article-title>Evaluation of fungicides against Sclerotium rolfsii Sacc. incitant of collar rot of chickpea</article-title>
					<source>The Pharma Innovation Journal</source>
					<volume>8</volume>
					<fpage>310</fpage>
					<lpage>316</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.thepharmajournal.com/archives/2019/vol8issue12/PartF/8-12-18-288.pdf">https://www.thepharmajournal.com/archives/2019/vol8issue12/PartF/8-12-18-288.pdf</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B21">
				<mixed-citation> SIAP, Servicio de Información Agroalimentaria y Pesquera 2023. Sistema de Información Agroalimentaria. <italic>SIAP</italic><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.gob.mx/siap/documentos/siacon-ng-161430">https://www.gob.mx/siap/documentos/siacon-ng-161430</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="webpage">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<collab>SIAP, Servicio de Información Agroalimentaria y Pesquera</collab>
					</person-group>
					<year>2023</year>
					<article-title>Sistema de Información Agroalimentaria</article-title>
					<source>SIAP</source>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.gob.mx/siap/documentos/siacon-ng-161430">https://www.gob.mx/siap/documentos/siacon-ng-161430</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B22">
				<mixed-citation> Siddique, M., Faruq, A., Mazumder, M., Khaiyam, M. O., Islam, M. 2016. Evaluation of Some Fungicides and Bio-Agents against<italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic>and Foot and Root Rot Disease of Eggplant (<italic>Solanum melongena</italic>L.). <italic>The Agriculturists</italic> 14 92 10.3329/agric.v14i1.29105 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3329/agric.v14i1.29105">https://doi.org/10.3329/agric.v14i1.29105</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Siddique</surname>
							<given-names>M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Faruq</surname>
							<given-names>A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Mazumder</surname>
							<given-names>M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Khaiyam</surname>
							<given-names>M. O.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Islam</surname>
							<given-names>M.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2016</year>
					<article-title>Evaluation of Some Fungicides and Bio-Agents against Sclerotium rolfsii and Foot and Root Rot Disease of Eggplant (Solanum melongena L.)</article-title>
					<source>The Agriculturists</source>
					<volume>14</volume>
					<fpage>92</fpage>
					<lpage>92</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3329/agric.v14i1.29105</pub-id>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3329/agric.v14i1.29105">https://doi.org/10.3329/agric.v14i1.29105</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B23">
				<mixed-citation> Singh, B., Bhardwaj, V., Kaur, K., Kukreja, S., Goutam, U. 2021. Potato periderm is the first layer of defense against biotic and abiotic stresses: a review. <italic>Potato Research</italic> 64 131-146 10.1007/s11540-020-09468-8 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11540-020-09468-8">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11540-020-09468-8</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Singh</surname>
							<given-names>B.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Bhardwaj</surname>
							<given-names>V.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Kaur</surname>
							<given-names>K.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Kukreja</surname>
							<given-names>S.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Goutam</surname>
							<given-names>U.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2021</year>
					<article-title>Potato periderm is the first layer of defense against biotic and abiotic stresses: a review</article-title>
					<source>Potato Research</source>
					<volume>64</volume>
					<fpage>131</fpage>
					<lpage>146</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11540-020-09468-8</pub-id>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11540-020-09468-8">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11540-020-09468-8</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B24">
				<mixed-citation> Torrance, L., Talianksy, M. 2020. Potato Virus Y emergence and evolution from the Andes of South America to become a major destructive pathogen of potato and other solanaceous crops worldwide. <italic>Viruses</italic> 12 1430 10.3390/v12121430 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/v12121430">https://doi.org/10.3390/v12121430</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Torrance</surname>
							<given-names>L.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Talianksy</surname>
							<given-names>M.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2020</year>
					<article-title>Potato Virus Y emergence and evolution from the Andes of South America to become a major destructive pathogen of potato and other solanaceous crops worldwide</article-title>
					<source>Viruses</source>
					<volume>12</volume>
					<fpage>1430</fpage>
					<lpage>1430</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/v12121430</pub-id>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/v12121430">https://doi.org/10.3390/v12121430</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B25">
				<mixed-citation> Vincent, J. M. 1947. Distortion of fungi hyphae in the presence of certain inhibitors. <italic>Nature</italic> 159 850 10.1038/159850b0 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/159850b0">https://doi.org/10.1038/159850b0</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Vincent</surname>
							<given-names>J. M.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>1947</year>
					<article-title>Distortion of fungi hyphae in the presence of certain inhibitors</article-title>
					<source>Nature</source>
					<volume>159</volume>
					<fpage>850</fpage>
					<lpage>850</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/159850b0</pub-id>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/159850b0">https://doi.org/10.1038/159850b0</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B26">
				<mixed-citation> Vikram, , Kumar, S., Ashwarya, L., Patel, 2023. Efficacy of Various Fungicides and Herbicides for the Management of Wheat Foot Rot Disease. <italic>International Journal of Plant &amp; Soil Science</italic> 35 1066-1073 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://adaswk3423.s3.ap-south-1.amazonaws.com/Vikram35192023IJPSS104517.pdf">https://adaswk3423.s3.ap-south-1.amazonaws.com/Vikram35192023IJPSS104517.pdf</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Vikram</surname>
							<given-names/>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Kumar</surname>
							<given-names>S.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Ashwarya</surname>
							<given-names>L.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Patel</surname>
							<given-names/>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2023</year>
					<article-title>Efficacy of Various Fungicides and Herbicides for the Management of Wheat Foot Rot Disease</article-title>
					<source>International Journal of Plant &amp; Soil Science</source>
					<volume>35</volume>
					<fpage>1066</fpage>
					<lpage>1073</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://adaswk3423.s3.ap-south-1.amazonaws.com/Vikram35192023IJPSS104517.pdf">https://adaswk3423.s3.ap-south-1.amazonaws.com/Vikram35192023IJPSS104517.pdf</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B27">
				<mixed-citation> Widmer, T. 2019. Compatibility of<italic>Trichoderma asperellum</italic>isolates to selected soil fungicides. <italic>Crop Protection</italic> 120 91-96 10.1016/j.cropro.2019.02.017 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2019.02.017">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2019.02.017</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Widmer</surname>
							<given-names>T.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2019</year>
					<article-title>Compatibility of Trichoderma asperellum isolates to selected soil fungicides</article-title>
					<source>Crop Protection</source>
					<volume>120</volume>
					<fpage>91</fpage>
					<lpage>96</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.cropro.2019.02.017</pub-id>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2019.02.017">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2019.02.017</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B28">
				<mixed-citation> Yajun, H., Huiming, S., Pei, D., Lifeng, G., Yong, X., Hanrong, W. 2018. Efficacy evaluation of 16% validamycin thyfluzamide SC against<italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic>in<italic>Dendrobium officinale</italic>Kimura et migo. <italic>Plant Diseases and Pests</italic> 9 41-42 10.19579/j.cnki.plant-d.p.2018.01.010 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.19579/j.cnki.plant-d.p.2018.01.010">https://doi.org/10.19579/j.cnki.plant-d.p.2018.01.010</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Yajun</surname>
