Next Article in Journal
A Method for Identifying Picking Points in Safflower Point Clouds Based on an Improved PointNet++ Network
Previous Article in Journal
Optimising the Vase Life of Cut Hydrangeas: A Review of the Impact of Various Treatments
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agronomy
Volume 15
Issue 5
10.3390/agronomy15051126
agronomy-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Effect of Essential Oil Components on the Growth Inhibition of Fusarium solani var. coeruleum During Potato Storage

by
Martin Kmoch
1,*,
Věra Loubová
1,
Renata Švecová
2 and
Barbora Jílková
3
1
Laboratory of Virology, Department of Genetic Resources, Potato Research Institute Havlíčkův Brod, Dobrovského 2366, 580 01 Havlíčkův Brod, Czech Republic
2
Laboratory of Genetic Resources, Department of Genetic Resources, Potato Research Institute Havlíčkův Brod, Dobrovského 2366, 580 01 Havlíčkův Brod, Czech Republic
3
Department of Crop Science, Breeding and Plant Medicine, Faculty of Agri Sciences, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1665/1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agronomy 2025, 15(5), 1126; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15051126
Submission received: 26 March 2025 / Revised: 16 April 2025 / Accepted: 29 April 2025 / Published: 2 May 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Pest and Disease Management)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Fusarium dry rot of potato may be caused by several species of the genus Fusarium. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of essential oil (EO) components (α-pinene, carvacrol, cinnamaldehyde, D-carvone, eucalyptol, L-linalool, L-menthol, L-menthone, (R)-(+)-limonene and thymol) on the growth of Fusarium solani var. coeruleum using in vitro and in vivo experiments. All the evaluated EO components had a significant effect on the pathogen growth inhibition. Under in vitro conditions, the strongest inhibitory effect on mycelial growth was recorded for carvacrol, thymol, L-menthol and cinnamaldehyde. In vivo experiments confirmed the efficacy of selected EO components. The application of EO components was done by tuber dressing and fumigation. After treating tubers with EO components by dressing and fumigation, a statistically highly significant reduction in tuber infection with the pathogen was observed. Dressing usually had a stronger effect on the reduction in pathogen tuber infection (56.07–81.44%) compared to fumigation (40.03–69.63%). EO components did not have any significant effect on the organoleptic characteristics of cooked tubers; however, during tasting, a deteriorated quality of EO component-dressed tubers was found due to the off-odor and taste of the applied EO components. EO components have a high potential for ecological tuber protection against F. solani var. coeruleum during storage.

1. Introduction

Fusarium dry rot of potato (also known as potato dry rot), caused by several species in the genus Fusarium, is an important potato storage disease of global economic importance [1,2]. It is caused by more than 13 species of the genus Fusarium [1], especially F. solani var. coeruleum (syn. F. coeruleum (Libert) Sacc.), F. sulphureum Schlechtend. (syn. F. sambucinum Fuckel), F. avenaceum (Fr.) Sacc., F. culmorum (Wm. G. Sm.) Sacc., F. graminearum Schwabe, F. oxysporum Schlechtend, Fr., F. sporotrichioides Sherb. F. acuminatum Ellis & Everh., F. equiseti (Corda) Sacc., F. scirpi Lambotte & Fautrey, F. crookwellense L. W., Burgess, P. E. Nelson & T. A. Toussoun, F. semitectum Berk. & Ravenel and F. tricinctum (Corda) Sacc. [3].
Fusarium species infect almost all grown crops, and potatoes are not an exception [4]. They are considered a major treat for stored potatoes due to rot development; however, their negative effects can also be observed in the form of sprout development inhibition, wilting and degradation of potato plant roots in the field [1]. Fusarium species can potentially result in high yield losses, estimated in the range of 6 and 25%, with infection during storage reaching up to 60%, and they can impair tuber quality [1,5]. Tuber injuries become more severe, when during storage Fusarium dry rot is accompanied by other diseases, e.g., potato soft rot caused by the bacteria of the genus Pectobacterium and Dickeya and late blight caused by Phytophthora infestans (Mont.) de Bary, 1876 [6].
In addition to being pathogenic, Fusarium species are also known to produce mycotoxins. Species causing Fusarium dry rot of potato can produce the mycotoxins sambutoxin, fusarin C, fusaric acid, trichothecene, zearalenone and deoxynivalenol [7,8].
A typical symptom on the skin of Fusarium-infected potato tubers is mainly a wrinkled brown appearance and sunken tissue with a dry and leathery appearance. Initial symptoms are flat, small brown spots on sites of tuber wounds, appearing after approx. 30 days of storage. Subsequently, the infected tissue expands in all directions. Finally, concentric rings are observed on the enlarged lesions and the dead tissue begins to dry out [9,10]. On the tuber cross-section, white, pink, yellow, purple or brick-orange mycelium and spore mass is seen in the cavity under lesions [2,10]. With disease progression, the whole tubers with signs of heavy decay always have a shrunken and dehydrated appearance. In serious cases, the affected tubers could completely decay, forming a slurry structure and an unpleasant odor. Therefore, the identification and early management of the disease is important to prevent further spread and to minimize economic loss [11].