							<given-names>H.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Huiming</surname>
							<given-names>S.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Pei</surname>
							<given-names>D.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Lifeng</surname>
							<given-names>G.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Yong</surname>
							<given-names>X.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Hanrong</surname>
							<given-names>W.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2018</year>
					<article-title>Efficacy evaluation of 16% validamycin thyfluzamide SC against Sclerotium rolfsii in Dendrobium officinale Kimura et migo</article-title>
					<source>Plant Diseases and Pests</source>
					<volume>9</volume>
					<fpage>41</fpage>
					<lpage>42</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.19579/j.cnki.plant-d.p.2018.01.010</pub-id>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.19579/j.cnki.plant-d.p.2018.01.010">https://doi.org/10.19579/j.cnki.plant-d.p.2018.01.010</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B29">
				<mixed-citation> Yao, X., Guo, H., Zhang, K., Zhao, M., Ruan, J., Chen, J. 2023. <italic>Trichoderma</italic>and its role in biological control of plant fungal and nematode disease. <italic>Frontier in Microbiology</italic> 14 1-15 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1160551 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2023.1160551">https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2023.1160551</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Yao</surname>
							<given-names>X.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Guo</surname>
							<given-names>H.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Zhang</surname>
							<given-names>K.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Zhao</surname>
							<given-names>M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Ruan</surname>
							<given-names>J.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Chen</surname>
							<given-names>J.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2023</year>
					<article-title>Trichoderma and its role in biological control of plant fungal and nematode disease</article-title>
					<source>Frontier in Microbiology</source>
					<volume>14</volume>
					<fpage>1</fpage>
					<lpage>15</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fmicb.2023.1160551</pub-id>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2023.1160551">https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2023.1160551</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B30">
				<mixed-citation> Yassin, M., Mostafa, F., Al-Askar, A. 2021. <italic>In vitro</italic>antagonistic activity of<italic>Trichoderma harzianum</italic>and<italic>T. viride</italic>strains compared to carbendazim fungicide against the fungal phytopathogens of<italic>Sorghum bicolor</italic>(L.) Moench. <italic>Egyptian Journal of Biological Pest Control</italic> 31 1-9 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s41938-021-00463">https://doi.org/10.1186/s41938-021-00463</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Yassin</surname>
							<given-names>M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Mostafa</surname>
							<given-names>F.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Al-Askar</surname>
							<given-names>A.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2021</year>
					<article-title>In vitro antagonistic activity of Trichoderma harzianum and T. viride strains compared to carbendazim fungicide against the fungal phytopathogens of Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench</article-title>
					<source>Egyptian Journal of Biological Pest Control</source>
					<volume>31</volume>
					<fpage>1</fpage>
					<lpage>9</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s41938-021-00463">https://doi.org/10.1186/s41938-021-00463</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B31">
				<mixed-citation> Zapata, Y., Botina, B. 2023. Efecto de coadyuvantes, fungicidas e insecticidas sobre el crecimiento de<italic>Trichoderma koningiopsis</italic>Th003. <italic>Revista Mexicana de Fitopatología</italic> 41 412-433 10.18781/r.mex.fit.2305-1 <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.18781/r.mex.fit.2305-1">https://doi.org/10.18781/r.mex.fit.2305-1</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Zapata</surname>
							<given-names>Y.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Botina</surname>
							<given-names>B.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2023</year>
					<article-title>Efecto de coadyuvantes, fungicidas e insecticidas sobre el crecimiento de Trichoderma koningiopsis Th003</article-title>
					<source>Revista Mexicana de Fitopatología</source>
					<volume>41</volume>
					<fpage>412</fpage>
					<lpage>433</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.18781/r.mex.fit.2305-1</pub-id>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.18781/r.mex.fit.2305-1">https://doi.org/10.18781/r.mex.fit.2305-1</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
		</ref-list>
	</back>
	<sub-article article-type="translation" id="s1" xml:lang="en">
		<front-stub>
			<article-categories>
				<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
					<subject>Scientific Article</subject>
				</subj-group>
			</article-categories>
			<title-group>
				<article-title><italic>In vitro</italic> sensitivity of <italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic> and four species of <italic>Trichoderma</italic> to common-use fungicides on the potato (<italic>Solanum tuberosum</italic>) crop</article-title>
			</title-group>
			<abstract>
				<title>ABSTRACT</title>
				<p> </p>
				<sec>
					<title>Background/Objective</title>
					<p>. Soft rot of potato tubers, caused by <italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic>, is a disease that occurs in soils with high levels of humidity and temperatures above 30 °C. Synthetic fungicides are primarily used for its control. The objectives of this study were to determine the biological efficacy of synthetic fungicides at different concentrations against the pathogen and the sensitivity of four species of <italic>Trichoderma</italic> to commonly used fungicides in potato in Sinaloa.</p>
					<p> </p>
				</sec>
				<sec>
					<title>Materials and Methods. </title>
					<p>The <italic>in vitro</italic> efficacy of nine fungicides at concentrations of 0.01, 0.1, 1, 10 and 100 ppm on mycelial growth inhibition and sclerotia formation of <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> was determined<italic>.</italic> Furthermore, the <italic>in vitro</italic> sensitivity of <italic>T. afroharzianum</italic>, <italic>T. asperelloides, T. asperellum,</italic> and <italic>T. azevedoi</italic> to 10 fungicides at concentrations of 100, 500, 1000, and 2000 ppm was studied. The experiment was conducted twice. Treatments were distributed in a completely randomized design and data were subjected to ANOVA. Means were compared with the Tukey test (p &lt; 0.05).</p>
					<p> </p>
				</sec>
				<sec>
					<title>Results</title>
					<p>. Thifluzamide and Propineb at the 0.01 ppm concentration inhibited mycelial growth <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> by 32.7 and 12.2%, respectively. On the other hand, <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> produced 157, 164, and 164 sclerotia per Petri dish on PDA supplemented with the fungicides. Thifluzamide, Propineb and prochloraz, respectively, at the same concentration. In contrast, Propineb at a concentration of 100 ppm inhibited the mycelial growth of <italic>T. azevedoi</italic>, <italic>T. afroharzianum</italic>, <italic>T. asperellum</italic> and <italic>T. asperelloides</italic> by 0, 0, 0 and 54.9%, respectively; while the inhibition of mycelial growth by Thifluzamide at the same concentration in <italic>T. azevedoi</italic>, <italic>T</italic>. <italic>afroharzianum</italic>, <italic>T</italic>. <italic>asperellum</italic> and <italic>T</italic>. <italic>asperelloides</italic> ranged from 0 to 63%. The results indicate that the four <italic>Trichoderma</italic> species are compatible with both fungicides.</p>
				</sec>
				<sec>
					<title>Conclusion</title>
					<p>. The effect of thifluzamide and propineb on mycelial growth inhibition and sclerotia formation of <italic>S. rolfsii</italic>, as well as their compatibility with the four species <italic>Trichoderma</italic>, indicates that the combination of <italic>Trichoderma</italic> spp. and the fungicides has potential use for controlling soft rot of potato tubers under field conditions.</p>
				</sec>
			</abstract>
			<kwd-group xml:lang="en">
				<title>Keywords:</title>
				<kwd>Production</kwd>
				<kwd>Quality</kwd>
				<kwd>Sclerotia</kwd>
				<kwd>Management.</kwd>
			</kwd-group>
		</front-stub>
		<body>
			<sec sec-type="intro">
				<title>Introduction</title>
				<p>The potato (<italic>Solanum tuberosum</italic>) is the sixth most widely produced crop in the world, with 470,409,159 t, obtained from 23,514,508 h. The main producing countries of this tuber are China, India, Ukraine, Russia and the United States (FAO, 2023). Mexico is in35th place, with an annual production of 1,986,198 t, with the highest-producing states are Sonora, with 612,600 t, and Sinaloa with 427,587 t a year, representing 52.4% of the national production, with a production valued in 17,426,448,000 pesos (SIAP, 2023). The crop is affected by diseases that limit its production and quality (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">Torrance and Talianksy, 2020</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">Singh <italic>et al</italic>., 2021</xref>). Soft rot stands out for its importance and is caused by <italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic>, which affects around 500 plant species, which are grouped into 100 different families, with tomato (<italic>Solanum lycopersicum</italic>), cucumber (<italic>Cucumis sativus</italic>), peanut (<italic>Arachis hypogaea</italic>), potato and others standing out (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">Kator <italic>et al</italic>., 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">Roca <italic>et al</italic>., 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Kumar <italic>et al</italic>., 2018</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">Paparu <italic>et al</italic>., 2020</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Meena <italic>et al</italic>., 2023</xref>). In the potato, soft tuber rot affects production by 20%. The fungus presents saprophytic habits and in the soil it colonizes crop residues or it can survive in the form of sclerotia, which are dispersed through water, machinery, plant residues, soil and animales (Kator <italic>et al</italic>., 2015; Roca <italic>et al</italic>., 2016).</p>
				<p>The traditional management of tuber soft rot with synthetic fungicides contaminates the environment and affects living beings (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">Widmer, 2019</xref>), and its continuous use produces resistance in phytopathogens, which leads to the increase in concentrations for their control (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Ferreira <italic>et al</italic>., 2020</xref>).</p>
				<p>In recent years, advances have emerged regarding the use of environmentally friendly strategies for disease management in various crops, with the use of fungi as biological control agents standing out (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">Rubayet and Bhuiyan 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B30">Yassin <italic>et al</italic>., 2021</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">Kim <italic>et al</italic>., 2023</xref>)</p>
				<p>The fungi genus of the <italic>Trichoderma</italic> are the most widely studied and used as biological agents, due to the good results in the control of fungal diseases. This is due to the diversity of action mechanisms they have (competition for space and nutrients, mycoparasitism and antibiosis). In addition, this type of antagonistics produce secondary metabolites that promote plant growth and activate the defense mechanisms of plants, as well as increasing crop production and quality (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">Yao <italic>et al</italic>., 2023</xref>). Treatments with this fungus are directed to seed, seedlings, irrigation water and foliage; on the other hand, there are studies in which the compatibility of <italic>Trichoderma</italic> with commercial synthetic fungicides has been proven for use in mixtures in the control of fungal diseases in diverse crops (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">Gonzalez <italic>et al</italic>., 2020</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Manandhar <italic>et al</italic>., 2020</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">Arain <italic>et al</italic>., 2022</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Dinkwar <italic>et al</italic>., 2023</xref>).</p>
				<p>In Mexico there are no studies on the compatibility of <italic>Trichoderma</italic> species in mixtures with fungicides aimed at the control of soft potato tuber rot. For this reason, the aim of this study was to determine the <italic>in vitro</italic> biological effectiveness of different concentrations of synthetic fungicides on the inhibition of mycelial growth and formation of <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> sclerotia, as well as the <italic>in vitro</italic> effect of the fungicides on the mycelial growth of <italic>Trichoderma afroharzianum, T. asperelloides, T. asperellum</italic> and <italic>T. azevedoi.</italic></p>
			</sec>
			<sec sec-type="materials|methods">
				<title>Materials and Methods</title>
				<p>Origen of isolates. <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> (Scr4) <italic>Trichoderma afroharzianum</italic> (TES24)<italic>, T. asperelloides</italic> (TAM74), <italic>T. asperellum</italic> (TAF75) and <italic>T. azevedoi</italic> (TAI73) were provided by the microbiological bank of the Phytosanitary Diagnostics Laboratory of the Local Plant Health Board of the El Fuerte Velley. The isolates were obtained from soil in commercial fields in which potato was grown in previous agricultural cycles in the Municipalities of Ahome, Sinaloa and, Altar and Caborca in Sonora, Mexico in 2019, 2020 and 2021 (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t1">Table 1</xref>).</p>
				<p>
					<table-wrap id="t8">
						<label>Table 1</label>
						<caption>
							<title>Species and isolates of <italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic> and <italic>Trichoderma</italic>, site and year of collection and code in the GeneBank.</title>
						</caption>
						<table cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0">
							<thead>
								<tr>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Species/isolate </th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Locality </th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Year of collection</th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Code in GeneBank</th>
								</tr>
							</thead>
							<tbody>
								<tr>
									<td style="font-style:italic">Sclerotium rolfsii /Scr4 </td>
									<td>Ahome, Sinaloa/ 25.701944 -109.043333</td>
									<td>2019 </td>
									<td>OR514113 </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td style="font-style:italic">T. asperelloides /TES24 </td>
									<td>Caborca, Sonora/31.06666 -112.338333</td>
									<td>2020 </td>
									<td>OR521164 </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td style="font-style:italic">T. azevedoi /TAI73 </td>
									<td>Ahome, Sinaloa/25.818885 -108.956014</td>
									<td>2021 </td>
									<td>OR521181 </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td style="font-style:italic">T. afroharzianum/TAF75 </td>
									<td>Ahome, Sinaloa/25.491445 -108.571659</td>
									<td>2021 </td>
									<td>OR521183 </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td style="font-style:italic">T. asperellum/TAM74 </td>
									<td>Ahome, Sinaloa/ 25.491445 -108.571659</td>
									<td>2021 </td>
									<td>OR521182 </td>
								</tr>
							</tbody>
						</table>
					</table-wrap>
				</p>
				<p><bold>
 <italic>In vitro</italic> sensitivity of <italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic> to nine synthetic fungicides.</bold> This study evaluated the <italic>in vitro</italic> sensitivity of <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> (isolate Scr4) to the following fungicides: Thifluzamide (Summit Agro Mexico), Thiabendazole (Arysta LifeScience Mexico), Mancozeb (Arysta LifeScience Mexico), Propineb (Bayer Crop Science), Prochloraz (Adama, Mexico), Propiconazole (Syngenta Agro), Tolclofos-methyl (Valent), Carboxin+Captan (Arysta LifeScience) and Thiophanate-methyl (Arysta LifeScience), against the mycelial growth of the fungal isolate.</p>
				<p>The tests were performed using the poisoned food technique (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Dinkwar <italic>et al</italic>., 2023</xref>), in Petri dishes, 90 mm in diameter, with 20 mL of the Potato Dextrose Agar (PDA) culture medium, supplemented with the test substances at the concentrations of 0.01, 0.1, 1.0, 10 and 100 ppm. PDA discs (5 mm in diameter) with a three-day active mycelial growth of <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> were used and transferred to the center of the Petri dish. The treatments were distributed in a completely randomized design with a 9x5 factorial arrangement, in which the first factor of the arrangement was each one of the nine fungicides and the second factor consisted of the five concentrations<italic>.</italic> The dishes were sealed with parafilm and incubated at 25 ±2 °C. The control consisted of five Petri dishes with PDA and fungal mycelium without fungicide.</p>