Fusarium species are both soil- and seed-borne. The survival of Fusarium conidia in the soil and plant debris is a major reservoir of inoculum and a source of tuber infection in the field [1,12]. Since Fusarium species cannot penetrate tuber periderm, an infection could only occur through wounds or cracks in the periderm [6], caused especially during handling at planting, harvest and sorting [2]. The Fusarium fungi could survive well at 4–10 °C. The aggressiveness of various species depends on the storage conditions and potato variety [8,12,13]. For tuber protection from Fusarium pathogens, appropriate growing measures are the most important things together with the optimization of storage conditions. The planting of healthy seed tubers, avoiding tuber injury at harvest and ensuring favorable conditions for wound healing are the key measures [2]. Harvesting mature tubers minimizes rotting in stores. Crop rotation, the most recommended growing measure in the management of soil-borne pathogens, is not very effective [8] due to the long-term survival of Fusarium conidia in the soil and a broad host range [12]. Tuber protection from Fusarium spp. further involves the growth of resistant varieties, use of ultraviolet radiation and fungicide application [3,8,12,13,14,15]. Recently, ecological control measures have been searched and developed such as the use of organic acids and salts [16], inorganic salts [17,18], chitosan [17], biological antagonists [13,19] and essential oils [9,20].
Essential oils (EOs) are secondary metabolites of aromatic plants, biosynthesized in various plant parts, such as epidermal cells, glandular trichomes and secretory cavities or canals. EOs are mixtures of various bioactive lipophilic substances of a volatile nature, such as terpenes (terpenoids), ketones, aldehydes, phenols, alcohols, esters, phenylpropanoids, oxides and other compounds with low molecular weight, characterized by a strong aroma [21,22,23,24]. The name “essential oils” arose from “essence”, i.e., the presence of aroma and flavor [23]. In individual EOs, between 20 and 60 compounds could be identified (EO components). Two or three components of these compounds have a high concentration compared to the others. Several compounds could only be present at trace amounts [22]. Factors affecting EO yield and composition involve plant genetics, vegetative growth stage, geographical and environmental conditions (as climate, altitude and soil type), agricultural methods and growing procedures (plant density, water availability and harvest time), used plant part, extraction method and storage conditions [25,26,27]. For the abovementioned reasons, the experiments were focused on testing pure natural EO components. The biological activity of EOs is generally ascribed to one or two of these major compounds. It can also be possible that the biological activity of EOs is a result of several synergistically acting components having a significant effect [22]. There are approximately 3000 known EOs from which 300 EOs are commercially important, especially for pharmaceutical, cosmetic, perfumery, sanitary, agricultural and food industries [22]. EOs are conventionally extracted from plants using hydrodistillation, steam distillation or cold pressure [28,29,30,31]. EOs are contained in various plant species of different families [21,22,24,31]. EOs could be produced by various plant organs, i.e., buds, flowers, stems, twigs, seeds, fruits, roots, wood or bark [24]. Monoterpenes are referred as the most abundant bioactive EO components [22,32].
In nature, EOs play an important role in the plant protection for their antibacterial, antiviral, antifungal, insecticidal and repellent properties [22]. Due to their natural origin, high biological degradability, generally low toxicity and environmental friendliness, EOs and their components are perspective candidates for the development of new biopesticides for agronomic purposes [33,34] as alternatives to the synthetic fungicides [29,31,35]. El Bous et al. [36] reported an antimycotic activity of an ethanol extract from clove (Syzygium aromaticum (L.) Merr. & Perry) against F. oxysporum under in vitro conditions. Manganyi et al. [37] determined the highest microbial efficacy of clove and thyme oil against F. oxysporum. Medjahed et al. [38] demonstrated an antimycotic activity of EO from Artemisia herba alba (Asso) and Ammoides verticillata (Desf.) against F. solani var. coeruleum under in vivo and in vitro conditions.
The aim of this study was to find the effect of selected EO components on the growth of F. solani var. coeruleum using in vitro and in vivo experiments and to evaluate their potential in the ecological protection of potato tubers in storage. This study investigates antifungal properties of various EO components against F. solani var. coeruleum under laboratory conditions and in potato storage, which is, among other things, important for the development of new biopesticides.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Pathogen Culture and Inoculum Preparation