				<p>The biological effectiveness of the fungicides on the mycelial growth of <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> was determined by measuring radial growth of the fungus every 24 h, after its transfer and ended when <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> filled the Petri dishes without any fungicide.</p>
				<p>The percentage of inhibition of the mycelial growth of <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> was calculated according to the equation I= C-T/C X 100, where I=Percentage of inhibition, C=Growth of the control pathogen, T=Growth of the pathogen under treatment (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">Vincent, 1947</xref>). The experiment was performed twice.</p>
				<p>Effect of synthetic fungicides on the formation of sclerotia by <italic>S. rolfsii</italic>. PDA discs, 5 mm in diameter with an active <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> mycelial growth were transfered onto PDA Petri dishes containing fungicides in the same concentrations described in the previous section. The design of the treatments was completely at random with a 9x5 factorial arrangements, with five replicates, in which the first factor of the arrangement was each one of the nine fungicides and the second factor was the five concentrations. The control treatment consisted of five Petri dishes with PDA with <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> mycelial growth without any fungicide. The number of sclerotia was determined 21 days of incubatiton. The experiment was performed twice.</p>
				<p><italic>In vitro</italic> sensitivity of <italic>Trichoderma</italic> to 10 synthetic fungicides. This study evaluated the <italic>in vitro</italic> sensitivity of <italic>T</italic>. <italic>afroharzianum</italic>, <italic>T. asperelloides</italic>, <italic>T. asperellum</italic> and <italic>T. azevedoi</italic> to the fungicides 1) Thifluzamide (Summi Agro Mexico), 2) Thiabendazole (Arysta LifeScience Mexico), 3) Mancozeb (Arysta LifeScience Mexico), 4) Propineb (Bayer Crop Science), 5) Prochloraz (Adama, Mexico), 6) Propiconazole (Syngenta Agro), 7) Carboxin+Captan (Arysta LifeScience Mexico), 8) Thiophanate-methyl (Arysta LifeScience), 9) Fluazinam (Syngenta Agro) and 10) TCMTB (Summit Agro Mexico)<italic>.</italic></p>
				<p>The trial was performed based on procedures described by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Dinkwar <italic>et al</italic>. (2023</xref>), and for this purpose, Petri dishes with a diameter of 90 mm and 20 mL of PDA containing the test substances were used in the following concentrations: 100, 500, 1000 and 2000 ppm. PDA discs, 5 mm in diameter with an active mycelial growth of each species of <italic>Trichoderma</italic> were used, which were placed in the center of the Petri dish. The treatments were distributed in a completely randomized experimental design and with a 4x10x4 factorial arrangement, with four repetitions, in which the first factor of the arrangement corresponded to each one of the <italic>Trichoderma</italic> species, the second one was the 10 fungicides and the third one, the four concentrations of fungicides<italic>.</italic> The dishes were sealed with parafilm and incubated at 25±2 °C. The control consisted on four Petri dishes with PDA with the <italic>Trichoderma</italic> species without fungicide. The experiment was performed twice.</p>
				<p>The biological effectiveness of the fungicides on the mycelial growth of the four <italic>Trichoderma</italic> species was determined by measuring their radial growth every 24 h after during the experimental period and culminated when each of the <italic>Trichoderma</italic> species filled the Petri dishes without fungicide.</p>
				<p>The percentage of inhibition of the mycelial growth of the <italic>Trichoderma</italic> species was calculated according to the formula I= C-T/C X 100, where I=Percentage of inhibition, C=Growth of the control antagonist, T=Growth of the antagonist under treatment (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">Vincent, 1947</xref>).</p>
				<p>Statistical analysis of data. Considering that the data of the experiments 1 and 2 on the inhibition of the radial growth and the production of sclerotia by <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> in the different concentrations of the fungicides did not display significant differences between them, in addition to their variances being homogenous, the data of both experiments were combined, analyzed as a single one. The data were subjected to an ANOVA in the statistical package (SAS 9.0, SAS Institute Inc., North Carolina, USA). The comparison of means was performed using Tukey’s test (P=0.05) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">Little and Hills, 1973</xref>). The data on the inhibition of mycelial growth of the four <italic>Trichoderma</italic> species by the fungicides were subjected to the same statistical analyses.</p>
			</sec>
			<sec sec-type="results">
				<title>Results</title>
				<p><bold>Biological <italic>in vitro</italic> effectiveness of synthetic fungicides in the inhibition of mycelial growth in <italic>Sclerotium rolfsii.</italic> 
</bold> The factorial variance analysis between fungicides displayed significant differences (F=65687.3, P≤ 0.0001). Significant differences (F=141381, P≤ 0.0001) were also reflected between fungicidal concentrations. The interaction of fungicides and their concentrations was also significant (F=9142.35, P≤ 0.0001), which implies a differential sensitivity of <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> to the concentrations of the fungicides under study (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t2">Table 2</xref>).</p>
				<p>
					<table-wrap id="t9">
						<label>Table 2</label>
						<caption>
							<title>Factorial analysis of variance of the percentage of <italic>in vitro</italic> inhibition of the mycelial growth in <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> to four concentrations of nine fungicides.</title>
						</caption>
						<table cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0">
							<thead>
								<tr>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Source</th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Sdf</th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">SSum of squares</th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">SF values</th>
								</tr>
							</thead>
							<tbody>
								<tr>
									<td>Fungicides</td>
									<td>8</td>
									<td>174055.4360z</td>
									<td>65687.3b</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>Concentrations of fungicides</td>
									<td>4</td>
									<td>187313.2096</td>
									<td>141381</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>Fungicides X concentrations of fungicides</td>
									<td>32</td>
									<td>96900.0220</td>
									<td>9142.35</td>
								</tr>
							</tbody>
						</table>
						<table-wrap-foot>
							<fn id="TFN11">
								<p>zThe analysis of variance was performed with data transformed into the Arc sin<sup>-</sup></p>
							</fn>
							<fn id="TFN12">
								<p>1 form, using Type III sum of squares from SAS’s generalized linear model (GLM) procedures. b= Significant effect at P≤ 0.0001.</p>
							</fn>
						</table-wrap-foot>
					</table-wrap>
				</p>
				<p>The inhibition of the mycelial growth of <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> by the fungicides Tifluzamide, Propineb and Propiconazole at the concentration of 0.01 ppm varied between 5.7 and 32.7%, with significant differences (P = 0.05) between treatments, whereas the rest of the fungicides at the same concentrations exerted no inhibition in the mycelial growth of the fungus, while the inhibition exerted by the fungicides Thifluzamide, Carboxin+Captan, Propiconazole, Propineb, Prochloraz and Thiabendazole at 0.1 ppm concentrations varied between 6.8 and 78.1%, with significant differences (P=0.05) between them. In turn, the treatments displayed differences with the rest of the fungicides, where there was no inhibition of the mycelial growth of the fungus (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t3">Table 3</xref>).</p>
				<p>The fungicides Thifluzamide, Propineb, Propiconazole, Carboxin+Captan, Tolclofos-methyl, Prochloraz and Thiabendazole, at a concentration of 1 ppm, inhibited the mycelial growth by 7.1-93.1%, with significant differences (P=0.05) between treatments. Thifluzamide and Carboxin+Captan stand out for their biological effectiveness, whereas Mancozeb and Thiophanate methyl did not inhibit the mycelial growth of the fungus (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t3">Table 3</xref>).</p>
				<p>
					<table-wrap id="t10">
						<label>Table 3. Average</label>
						<caption>
							<title>percentage of <italic>in vitro</italic> inhibition of the radial growth of <italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic>, caused by various synthetic fungicides.</title>
						</caption>
						<table cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0">
							<thead>
								<tr>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
									<th colspan="4" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Percent of inhibition of mycelial growth</th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<th colspan="2" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">ppm</th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
								</tr>
							</thead>
							<tbody>
								<tr>
									<td> </td>
									<td>Tifz</td>
									<td>Prop</td>
									<td>Prp</td>
									<td>C+C</td>
									<td>Prc</td>
									<td style="text-align:right">Tia</td>
									<td>Tol</td>
									<td>Man</td>
									<td>Tio</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>0.01</td>
									<td>32.7* a**</td>
									<td>12.2 b</td>
									<td>5.7 c</td>
									<td>0.0 d</td>
									<td style="text-align:right">0.0 d</td>
									<td style="text-align:right">0.0 d</td>
									<td>0.0 d</td>
									<td>0.0 d</td>
									<td>0.0 d</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>0.1</td>
									<td>78.1 a</td>
									<td>15.0 d</td>
									<td>18.2 c</td>
									<td>64.2 b</td>
									<td style="text-align:right">14.0 d</td>
									<td style="text-align:right">6.8 e</td>
									<td>0.0 f</td>
									<td>0.0 f</td>
									<td>0.0 f</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>1.0</td>
									<td>90.7 b</td>
									<td>16.0 e</td>
									<td>48.0 d</td>
									<td>93.1 a</td>
									<td style="text-align:right">15.8 e</td>
									<td style="text-align:right">7.1 f</td>
									<td>61.4 c</td>
									<td>0.0 g</td>
									<td>0.0 g</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>10</td>
									<td>92.4 b</td>
									<td>26.9 d</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td style="text-align:right">33.0 c</td>
									<td style="text-align:right">17.5 f</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>20.7 e</td>
									<td>6.6 g</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>100</td>
									<td>93.0 b</td>
									<td>41.1 d</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td style="text-align:right">100 a</td>
									<td style="text-align:right">20.9 e</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>75.0 c</td>
									<td>8.1 f</td>
								</tr>
							</tbody>
						</table>
						<table-wrap-foot>
							<fn id="TFN13">
								<p>zTif =Thifluzamide, Pro = Propineb, Prp= Propiconazole, C+C = Carboxin+Captan, Prc = Prochloraz, Tia = Thiabendazole, Tol = Tolclofos-methyl, Man = Mancozeb and Tio =Thiophanate-methyl.</p>
							</fn>
							<fn id="TFN14">
								<p>*The number in the row expresses the average percentage of mycelial growth inhibition in <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> for each one of the fungicides. **Means with a common letter in the rows are not significantly different (P=0.05) when placed under Tukey’s test.</p>
							</fn>
						</table-wrap-foot>
					</table-wrap>
				</p>
				<p>The concentration of 10 ppm in all fungicides inhibited the mycelial growth of the fungus, with Propiconazole, Carboxin+Captan and Tolclofos-methyl standing out for their efficiency, since they inhibited 100% of the mycelial growth with no significant differences (P=0.05) between these treatments, although there were differences compared to the other fungicides, where mycelial growth ranged from 6.6 to 92.4%, with Thifluzamide showing the greatest inhibiting effect (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t3">Table 3</xref>).</p>
				<p>The inhibition of the mycelial growth of <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> by fungicides Tifluzamide, Propiconazole, Carboxin+Captan, Prochloraz y Tolclofos-methyl at a concentration of 100 ppm was evident, with inhibitions of the mycelial growth of 93.0 to 100%, with significant differences (P=0.05) among these treatments. The mycelial inhibition by the fungicides Propineb, Tiabendazol, Mancozeb and Thiophanate-methyl varied from 8.1 to 75.0% with significant differences (P=0.05) among them and also with the rest of the fungicides (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t3">Table 3</xref>)</p>
				<p><bold>
 <italic>In vitro</italic> effect of synthetic fungicides on the <italic>in vitro</italic> formation of <italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic> sclerotia<italic>.</italic> 
</bold> Significant differences (F=2524.74, P≤ 0.0001) were reflected in the production of <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> sclerotia in PDA with the different chemical fungicides. The five concentrations also displayed significant differences (F=10146.5, P≤ 0.0001) in the productions of the fungal resistance structures. The interaction between the fungicides and their concentrations was also significant (F=642.22, P≤ 0.0001) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t4">Table 4</xref>).</p>
				<p>The production of sclerotia varied between 157 and 180 per Petri dish in PDA with the different fungicides in the concentration of 0.01 ppm. The lowest number of slcerotia occurred in the culture medium with Thifluzamide, Propineb and Prochloraz, whcih displayed no significant differences (P=0.05) between them, but there were differences with the rest of the fungicides and the control without fungicide, where 182 sclerotia were counted for each Petri dish (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t5">Table 5</xref>).</p>
				<p>
					<table-wrap id="t11">
						<label>Table 4</label>
						<caption>
							<title>Factorial analysis of variance of sclerotia production by <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> in PDA with five concentrations of nine fungicides.</title>
						</caption>
						<table cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0">
							<thead>
								<tr>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Source</th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">df</th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Sum of squares</th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">F values</th>
								</tr>
							</thead>
							<tbody>
								<tr>
									<td>Fungicides</td>
									<td>9</td>
									<td>386.840642*</td>
									<td>2524.74b</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>Concentrations of fungicides</td>
									<td>4</td>
									<td>1554.645170*</td>
									<td>10146.5</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>Fungicides X concentrations of fungicides</td>
									<td>36</td>
									<td>98.400870*</td>
									<td>642.22</td>
								</tr>
							</tbody>
						</table>
						<table-wrap-foot>
							<fn id="TFN15">
								<p>*The analysis of variance was carried out with data transformed to the square root form using type III of the sum of squares in SAS’s GLM procedures. b= Significant effect at P≤ 0.0001.</p>
							</fn>
						</table-wrap-foot>
					</table-wrap>
				</p>
				<p>The concentration of 0.1 ppm of Thifluzamide and Carboxin+Captan exerted the greatest effect in the inhibition of the formation of sclerotia with 147 and 148, respectively for every Petri dish. In the rest of the treatments, the production of sclerotia varied between 161 and 171, with significant differences (P = 0.05) between them.</p>
				<p><italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic> formed no sclerotia in the concentration of 1 ppm of Thifluzamide, although the number of sclerotia for each Petri dish varied between 69 and 162 in the culture medium with the same concentration in the different fungicides. There were significant differences (P = 0.05) between these treatments and with the control treatment, where 182 sclerotia were produced per Petri dish.</p>
				<p>No sclerotia were formed in PDA with the concentration of 10 ppm of Thifluzamide, Propineb and Carboxin+Captan, but they did form in the medium with the rest of the fungicides at the same concentration, with significant differences (P = 0.05) between treatments, where the number of sclerotia varied between 22 and 146 per Petri dish. The lowest efficiency was displayed by Thiabendazole, since this treatment displayed the lowest number of sclerotia.</p>
				<p>
					<table-wrap id="t12">
						<label>Table 5</label>
						<caption>
							<title>Production of <italic>Sclerotium rolfsii</italic> sclerotia per Petri dish with PDA added with the different concentrations of nine fungicides.</title>
						</caption>
						<table cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0">
							<thead>
								<tr>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"/>
									<th colspan="10" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Fungicides/number of sclerrotia</th>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<th colspan="2" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">ppm</th>
									<th colspan="9" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"/>
								</tr>
							</thead>
							<tbody>
								<tr>
									<td> </td>
									<td>Tify</td>