The fungus F. solani var. coeruleum (CCM F-3) required for the experiments was obtained from the Czech Collection of Microorganisms (Brno, Czech Republic). It was isolated from potato tubers. The pathogen was cultured on Sabouraud Maltose Agar (SMA; HiMedia, Mumbai, India) enriched with D-glucose (20 g/L) (Ing. Petr Švec—PENTA Ltd., Prague, Czech Republic) at 25 ± 1 °C. Sabouraud Maltose Agar (SMA; HiMedia, Mumbai, India) enriched with D-glucose (20 g/L) was used for Fusarium solani var. coeruleum macroconidia production. The pathogen was stored in Petri dishes in a refrigerator (5 °C) for a short period of time and in cryotubes in a deep-freeze box (−80 °C, 40% glycerol) for a long period of time.
The inoculum of the fungus F. solani var. coeruleum for the experiments was derived by scraping off the mycelium from the nutrient medium in a Petri dish using a scalpel and transferring it to a test tube containing sterile distilled water. The conidial concentration was determined by the Bürker chamber (Paul Marienfeld, Lauda-Konigshofen, Germany). For the experiments, a concentration of 5 × 105 conidia/mL was used.

2.2. The Used EO Components

The following pure, natural EOs were selected for the experiments: cinnamaldehyde (≥95%, W228613-100G-L), α-pinene (98%; 147524-250ML), carvacrol (99%, W224511-100G-K), D-carvone (≥96 %, W224928-100G-K), eucalyptol (≥99%; W2465069-1KG-K), L-menthol (≥99%; W266523-100G-K), L-linalool (≥95%, natural), (R)-(+)-limonene (97%; 183164-100ML), L-menthone (≥96 %; W266701-1KG-K) and thymol (≥98.5%; T0501-100G) (all Sigma-Aldrich, Steinheim, Germany). The tested essential oil components were selected based on a literature review and prior knowledge.

2.3. In Vitro Assays of the Antifungal Activity of EO Components

The antifungal activity of the evaluated EO components was determined as the inhibition of radial mycelial growth. The experiments were conducted in 2023 (September to December). The tested EO components were diluted as described by Kmoch et al. [39]. Relevant volumes of diluted EO components were added to sterilized SMA medium at a temperature of 40–45 °C to obtain final concentrations of 0–1600 µL/L. When thoroughly mixed, the SMA solutions were immediately poured into 90 mm diameter Petri dishes (20 mL/dish). After cooling and the solidification of the nutrient medium, a 6 mm agar disc with the fungal inoculum was cut from a 3-week-old culture using a cork borer and placed into the center of the Petri dish, which was then sealed with parafilm. Petri dishes without any EO components were used as controls. Three replications were prepared for each concentration variant and the dishes were incubated at 25 ± 1 °C for 21 days. The culturing was done in closable plastic boxes. Subsequently, the diameters of fungal cultures (mm) from individual experimental variants were measured, and individual mycelial growth characteristics were calculated. The results were expressed as the means of three independent replications for each pathogen–EO component combination. Mycelial growth inhibition (MGI) was calculated using the formula as described by Albuquerque et al. [21].
Further, the nature of each EO component’s effect on fungi (fungistatic and/or fungicidal) was determined. The minimum inhibition concentration (MIC) and minimum fungicidal concentration (MFC) of the evaluated EOs in fungi were established, as described by Plodpai et al. [40]. To determine MFC, inhibited fungi on agar discs in Petri dishes treated with EO concentrations higher than MIC were transferred to a fresh medium (SMA) and incubated at 25 ± 1 °C for 14 days. The recovery of the fungal growth was studied, thereby determining the concentration of fungicidal effect. IC50 values were graphically derived from dosage curves as described by Chang et al. [3].