									<td>Prc</td>
									<td>Pro</td>
									<td>Tol</td>
									<td>Prp</td>
									<td>C+C</td>
									<td>Tia</td>
									<td>Man</td>
									<td>Tio</td>
									<td>Tes</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>0.01</td>
									<td>157 c*</td>
									<td>164 cb</td>
									<td>164 cb</td>
									<td>171 a</td>
									<td>173 ab</td>
									<td>174 ab</td>
									<td>174 ab</td>
									<td>178 a</td>
									<td>180 a</td>
									<td>182 a</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>0.1</td>
									<td>147c</td>
									<td>162 cb</td>
									<td>163 abc</td>
									<td>164 abc</td>
									<td>171 ab</td>
									<td>148 c</td>
									<td>167 ab</td>
									<td>161 cb</td>
									<td>162 cb</td>
									<td>182 a</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>1</td>
									<td>0 e</td>
									<td>92 c</td>
									<td>69 d</td>
									<td>148 b</td>
									<td>162 b</td>
									<td>93 c</td>
									<td>161 b</td>
									<td>78 d</td>
									<td>148 b</td>
									<td>182 a</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>10</td>
									<td>0g</td>
									<td>75 d</td>
									<td>0 g</td>
									<td>30 e</td>
									<td>129 c</td>
									<td>0 g</td>
									<td>146 b</td>
									<td>22 f</td>
									<td>131 c</td>
									<td>182 a</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>100</td>
									<td>0 d</td>
									<td>0 d</td>
									<td>0 d</td>
									<td>9 c</td>
									<td>0 d</td>
									<td>0 d</td>
									<td>132 b</td>
									<td>0 d</td>
									<td>129 b</td>
									<td>182 a</td>
								</tr>
							</tbody>
						</table>
						<table-wrap-foot>
							<fn id="TFN16">
								<p>yTif =Tifluzamide, Prc = Prochloraz, Pro = Propineb, Tol = Tolclofos-methyl, Prp= Propiconazole, C+C = Carboxin+Captan, TC = TCMTB, Tia = Thiabendazole, Man = Mancozeb, Flu = Fluazinam, Tio =Thiophanate-methyl and control without fungicide. <sup>z</sup>Sclerotia in PDA with different concentrations of fungicides 21 days of incubation. *Means with a common letter in the rows are not significantly different (P=0.05) according to Tukey’s procedure.</p>
							</fn>
						</table-wrap-foot>
					</table-wrap>
				</p>
				<p>In the concentration of 100 ppm of Thifluzamide, Prochloraz, Propineb, Propiconazole, Carboxin+Captan and Mancozeb completely inhibited the formation of sclerotia, without any significant differences (P=0.05) between treatments, although there were differences with the number of sclerotia (9 to 132) produced in the medium with the fungicides Tolclofos-methyl, Thiabendazole and Thiophanate-methyl at the same concentration.</p>
				<p><bold>
 <italic>In vitro</italic> sensitivity of four <italic>Trichoderma</italic> species to 10 synthetic fungicides.</bold> In the factorial analysis of variance, the four <italic>Trichoderma</italic> species displayed significant differences (F=9576.97, P≤ 0.0001) in the percentage of inhibition of the mycelial growth. The species of the fungus displayed a differential response to the fungicides included in this study. Likewise, the 10 fungicides displayed significant differences (F=177350, P≤ 0.0001) in the inhibition of the <italic>Trichoderma</italic> species. There were also significant differences (F=24772.8, P≤ 0.0001) between the concentrations. The interaction between the 10 fungidides and their four respective concentrations was also significant (F=5208, P≤ 0.0001). Similarly, the interaction of the <italic>Trichoderma</italic> species and the 10 fungicides was also significant (F=4212.90, P≤ 0.0001). The interaction between the species of <italic>Trichoderma</italic> and the four concentrations of fungicide evaluated displayed significant differences (F=1173.88, P≤ 0.0001). Finally, the interaction <italic>Trichoderma</italic> species X fungicides X concentrations of fungicides was also significant (1211.06, P≤ 0.0001) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t6">Table 6</xref>).</p>
				<p>
					<table-wrap id="t13">
						<label>Table 6</label>
						<caption>
							<title>Factorial analysis of variance of the percentage of <italic>in vitro</italic> inhibition of the mycelial growth of four <italic>Trichoderma</italic> species by four concentrations of ten fungicides.</title>
						</caption>
						<table cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0">
							<thead>
								<tr>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Source</th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">gl</th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Sum of squares</th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">values</th>
								</tr>
							</thead>
							<tbody>
								<tr>
									<td>Species of Trichoderma</td>
									<td>3</td>
									<td>4044.8603*</td>
									<td>9576.97b</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>Fungicides</td>
									<td>9</td>
									<td>74904.1540*</td>
									<td>177350</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>Concentrations of fungicides</td>
									<td>3</td>
									<td>10462.8481*</td>
									<td>24772.8</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>Fungicides X concentrations of fungicides</td>
									<td>27</td>
									<td>2199.9104*</td>
									<td>5208.70</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>Species of Trichoderma X fungicides</td>
									<td>27</td>
									<td>1779.3305*</td>
									<td>4212.90</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>Species of Trichoderma X concentrations of fungicides</td>
									<td>9</td>
									<td>495.7913*</td>
									<td>1173.88</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>Species of Trichoderma X fungicides X concentrations of fungicides</td>
									<td>81</td>
									<td>511.4926*</td>
									<td>1211.06</td>
								</tr>
							</tbody>
						</table>
						<table-wrap-foot>
							<fn id="TFN17">
								<p>*The analysis of variance was performed with data transformed into the Arc sen<sup>-1</sup> form, using Type III sum of squares from SAS’s GLM procedures. b= Significant effect at P≤ 0.0001.</p>
							</fn>
						</table-wrap-foot>
					</table-wrap>
				</p>
				<p>The fungicides Propineb and Tifluzamide at a concentration of 100 ppm did not lead to an <italic>in vitro</italic> inhibition of the mycelial growth of <italic>T. azevedoi</italic> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="f2">Figure 1</xref> A and B); the rest of the fungicides inhibited mycelial growth from 30.8 to 100%, with significant differences between treatments (P=0.05). <italic>T. azevedoi</italic> displayed sensitivity to 2000 ppm, particularly in the case of Propineb. Increasing the concentrations of 500 to 2000 ppm led to an increased inhibition of the mycelial growth by Thifluzamide, but without completely inhibiting the mycelial development. By contrast, Fluazinam (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="f2">Figure 1</xref> C) and the rest of the fungicides inhibited the mycelial development of <italic>T. azevedoi</italic> from</p>
				<p>88.9 to 100%, with significant differences (P=0.05) between treatments (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t7">Table 7</xref>).</p>
				<p>Similar to <italic>T. azevedoi</italic>, <italic>T. afroharzianum</italic> displayed no sensitivity to Propineb in the concentrations of 100 (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="f2">Figure 1</xref> D), 500 and 1000 ppm<italic>,</italic> although it did display a sensitivity to 2000 ppm. The inhibition of the mycelial growth of <italic>T. afroharzianum</italic> increased gradually when increasing the concentrations of the fungicides Thifluzamide, Mancozeb, Caboxin+Captan and Fluazinam. The fungicides Propiconazol (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="f2">Figure 1</xref> E), Prochloraz, Thiabendazole and Thiophanate-methyl at concentrations of 100 to 2000 ppm inhibited 100% of the mycelial growth of the antagonist.</p>
				<p>
					<fig id="f2">
						<label>Figure 1</label>
						<caption>
							<title>Inhibition of the mycelial growth of four <italic>Trichoderma</italic> species in PDA added with synthetic fungicides<bold>.</bold> A) <italic>T. azevedoi+</italic>Propineb 100 ppm; B) <italic>T. azevedoi</italic>+Tifluzamide 100 ppm; C) <italic>T. azevedoi+</italic>Fluazinam 100 ppm; D) <italic>T. afroharzianum+</italic>Propineb 100 ppm; E) <italic>T. afroharzianum+</italic>Propiconazole 100 ppm; F) <italic>T. asperellum</italic>+Propineb 100 ppm; G) <italic>T. asperellum+</italic>Thiabendazole 100 ppm; H) <italic>T. asperelloides+</italic>Tifluzamide 100 ppm; I) <italic>T. asperelloides+</italic>TCMTB 100 ppm.</title>
						</caption>
						<graphic xlink:href="2007-8080-rmfi-43-02-RMEXFIT240512-gf2.png"/>
					</fig>
				</p>
				<p>The fungicides Propineb (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="f2">Figure 1</xref> F) and Thifluzamide at concentrations of 100 and 500 ppm ndid not exert an <italic>in vitro</italic> inhibiting effect on the mycelial growth of <italic>T. asperellum</italic>. The fungus only displayed sensitivity to the concentrations of 1000 and 2000 ppm of both fungicides, whereas Mancozeb and Carboxin+Captan inhibited mycelial growth by 36.7 to 92.2%. The rest of the fungicides exerted an <italic>in vitro</italic> inhibition of 95.0 to 100% (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t7">Table 7</xref>; <xref ref-type="fig" rid="f2">Figure 1</xref> G), regardless of their concentrations.</p>
				<p>
					<table-wrap id="t14">
						<label>Table 7</label>
						<caption>
							<title>Means of percentage of <italic>in vitro</italic> inhibition of the radial growth of four <italic>Trichoderma</italic> species, caused by various synthetic fungicides.</title>
						</caption>
						<table cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0">
							<thead>
								<tr>
									<th rowspan="2" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> </th>
									<th rowspan="2" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center"> ppm</th>
									<th colspan="10" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Percent of inhibition of mycelial growth</th>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Proz</th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Tif</th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Man</th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">C+C</th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Flu</th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">TC</th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Prp</th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Prc</th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Tia</th>
									<th style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; border-top:1px solid #000; text-align:center; vertical-align:center">Tio</th>
								</tr>
							</thead>
							<tbody>
								<tr>
									<td rowspan="4">T. azevedoi</td>
									<td>100</td>
									<td>0.0 e</td>
									<td>0.0 e</td>
									<td>30.8 d</td>
									<td>73.0 c</td>
									<td>88.9 b</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>500</td>
									<td>0.0 e</td>
									<td>33.4 e</td>
									<td>53.0 d</td>
									<td>90.4 c</td>
									<td>90.7 b</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>1000</td>
									<td>0.0 e</td>
									<td>54.8 d</td>
									<td>56.5 c</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>92.2 b</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>2000</td>
									<td>58.0 e</td>
									<td>78.9 c</td>
									<td>66.4 d</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>93.9 b</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td rowspan="4">T. afroharzianum</td>
									<td>100</td>
									<td>0.0 g</td>
									<td>63.3 e</td>
									<td>37.3 f</td>
									<td>82.2 d</td>
									<td>92.1 c</td>
									<td>97.3 b</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>500</td>
									<td>0.0 f</td>
									<td>69.6 d</td>
									<td>54.2 e</td>
									<td>85.5 c</td>
									<td>92.9 b</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>1000</td>
									<td>0.0 f</td>
									<td>82.0 d</td>
									<td>57.4 e</td>
									<td>87.8 c</td>
									<td>94.3 b</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>2000</td>
									<td>88.6 c</td>
									<td>87.0 c</td>
									<td>73.4 d</td>
									<td>97.0 b</td>
									<td>95.5 b</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td rowspan="4">T. asperellum</td>
									<td>100</td>
									<td>0.0 e</td>
									<td>0.0 e</td>
									<td>36.7 d</td>
									<td>43.7 c</td>
									<td>95.0 b</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>500</td>
									<td>0.0 e</td>
									<td>0.0 e</td>
									<td>42.8 d</td>
									<td>78.3 c</td>
									<td>97.0 b</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>1000</td>
									<td>36.2 f</td>
									<td>47.4 d</td>
									<td>45.9 e</td>
									<td>87.6 c</td>
									<td>97.8 b</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>2000</td>
									<td>38.5 f</td>
									<td>73.7 d</td>
									<td>48.2 e</td>
									<td>92.2 c</td>
									<td>98.5 b</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td rowspan="4">T. asperelloides</td>
									<td>100</td>
									<td>54.9 e</td>
									<td>58.0 c</td>
									<td>57.3 d</td>
									<td>23.2 f</td>
									<td>94.6 b</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>500</td>
									<td>56.3 d</td>
									<td>58.7 c</td>
									<td>58.6 c</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>96.1 b</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>1000</td>
									<td>58.1 e</td>
									<td>69.4 c</td>
									<td>62.0 d</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>97.1 b</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td>2000</td>
									<td>61.1 e</td>
									<td>80.0 c</td>
									<td>68.3 d</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>97.8 b</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
									<td>100 a</td>
								</tr>
							</tbody>
						</table>
						<table-wrap-foot>
							<fn id="TFN18">
								<p>zPro = Propineb, Tif =Thifluzamide, Man = Mancozeb, C+C = Carboxin+Captan, Flu = Fluazinam, TC = TCMTB, Prp= Propiconazole, Prc = Prochloraz, Tia = Thiabendazole and Tio =Tiophanate-methyl.</p>
							</fn>
							<fn id="TFN19">
								<p>*The number in the rows expresses the mean percentage of growth inhibition in <italic>T. azevedoi, T. afroharzianum</italic>, <italic>T. asperellum</italic> and <italic>T. asperelloides</italic> for each one of the fungicides.</p>
							</fn>
							<fn id="TFN20">
								<p>**Means with a common letter in the rows are not significantly different (P=0.05) according to Tukey´s procedure.</p>
							</fn>
						</table-wrap-foot>
					</table-wrap>
				</p>
				<p>The mycelial growth of <italic>T. asperelloides</italic> was inhibited by the different concentrations of all fungicides. The fungicides Propineb, Thifluzamide (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="f2">Figure 1</xref> H) and Mancozeb reduced mycelial growth 54.9 to 80.0%. The mixture of Carboxin+Captan at a concentration of 100 ppm inhibited mycelial growth by 23.2%, but the same combination of fungicides at concentrations of 500, 1000 and 2000 ppm inhibited mycelial growth by 100% (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="f2">Figure 1</xref> I). Similar results were observed when the rest of the fungicides were used at the same concentrations, where the inhibition of the mycelial growth varied between 94.6 and 100 % (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t7">Table 7</xref>).</p>
			</sec>
			<sec sec-type="discussion">
				<title>Discussion</title>
				<p>In this study Thifluzamide had a greater <italic>in vitro</italic> effect on the mycelial growth of <italic>S. rolfsii</italic>, especially in the dose of 0.1 and 0.01 ppm in the five concentrations studied: despite the lack of any reference studies on the effect of this fungicide on the <italic>in vitro</italic> inhibition of the mycelial growth of the fungus, studies carried out in China indicated that the same fungicide has a preventative effect against soft rot in <italic>Dendrobium officinale</italic> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">Yajun <italic>et al</italic>., 2018</xref>).</p>
				<p>Likewise, Propineb inhibited the mycelial growth of the fungus by 41.1%, which coincides with previous studies in which the concentration of 100 ppm of this fungicide was used (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">Shirsole <italic>et al</italic>., 2019</xref>), and which inhibited 75.4% of the mycelial growth of</p>
				<p><italic>S. rolfsii</italic> obtained from chickpea (<italic>Cicer arietinum</italic>) in India. In turn, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Vikram <italic>et al</italic>. (2023</xref>) evaluated the same molecule at 150 ppm, and it inhibited the mycelial growth of the fungus in wheat plants (<italic>Triticum</italic> spp.) in India by 17.7%, which contrasts with the results from this study. On the other hand, Mancozeb displayed an inhibition of 75.0% of the phytopathogen at a concentration of 100 ppm, which coincides with <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">Shirsole <italic>et al</italic>. (2019</xref>), who found that this fungicide inhibited the growth of the fungus by 100% at the same concentration, whereas Vikram <italic>et al</italic>. (2023) found that the fungicide, at 50 and 150 ppm, inhibited they mycelial growth of the fungus by 57 and 100%, respectively. However, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">Das <italic>et al</italic>. (2014</xref>) reported an inhibition of 20% at 100 ppm, which contrasted with Chandra <italic>et al</italic>. (2020), who recorded that the same fungicide at 250 ppm inhibited 6.3% of the mycelial growth of the fungus from tomato plants in India. In this study, the Carboxin+Captan mixture completely inhibited <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> at concentrations of 10 and 100 ppm, which contrasted with the results by Das <italic>et al</italic>. (2014), who determined that Carboxin mixed with Tiram inhibited the growth of the fungus by 86.4 and 100%, respectively, at the same dose, which may be due to a synergy when combining both molecules.</p>