2.4. Assays of the Antifungal Activity of EO Components During Potato Storage

The effectiveness of the selected EO components (EO with high antifungal activity in in vitro tests) on potato tuber infection with the pathogen F. solani var. coeruleum in storage was verified using in vivo experiments. The experiments were conducted in 2024 (February to May). EO components were applied on potato tubers using vapors (fumigation) and dressing. Three EO components (carvacrol, thymol and cinnamaldehyde) were selected for the experiments, or based on the results of in vitro assays, but also the results of first screening on tubers (unpublished data). Healthy potato tubers of size 35–45 mm of the variety ‘Red Anna’ were washed with tap water to remove adhering soil residues and disinfected in 1% solution of NaClO (Unilever, Bohumín, Czech Republic) for 15 min., then they were rinsed in sterile distilled water, and left to dry at room temperature overnight. Tuber stem ends and bud ends were mechanically injected with a sterile steel rod (diameter: 3 mm; length: 10 mm). It was performed based on the modified method by Akosah et al. [41].
The experiments to establish the fumigation effect on F. solani var. coeruleum growth were performed in the desiccators (Super-Star-Desiccator, Sicco, Grünsfeld, Germany) with a usable volume of 42 L and a total volume of 45 L. The prepared tuber wounds were inoculated with a F. solani var. coeruleum conidial suspension (10 µL) at a concentration of 5 × 105 conidia/mL and tubers (n = 7) in egg trays were uniformly placed in the desiccator. Petri dishes with cellulose upon which 4.2 mL (100 mL/m3) of pure EO, 4.2 g (100 mL/m3) in the case of thymol, had been applied, were placed into the desiccator. To obtain the required humidity, trays and filtration paper under the dishes were moistened with distilled water. A positive control without any EO component application (only inoculation with a conidial spore suspension) was included in the experiment. A variant with the application of sterile distilled water was used as a negative control. Three replications were done for each experimental variant. The experiment was assessed after 28 days of incubating the treated tubers at 5–8 °C and a relative humidity of 95–99%. The tuber was cut with a knife across the inoculation sites. After taking photos with the Olympus TG-6 camera tuber rotting areas (infection intensity) (%) of individual experimental variants was assessed using software ImageJ 1.53e (US National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MA, USA).
In another experiment, the effect of tuber dressing with EO components on F. solani var. coeruleum growth was studied. Wounded tubers of the size 35–45 mm of the variety ‘Red Anna’ were rinsed in EO components at the concentration of 2% for 2 s. To ensure higher efficacy and stability, EO components (carvacrol and cinnamaldehyde) were bound to a biopolymer (gelatin- and chitosan-containing) as described in the patent by Matušinský et al. [42]. Thymol was diluted to 2% concentration (1 g crystallite thymol was dissolved in 2 mL ethanol (96%), rapeseed oil (3 mL) and distilled water (9 mL) + Tween 20 (as required for perfect dispersion) were added to make a stock solution at a concentration of 6.90%, which was further diluted to a concentration of 2% using distilled water). F. solani var. coeruleum conidial solution (10 µL) at a concentration of 5 × 105 conidia/mL was pipetted into prepared wounds on the tubers, and the tubers (n = 7) were placed onto filtration paper saturated with distilled water (150 mL) in sterile closable plastic boxes (25 L). A positive control (only inoculation with F. solani var. coeruleum conidia) and a negative control (application of sterile distilled water) were included in the experiment. For each experimental variant, three replications were performed. Each variant contained seven tubers. The boxes were closed and placed into a store at 5–8 °C and a relative humidity of 95–99%. After 28 days of incubation, the extent of tuber infection intensity was determined for individual experimental variants. The tubers were cut across inoculation points using a knife. After taking photos with the Olympus TG-6 camera, the rotting area (%) was assessed using software ImageJ 1.53e.

2.5. Organoleptic Test After EO Component Application by Dressing and Fumigation

Finally, an organoleptic evaluation of the tubers was made after EO component application by dressing and fumigation. The organoleptic test was performed on selected components of essential oils that demonstrated high antifungal activity in in vitro tests and were used for experiments during tuber storage. The organoleptic test was performed as described by Vidner et al. [43]. Five people conducted the assessment, who independently scored individual qualities. The evaluators were properly trained. They were from the Department of Genetic Resources (Potato Research Institute Havlíčkův Brod, Czech Republic).

2.6. Statistical Assessment of the Experiments

The statistical assessment of the experiments was performed using an analysis of variance (one-factor ANOVA) and Tukey’s HSD test (p < 0.01; program STATISTICA 7, Statsoft, Tulsa, OK, USA).

3. Results

3.1. In Vitro Antifungal Effect of EO Components

The results of the experiments on the in vitro antifungal activity of EO components indicated that all the evaluated EO components had a significant effect on the growth inhibition of F. solani var. coeruleum under in vitro conditions. Significant differences were found among the control and individual concentrations of EO components. The antifungal activity of individual EO components significantly differed (Table 1). The highest antifungal activity was recorded for carvacrol, thymol and L-menthol (Figure 1), which caused F. solani var. coeruleum mycelial growth inhibition of 100% and/or 82.96% at the concentration of 200 µL/L. The lowest antifungal activity was detected in (R)-(+)-limonene (Figure 2) and α-pinene.
In addition, IC50, MIC and MFC were measured (Table 2). The lowest IC50 value was recorded for carvacrol (60 µL/L) and thymol (100 µL/L), followed by menthol (150 µL/L). The study of fungistatic and/or fungicidal activities revealed that carvacrol (150 µL/L), thymol (250 µL/L) and cinnamealdehyde (400 µL/L) had the strongest fungicidal effect on F. solani var. coeruleum (Table 2). Contrary to that, the lowest fungicidal capacity was recorded for (R)-(+)-limonene (5600 µL/L), α-pinene (3900 µL/L) and eucalyptol (1600 µL/L). Thymol, carvacrol and menthol had the lowest MIC among the tested EOs (i.e., 120, 200 and 300 µL/L). EO components inhibited the growth of the pathogen in a dose-dependent manner.

3.2. Antifungal Effect of EO Components During Potato Storage

The tubers treated with sterilized water (a negative control) did not indicate rot symptoms. Apparent tissue discoloration only occurred on injection sites due to oxidation and suberization. Contrary to that, tubers inoculated with F. solani var. coeruleum (a positive control) indicated strong rot symptoms. Tubers treated with EO components and inoculated with F. solani var. coeruleum indicated mild rot symptoms (Figure 3). After EO component application, tuber rotting slowed down and the symptoms were significantly mitigated. After the fumigation of the tubers, a highly significant reduction in F. solani var. coeruleum infection intensity was recorded for all the tested EO components compared to the untreated control (Figure 4). Cinnamaldehyde had the strongest effect on the relative reduction in infection intensity (69.63%). Thymol and carvacrol reduced the infection intensity by 57.31% and 40.03%. No significant difference was found in the efficacy against the pathogen among the tested EO components, except for cinnamaldehyde. After tuber dressing, a statistically highly significant reduction in F. solani var. coeruleum infection intensity was also found in all the tested EOs (Figure 5). The evaluation of tuber infection with F. solani var. coeruleum after dressing with EO components is documented in Figure 3. A relative reduction in F. solani var. coeruleum tuber infection ranged between 56.07% (cinnamaldehyde) and 81.44% (carvacrol). No significant difference was recorded for the efficacy against the pathogen among the tested EO components. Dressing had a stronger effect on the reduction in F. solani var. coeruleum tuber infection compared to fumigation. The efficacy of fumigation and potato tuber dressing using EO components on Fusarium solani var. coeruleum (%) is given in Table 3.

3.3. Organoleptic Test After EO Component Application by Dressing and Fumigation

At the end of the experiments, a taste test of potato cooking quality after EO component application was performed. EO components had no significant effect on tuber cooking quality (Table 4), but the taste test revealed a deteriorated quality of dressed tubers due to the off-odor and taste of EO components. The taste of EO component-fumigated tubers was not degraded by an off-odor and off-taste.

4. Discussion

In this study, the antifungal activity of selected EO components against Fusarium solani var. coeruleum causing potato dry rot was determined using in vitro and in vivo experiments. In our experiments, all the evaluated EO components had an inhibitory effect on the pathogen growth under in vitro conditions. However, the antifungal activity of individual EO components significantly differed. The highest antifungal activity was recorded for thymol, carvacrol, L-menthol and cinnamaldehyde. Carvacrol and thymol are monoterpenoic phenols with a strong antifungal activity [44]. Carvacrol is an ingredient of EOs from many plants, e.g., oregano (Origanum vulgare L.), thyme (Thymus vulgaris L.), yellow pepperweed (Lepidium flavum Torr.), summer savory (Satureja hortensis L.), bergamot orange (Citrus aurantium subsp. Bergamia (Risso) Engl.) and black cumin (Nigella sativa L.) [45]. Thymol is isomeric with carvacrol and it is a major component of the EO extracted from thyme (T. vulgaris). Thymol could also be extracted from other plants, e.g., sweet basil (Ocimum basillicum L.) and ajwain (Trachyspermum ammi (L). Sprague ex Turrill), from various species of the genus Origanum or Satureja [46]. Menthol is a monocyclic monoterpene alcohol. It is a white, solid, crystalline substance occurring in two enantiomers, i.e., L-menthol and D-menthol. L-menthol is a major form of menthol occurring in nature [47]. Menthol and menthone are major components of EOs from peppermint (Mentha × piperita L.) [48] and pennyroyal (Mentha pulegium L.) [29]. Cinnamaldehyde is an aromatic aldehyde [49], which is contained in EOs extracted from the cinnamon bark and other species of the genus Cinnamomum [50].
The efficacy of selected EO components on F. solani var. coeruleum was confirmed by in vivo experiments, wherein potato tubers were dressed and fumigated. In our experiment, a statistically highly significant reduction in the intensity of F. solani var. coeruleum tuber infection was found after both dressing and fumigation. The relative reduction in tuber infection with F. solani var. coeruleum after an application of EO components by dressing and fumigation ranged between 56.07% and 81.44%, and/or 40.03% and 69.63%. Dressing had a stronger effect on the reduction in tuber infection with F. solani var. coeruleum compared to fumigation. Similar results of the efficacy of EO components applied to potato tubers by dressing and fumigation were obtained by Kmoch et al. [39] for the fungus Helminthosporium solani causing potato silver scurf.
Several authors have worked to verify the antifungal activity of EOs against Fusarium species, and they found various efficacy using in vitro and in vivo experiments. Oosterhaven [51] revealed the efficacy of S-carvone, a monoterpene present in caraway (Carum carvi L.). S-carvone inhibited the growth of plant pathogenic fungi F. solani var. coeruleum and F. sulphureum. In their study, Gorris et al. [52] also reported a significant effect of S-carvone on F. solani var. coeruleum and F. sulphureum. Awadalla et al. [53] focused on the efficacy of EOs against F. solani var. coeruleum using in vitro and in vivo experiments. They evaluated oils from lemon grass (Cymbopogon citratus (DC. ex Nees) Stapf), spearmint (Mentha spicata L.), peppermint (Mentha × piperita L.), scented geranium (Pelargonium graveolens (Thumb.) L’Hér.), fennel (Foeniculum vulgare Mill.), sweet basil (Ocimum basilicum L.) and marjoram (Origanum majorana L.). All the tested EOs significantly inhibited the growth of F. solani var. coeruleum under in vitro and in vivo conditions (during potato storage), and peppermint oil was the most effective against F. solani var. coeruleum. Rai et al. [54] reported that EO derived from eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sp.) significantly inhibited the growth of fungi F. solani var. coeruleum, F. oxysporum, F. pallidoroseum, F. acuminatum and F. chlamydosporum. Bäng [55] revealed a fungicidal effect of various EOs on F. solani var. coeruleum under in vitro and in vivo conditions. Al-Mughrabi et al. [13] focused on the efficacy of S-carvone, L-menthone and peppermint and spearmint oil against F. solani var. coeruleum, F. sambucinum, F. avenaceum and F. oxysporum under in vitro conditions. They demonstrated an inhibitory effect of EOs on a majority of pathogens. Bounar et al. [56] also found significant antifungal effects of EO from thyme (Thymus vulgaris L.) and oregano (Origanum vulgare L.) against F. oxysporum under both in vitro and in vivo conditions. Hartmans et al. [57] demonstrated an antifungal activity of carvone, derived from caraway, against F. sulphureum using in vitro experiments.
Slavov et Nikolová [58] demonstrated the antifungal activity of EO from Origanum vulgare ssp. hirtum, which is rich in carvacrol, on Fusarium solani var. coeruleum. EO had the potential for use in potato stores, especially in the second half of the storage season. In their study, Krzyśko-Łupicka et al. [59] also demonstrated a significant effect of thyme oil on Fusarium solani var. coeruleum.
EOs had no significant effect on the organoleptic characteristics of the cooked potatoes, but a deteriorated quality of tested cooked potatoes dressed with EO components due to the off-odor and off-taste of EO components was detected. The organoleptic characteristics of EO component-fumigated potatoes were not degraded by the off-odor and off-taste. Potato tuber treatment with natural EOs had no significant effect on the change of assessed characteristics (taste and odor), also according to the studies by Grudzińska et al. [60], Kalt et al. [61], Čížková et al. [62] and Gomes-Castillo et al. [63]. EOs are volatile substances, and that is why they do not leave residues at all or leave only few residues [64].
Although EOs show outstanding antimicrobial properties, the practical usability of most EOs is complicated. Their characteristic strong aroma and taste could result in undesirable organoleptic changes in sensory evaluation, and they can be degraded by light, increased temperatures, oxygen and moisture. Low water-solubility is one of the biggest limitations in using EOs [65,66]. The encapsulation of EOs and their components inside various matrices (such as polymers) may overcome such problems [67,68]. The encapsulation of EOs facilitates the controlled release of EOs and improves the bioactivity and stability of EOs [68,69]. Encapsulation is defined as a process in which EOs are retained inside a capsule [70]. The encapsulation technique minimizes interactions of EOs, which creates the core, with the environment, decreases the rate of evaporation or transfer of EOs into the environment, increases the feasibility of handling the encapsulated substance [71], facilitates the EO application converting liquid to solid phase [72], enables the controlled and targeted release of active ingredients, increases the antifungal, antioxidant efficiency and heat stability of EOs [73] and reduces (masks) the unpleasant odors and tastes of EOs [71,72]. It has been found that encapsulation techniques improve the antimicrobial efficiency of EOs. For example, encapsulated lavender EO has improved the antimicrobial potential three times [74].