				<p>Propiconazole exerted an inhibitory effect, comparable to the results by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">Das <italic>et al</italic>. (2014</xref>) who evaluated at 1, 10 and 100 ppm of this molecule, which inhibited the growth of <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> isolated from eggplant (<italic>Solanum melongena</italic>) in India by 27.2, 55.5 and respectively. Similar results were obtained by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Prasad <italic>et al</italic>. (2017</xref>) in India, who found that this fungicide inhibited the mycelial growth of the fungus obtained from tomato plants by 100% at a concentration of 150 ppm. This contrasts with the results by Das <italic>et al.</italic> (2014), who indicated that the fungicide did not inhibit the mycelial growth of the pathogen at 1, 10 and 50 ppm, although it did inhibit (19.4%) at a concentration of 100 ppm, which coincides with the results of this study, in which the fungicide inhibited by 100% at a concentration of 100 ppm.</p>
				<p>In relation to the production of sclerotia by <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> en PDA, Thifluzamide, Prochloraz, Propineb, Propiconazole, Carboxin+Captan and Mancozeb inhibited the formation of sclerotia in the concentration of 100 ppm, which contrasted with the fungicides of the group of Benzimidazoles (Thiabendazole and Thiophanate-methyl). These eariler studies indicate that Thiabendazole at a concentration of 4,000 inhibited the formation of <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> sclerotia obtained from onion (<italic>Allium cepa</italic>), chilli pepper (<italic>Capsicum annuum</italic>), tomato and barley (<italic>Hordeum vulgare</italic>) plants (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Pérez-Moreno <italic>et al</italic>., 2009</xref>), which coincides with the results of this investigation, since the reduction in the formation of sclerotia was related with the increase in the concentrations of the fungicide. On the other hand, additional studies indicated that the <italic>in vitro</italic> evaluation of Mancozeb at 2,000 ppm reduced from 545 to 272 the <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> sclerotia obtained from eggplant plants in Bangladesh (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B22">Siddique <italic>et al</italic>., 2016</xref>). These results contrast with those obtained in this study, since at 100 ppm, the production of sclerotia was completely inhibited, indicating variability in the sensitivity of the fungus to this molecule. The results of this study suggest that Thifluzamide, Prochloraz, Propineb, Propiconazole, Carboxin+Captan and Mancozeb can reduce the <italic>in vitro</italic> production of sclerotia, indicating that these fungicides display potential for the reduction of these structures in the field.</p>
				<p>The fungicides Propineb, Thifluzamide and Mancozeb displayed the lowest effect on mycelial growth in <italic>T. azevedoi, T. afroharzianum, T. asperellum</italic> and <italic>T. asperelloides,</italic> with a differential response of these species to the fungicides and their respective concentrations. In general, <italic>T. azevedoi</italic> and <italic>T. afroharzianum</italic> displayed the lowest inhibiting effect due to the different concentrations of Propineb. These results coincide with those by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Manandhar <italic>et al</italic>. (2020</xref>), who, in Nepal, determined that <italic>T. harzianum</italic> and the isolation T22 <italic>in vitro</italic> at 100 ppm were not inhibited by Propineb, whereas <italic>T. asperellum</italic>, <italic>T. viride</italic> and the isolation T69 were inhibited by 13.1, 28.7 and 0.8%, respectively; these isolations were obtained from the rhizosphere of vegetable orchards in Nepal. These authors recorded that Mancozeb at 100 ppm inhibited <italic>T. harzianum</italic>, <italic>T. viride</italic>, <italic>T. asperellum,</italic> T22 and T69 by 10.8, 16.2, 28.3, 31.2 y 46.6%, respectively, which contrasts with findings by González <italic>et al</italic>. (2020), who recorded that <italic>Trichoderma reesei</italic> was not inhibited at 100 ppm.</p>
				<p>In this study, Propiconazole inhibited the mycelial growth of the <italic>Trichoderma</italic> strains by 100% at a concentration of 100 ppm. By contrast, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">Zapata <italic>et al</italic>. (2023</xref>) found that, five days after the beginning of the study, the same fungicide at 1.25 mL L<sup>-1</sup> inhibited the mycelial growth of <italic>T</italic>. <italic>koningiopsis</italic> by 31% (Tri-cotec® WG in Colombia). These authors recorded that Fluazinam inhibited by 39.6% at the dose of 1 mL L<sup>-1</sup>, which contrasts with the results of this study, since the mycelial growth inhibition of the four <italic>Trichoderma</italic> species varied between 88.9 and 98.5%. They also recorded that Prochloraz and Thiabendazole completely inhibited the mycelial growth, which also coincides with our results.</p>
				<p>The difference in the sensitivity of <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> isolates and <italic>Trichoderma</italic> species to the different fungicides evaluated in this study, compared to other research studies, could be due to the constant use of fungicides in various crops. The exposure of this fungus to these products varies according to the agronomic management of the plant species, and over time, the fungus adapts to high doses of synthetic fungicides for disease management (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Pérez-Moreno <italic>et al</italic>., 2009</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Chaparro <italic>et al</italic>., 2011</xref>).</p>
				<p>The results of this study open new lines of research related to studies of the effectiveness of fungicides at greenhouse and field levels. In this sense, the effectiveness of the molecules that were efficient in the <italic>in vitro</italic> inhibition of <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> must be determined. The most adequate phenological stage of the crop should also be evaluated, along with the concentration and the number of applications for the management of <italic>S. rolfsii,</italic> which causes the soft potato tuber rot, in the field.</p>
				<p>The combination of the <italic>Trichoderma</italic> species with the fungicides Propineb and Thifluzamide and the <italic>in vitro</italic> effect of these against <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> is an option for the producer in the control of soft potato tuber rot. This approach has been practiced for the control of this disease in the potato crop (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">Rubayet and Bhuiyan, 2016</xref>). Future projects should lean towards the reduction in the concentration of fungicides when mixed with antagonistic <italic>Trichoderma</italic> species, with the aim of reducing environmental contamination, but particularly the contamination of tubers.</p>
			</sec>
			<sec sec-type="conclusions">
				<title>Conclusions</title>
				<p>The results indicate that Thifluzamide (0.01 ppm) more efficiently inhibited the mycelial growth of <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> (32.7%) as compared to Propineb (12.2%). Both fungicides reduced sclerotia production by the pathogen (157-164 sclerotia/Petri dish), while the mean production of these resistance structures was 182 sclerotia per Petri dishes without fungicides. In <italic>Trichoderma</italic> spp., Propineb (100 ppm) only affected <italic>T</italic>. <italic>asperelloides</italic> (54.9% mycelial growth inhibition), whereas Thifluzamide showed variable effects (0- 63%), confirming its compatibility with <italic>Trichoderma</italic> species. These findings suggest that: 1) Thifluzamide is more effective against <italic>S. rolfsii</italic> but requires combination with other strategies to reduce sclerotia formation; 2) Both fungicides can be integrated with <italic>Trichoderma</italic> spp. in integrated management programs, as they show low toxicity toward <italic>Trichoderma</italic> spp.; 3) Fungicide selectivity varies according to <italic>Trichoderma</italic> isolate, highlighting the need for specific evaluations. It is recommended to optimize doses and formulations to improve <italic>S</italic>. <italic>rolfsii</italic> control without compromising biocontrol agents, prioritizing schemes that combine both approaches for sustainable management</p>
			</sec>
		</body>
	</sub-article>
</article>