5. Conclusions

This study demonstrated a significant effect of selected EO components (carvacrol, thymol and cinnamaldehyde) applied by dressing and fumigation on the reduction in F. solani var. coeruleum during potato storage. Based on the obtained results, dressing with EO components could particularly be recommended against F. solani var. coeruleum on stored potato tubers. The highest efficacy of tuber dressing was recorded for carvacrol. An appropriate application form, dosage and concentration are very important for the efficacy of EOs under operational conditions. EO components have a high potential in the biological protection of stored potato tubers against F. solani var. coeruleum, the causal agent of Fusarium dry rot of potato, and could be an environment-friendly and human-safe alternative to synthetic fungicides. The findings of this study are important for the development of new biopesticides.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization., M.K. and V.L.; methodology, M.K., V.L. and B.J.; validation, M.K. and V.L.; formal analysis, M.K. and V.L.; investigation, M.K., V.L. and R.Š.; resources, M.K. and V.L.; data curation, M.K.; writing—original draft preparation, M.K. and V.L.; writing—review and editing, M.K., V.L. and B.J.; visualization, M.K. and V.L.; supervision, M.K.; project administration, M.K.; and funding acquisition, M.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Ministry of Agriculture of the Czech Republic, the National Agency for Agricultural Research, project number QK21010083 entitled “Ecological protection of ware potatoes as a healthy vegetable against selected soilborne and seedborne pathogens” and project number QL24010148 “Alternative methods of biological potato protection using bioagents and natural substances”. This research was further supported by the project number MZE-RO1624 “The long-term concept of research organization development for the years 2023–2027”.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the Czech Collection of Microorganisms (CCM), Brno, (a national program conserving and providing genetic resources of microorganisms and economically important small animals) for providing the necessary fungi strains.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Cullen, D.W.; Toth, I.K.; Pitkin, Y.; Boonham, N.; Walsh, K.; Barker, I.; Lees, A.K. Use of Quantitative Molecular Diagnostic Assays to Investigate Fusarium Dry Rot in Potato Stocks and Soil. Phytopathology 2005, 95, 1462–1471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Stevenson, W.R. (Ed.) Compendium of Potato Diseases, 2nd ed.; The Disease Compendia Series; American Phytopathological Society: St. Paul, MN, USA, 2001; ISBN 978-0-89054-275-0. [Google Scholar]
  3. Gachango, E.; Hanson, L.E.; Rojas, A.; Hao, J.J.; Kirk, W.W. Fusarium spp. Causing Dry Rot of Seed Potato Tubers in Michigan and Their Sensitivity to Fungicides. Plant Dis. 2012, 96, 1767–1774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Estrada, R., Jr.; Gudmestad, N.C.; Rivera, V.V.; Secor, G.A. Fusarium graminearum as a Dry Rot Pathogen of Potato in the USA: Prevalence, Comparison of Host Isolate Aggressiveness and Factors Affecting Aetiology. Plant Pathol. 2010, 59, 1114–1120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Fan, Y.; Zhang, W.; Kang, Y.; Shi, M.; Yang, X.; Yu, H.; Zhang, R.; Liu, Y.; Qin, S. Physiological and Dynamic Transcriptome Analysis of Two Potato Varieties Reveal Response of Lignin and MAPK Signal to Dry Rot Caused by Fusarium sulphureum. Sci. Hortic. 2021, 289, 110470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Secor, G.A.; Gudmestad, N.C. Managing Fungal Diseases of Potato. Can. J. Plant Pathol. 1999, 21, 213–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Desjardins, A.E. Fusarium Mycotoxins: Chemistry, Genetics, and Biology; APS Press, American Phytopathological Society: St. Paul, MN, USA, 2006; ISBN 978-0-89054-335-1. [Google Scholar]
  8. Bojanowski, A.; Avis, T.J.; Pelletier, S.; Tweddell, R.J. Management of Potato Dry Rot. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2013, 84, 99–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Xing-dong, L.; Hua-li, X. Antifungal Activity of the Essential Oil of Zanthoxylum bungeanum and Its Major Constituent on Fusarium sulphureum and Dry Rot of Potato Tubers. Phytoparasitica 2014, 42, 509–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Vatankhah, M.; Saberi Riseh, R.; Moradzadeh Eskandari, M.; Sedaghati, E.; Alaie, H.; Afzali, H. Biological Control of Fusarium Dry Rot of Potato Using Some Probiotic Bacteria. J. Agric. Sci. Technol. 2019, 21, 1301–1312. [Google Scholar]
  11. Xue, H.; Liu, Q.; Yang, Z. Pathogenicity, Mycotoxin Production, and Control of Potato Dry Rot Caused by Fusarium spp.: A Review. J. Fungi 2023, 9, 843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Peters, J.C.; Lees, A.K.; Cullen, D.W.; Sullivan, L.; Stroud, G.P.; Cunnington, A.C. Characterization of Fusarium spp. Responsible for Causing Dry Rot of Potato in Great Britain. Plant Pathol. 2008, 57, 262–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Al-Mughrabi, K.I.; Coleman, W.K.; Vikram, A.; Poirier, R.; Jayasuriya, K.E. Effectiveness of Essential Oils and Their Combinations with Aluminum Starch Octenylsuccinate on Potato Storage Pathogens. J. Essent. Oil Bear. Plants 2013, 16, 23–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Bång, U. Influence of Seed Tuber Infestation, Chemical Seed Treatment, and Pre-Harvest Climate on Incidence of Gangrene and Dry Rot of Potato (Solanum tuberosum L.). Potato Res. 1992, 35, 3–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Ranganna, B.; Kushalappa, A.C.; Raghavan, G.S.V. Ultraviolet Irradiance to Control Dry Rot and Soft Rot of Potato in Storage. Can. J. Plant Pathol. 1997, 19, 30–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Hua-Li, X.; Yang, B.; Yuan-Yuan, Z.; Calderón-Urrea, A.; Hu-Jun, W.; Lu-Mei, P.; Yi, W.; Yong-Cai, L. Erratum to: Effects of Elicitors on Trichothecene Accumulation and Tri Genes Expression in Potato Tubers Inoculated with Fusarium sulphureum. Eur. J. Plant Pathol. 2017, 149, 239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Li, Y.; Sun, X.; Bi, Y.; Ge, Y.; Wang, Y. Antifungal Activity of Chitosan on Fusarium sulphureum in Relation to Dry Rot of Potato Tuber. Agric. Sci. China 2009, 8, 597–604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Yaganza, E.S.; Tweddell, R.J.; Arul, J. Postharvest Application of Organic and Inorganic Salts To Control Potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) Storage Soft Rot: Plant Tissue–Salt Physicochemical Interactions. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2014, 62, 9223–9231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Aydin, M.H. Evaluation of Some Trichoderma Species in Biological Control of Potato Dry Rot Caused by Fusarium sambucinum Fuckel Isolates. Appl. Ecol. Environ. Res. 2019, 17, 533–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Wei, J.; Bi, Y.; Xue, H.; Wang, Y.; Zong, Y.; Prusky, D. Antifungal Activity of Cinnamaldehyde against Fusarium sambucinum Involves Inhibition of Ergosterol Biosynthesis. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2020, 129, 256–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Albuquerque, C.C.D.; Camara, T.R.; Mariano, R.D.L.R.; Willadino, L.; Marcelino Júnior, C.; Ulisses, C. Antimicrobial Action of the Essential Oil of Lippia Gracilis Schauer. Braz. Arch. Biol. Technol. 2006, 49, 527–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Bakkali, F.; Averbeck, S.; Averbeck, D.; Idaomar, M. Biological Effects of Essential Oils—A Review. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2008, 46, 446–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Baldim, I.; Tonani, L.; Von Zeska Kress, M.R.; Pereira Oliveira, W. Lippia sidoides Essential Oil Encapsulated in Lipid Nanosystem as an Anti-Candida Agent. Ind. Crops Prod. 2019, 127, 73–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Bergman, M.E.; Davis, B.; Phillips, M.A. Medically Useful Plant Terpenoids: Biosynthesis, Occurrence, and Mechanism of Action. Molecules 2019, 24, 3961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Masotti, V.; Juteau, F.; Bessière, J.M.; Viano, J. Seasonal and Phenological Variations of the Essential Oil from the Narrow Endemic Species Artemisia molinieri and Its Biological Activities. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003, 51, 7115–7121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Mugao, L. Factors Influencing Yield, Chemical Composition and Efficacy of Essential Oils. Int. J. Multidiscip. Res. Growth Eval. 2024, 5, 169–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Angioni, A.; Barra, A.; Coroneo, V.; Dessi, S.; Cabras, P. Chemical Composition, Seasonal Variability, and Antifungal Activity of Lavandula stoechas L. ssp. Stoechas Essential Oils from Stem/Leaves and Flowers. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2006, 54, 4364–4370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Masango, P. Cleaner Production of Essential Oils by Steam Distillation. J. Clean. Prod. 2005, 13, 833–839. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Bahrami, R.; Kocheili, F.; Ziaee, M. Fumigant Toxicity and Persistence of Essential Oils from Asafetida, Geranium, and Walnut on Adults of Rhyzopertha dominica (Col.: Bostrichidae). Toxin Rev. 2016, 35, 63–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Maes, C.; Bouquillon, S.; Fauconnier, M.-L. Encapsulation of Essential Oils for the Development of Biosourced Pesticides with Controlled Release: A Review. Molecules 2019, 24, 2539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Sempere-Ferre, F.; Asamar, J.; Castell, V.; Roselló, J.; Santamarina, M.P. Evaluating the Antifungal Potential of Botanical Compounds to Control Botryotinia fuckeliana and Rhizoctonia solani. Molecules 2021, 26, 2472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Caputo, L.; Reguilon, M.D.; Mińarro, J.; De Feo, V.; Rodriguez-Arias, M. Lavandula angustifolia Essential Oil and Linalool Counteract Social Aversion Induced by Social Defeat. Molecules 2018, 23, 2694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Pavela, R.; Benelli, G. Essential Oils as Ecofriendly Biopesticides? Challenges and Constraints. Trends Plant Sci. 2016, 21, 1000–1007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Morkeliūnė, A.; Rasiukevičiūtė, N.; Šernaitė, L.; Valiuškaitė, A. The Use of Essential Oils from Thyme, Sage and Peppermint against Colletotrichum acutatum. Plants 2021, 10, 114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Coleman, W.K.; Lonergan, G.; Silk, P. Potato Sprout Growth Suppression by Menthone and Neomenthol, Volatile Oil Components of Minthostachys, Satureja, Bystropogon, and Mentha Species. Am. J. Pot. Res. 2001, 78, 345–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. El Bous, M.; Soliman, W.; Ibrahim, M.; El Baz, H. In vitro Evaluation of Syzygium aromaticum L. Ethanol Extract as Biocontrol Agent against Postharvest Tomato and Potato Diseases. Egypt. J. Bot. 2018, 59, 81–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Manganyi, M.C.; Regnier, T.; Olivier, E.I. Antimicrobial Activities of Selected Essential Oils against Fusarium oxysporum Isolates and Their Biofilms. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2015, 99, 115–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Medjahed, I.M.; Benyelles, N.G.; Senouci, H.; Gaouar, M.Y. Individual and Combined Antifungal Activities of Artemisia herba alba and Ammoides verticillata Essential Oils against the Three Main Pathogenic Microorganisms of Potato. Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screen. 2023, 26, 1920–1928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Kmoch, M.; Loubová, V.; Veselská, M.; Jílková, B.; Víchová, J. Antifungal Activity of Essential Oils on Helminthosporium solani Causing Potato Silver Scurf under In vitro and In vivo Conditions. Agriculture 2023, 14, 66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Plodpai, P.; Chuenchitt, S.; Petcharat, V.; Chakthong, S.; Voravuthikunchai, S.P. Anti-Rhizoctonia solani Activity by Desmos chinensis Extracts and Its Mechanism of Action. Crop Prot. 2013, 43, 65–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Akosah, Y.A.; Kostennikova, Z.S.; Lutfullin, M.T.; Lutfullina, G.F.; Afordoanyi, D.M.; Vologin, S.G.; Mardanova, A.M. Induced Expression of Cyp51a and Hk1 Genes Associated with Penconazole and Fludioxonil Resistance in the Potato Pathogen Fusarium oxysporum. Microorganisms 2023, 11, 1257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Matušinsky, P.; Maňasová, M.; Zouhar, M. Fungicidní Prostředek na Ochranu Rostlin na Základě Esenciálního oleje z Thymus vulgaris, Způsob jeho Výroby a Použití. Czech Patent CZ 308145 B6, 11 December 2020. [Google Scholar]
  43. Vidner, J.; Dobiáš, K.; Dědič, P.; Bareš, I.; Sehnalová, J. Klasifikátor Genus Solanum L. Genové Zdroje 1987, 31, 45. [Google Scholar]
  44. De Vincenzi, M.; Stammati, A.; De Vincenzi, A.; Silano, M. Constituents of Aromatic Plants: Carvacrol. Fitoterapia 2004, 75, 801–804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Mączka, W.; Twardawska, M.; Grabarczyk, M.; Wińska, K. Carvacrol—A Natural Phenolic Compound with Antimicrobial Properties. Antibiotics 2023, 12, 824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Escobar, A.; Pérez, M.; Romanelli, G.; Blustein, G. Thymol Bioactivity: A Review Focusing on Practical Applications. Arab. J. Chem. 2020, 13, 9243–9269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Kamatou, G.P.P.; Vermaak, I.; Viljoen, A.M.; Lawrence, B.M. Menthol: A Simple Monoterpene with Remarkable Biological Properties. Phytochemistry 2013, 96, 15–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Malekmohammad, K.; Rafieian-Kopaei, M.; Sardari, S.; Sewell, R.D.E. Toxicological Effects of Mentha x Piperita (Peppermint): A Review. Toxin Rev. 2021, 40, 445–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Friedman, M. Chemistry, Antimicrobial Mechanisms, and Antibiotic Activities of Cinnamaldehyde against Pathogenic Bacteria in Animal Feeds and Human Foods. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2017, 65, 10406–10423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Guzman, J. Natural Cinnamic Acids, Synthetic Derivatives and Hybrids with Antimicrobial Activity. Molecules 2014, 19, 19292–19349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Oosterhaven, J. Different Aspects of S-Carvone, a Natural Potato Sprout Growth Inhibitor; Landbouwuniversiteit te Wageningen: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 1995; ISBN 978-90-5485-435-7. [Google Scholar]
  52. Gorris, L.G.M.; Oosterhaven, K.; Hartmans, K.J.; de Witte, Y.; Smid, E.J. Control of Fungal Storage Diseases of Potato by Use of Plant Essential Oil Components. In Brighton Crop Protection Conference, Pests and Diseases; British Crop Protection Council: Farnham, UK, 1994; pp. 307–312. [Google Scholar]
  53. Awadalla, O.A.; Abu El-Souod, S.M.; Assawah, S.M.W.; El-Debaky, S.A. Control of Dry and Soft Rot Disease of Potato Tubers Using Essential Oils, Fungicides and Antagonistic Fungi. Egypt. J. Exp. Biol. (Bot.) 2008, 4, 1–11. [Google Scholar]
  54. Rai; Qureshi, S.; Pandey, A.K. In vitro Susceptibility of Opportunistic Fusarium spp. to Essential Oils. Mycoses 1999, 42, 97–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Bång, U. Screening of Natural Plant Volatiles to Control the Potato (Solanum tuberosum) Pathogens Helminthosporium solani, Fusarium solani, Phoma foveata and Rhizoctonia solani. Potato Res. 2007, 50, 185–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Bounar, R.; Krimat, S.; Boureghda, H.; Dob, T. Chemical Analyses, Antioxidant and Antifungal Effects of Oregano and Thyme Essential Oils Alone or in Combination against Selected Fusarium Species. Int. Food Res. J. 2020, 27, 66–77. [Google Scholar]
  57. Hartmans, K.J.; Diepenhorst, P.; Bakker, W.; Gorris, L.G.M. The Use of Carvone in Agriculture: Sprout Suppression of Potatoes and Antifungal Activity against Potato Tuber and Other Plant Diseases. Ind. Crops Prod. 1995, 4, 3–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Slavov, S.; Nikolova, M. Origanum vulgare ssp. hirtum Essential Oil as Inhibitors of Fusarium Dry Rot of Potato. Biol. Life Sci. Forum 2021, 3, 40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Krzyśko-Łupicka, T.; Mahdi Oraibi, S.; Kurp, E.; Walkowiak, W. A Possible Use of Selected Essential Oils and Citrosept to Inhibit the Growth of Fusarium solani Mart. (Sacc.). Adv. Microbiol. 2016, 6, 1159–1165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Grudzińska, M.; Czerko, Z.; Borowska-Komenda, M. Changes of Organoleptic Quality in Potato Tubers after Application of Natural Sprout Inhibitors. Agric. Eng. 2016, 20, 35–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Kalt, W.; Prange, R.K.; Daniels-Lake, B.J.; Walsh, J.; Dean, P.; Coffin, R. Alternative Compounds for the Maintenance of Processing Quality of Stored Potatoes (Solanum tuberosum). J. Food Process. Preserv. 1999, 23, 71–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Čížková, H.; Sevcik, R.; Vacek, J. Caraway Essential Oil as Potential Inhibitor of Potato Sprouting. Rostl. Vyrob. 2000, 46, 501–507. [Google Scholar]
  63. Gómez-Castillo, D.; Cruz, E.; Iguaz, A.; Arroqui, C.; Vírseda, P. Effects of Essential Oils on Sprout Suppression and Quality of Potato Cultivars. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2013, 82, 15–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Şanlı, A.; Karadoğan, T. Carvone Containing Essential Oils as Sprout Suppressants in Potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) Tubers at Different Storage Temperatures. Potato Res. 2019, 62, 345–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Weiss, J.; Scherze, I.; Muschiolik, G. Polysaccharide Gel with Multiple Emulsion. Food Hydrocoll. 2005, 19, 605–615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Ghosh, V.; Mukherjee, A.; Chandrasekaran, N. Ultrasonic Emulsification of Food-Grade Nanoemulsion Formulation and Evaluation of Its Bactericidal Activity. Ultrason. Sonochemistry 2013, 20, 338–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Pasukamonset, P.; Kwon, O.; Adisakwattana, S. Alginate-Based Encapsulation of Polyphenols from Clitoria Ternatea Petal Flower Extract Enhances Stability and Biological Activity under Simulated Gastrointestinal Conditions. Food Hydrocoll. 2016, 61, 772–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Giunti, G.; Campolo, O.; Laudani, F.; Zappalà, L.; Palmeri, V. Bioactivity of Essential Oil-Based Nano-Biopesticides toward Rhyzopertha dominica (Coleoptera: Bostrichidae). Ind. Crops Prod. 2021, 162, 113257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Campolo, O.; Giunti, G.; Russo, A.; Palmeri, V.; Zappalà, L. Essential Oils in Stored Product Insect Pest Control. J. Food Qual. 2018, 2018, 6906105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Nedovic, V.; Kalusevic, A.; Manojlovic, V.; Levic, S.; Bugarski, B. An Overview of Encapsulation Technologies for Food Applications. Procedia Food Sci. 2011, 1, 1806–1815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Avila Gandra, E.; Radünz, M.; Helbig, E.; Dellinghausen Borges, C.; Kuka Valente Gandra, T. A Mini-Review on Encapsulation of Essential Oils. J. Anal. Pharm. Res. 2018, 7, 00205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Mishra, M. (Ed.) Handbook of Encapsulation and Controlled Release; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2015; ISBN 978-0-429-18347-8. [Google Scholar]
  73. Tiwari, S.; Singh, B.K.; Dubey, N.K. Encapsulation of Essential Oils—A Booster to Enhance Their Bio-Efficacy as Botanical Preservatives. J. Sci. Res. 2020, 64, 175–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Yuan, C.; Wang, Y.; Liu, Y.; Cui, B. Physicochemical Characterization and Antibacterial Activity Assessment of Lavender Essential Oil Encapsulated in Hydroxypropyl-Beta-Cyclodextrin. Ind. Crops Prod. 2019, 130, 104–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Agronomy 15 01126 g001
Figure 1. Growth inhibition of F. solani var. coeruleum after application of L-menthol.
Figure 1. Growth inhibition of F. solani var. coeruleum after application of L-menthol.
Agronomy 15 01126 g001
Agronomy 15 01126 g002
Figure 2. Growth inhibition of F. solani var. coeruleum after application of (R)-(+)-limonene.
Figure 2. Growth inhibition of F. solani var. coeruleum after application of (R)-(+)-limonene.
Agronomy 15 01126 g002
Agronomy 15 01126 g003
Figure 3. Evaluation of F. solani var. coeruleum tuber infection after dressing tubers with EO components.
Figure 3. Evaluation of F. solani var. coeruleum tuber infection after dressing tubers with EO components.
Agronomy 15 01126 g003
Agronomy 15 01126 g004
Figure 4. Mean intensity of F. solani var. coeruleum tuber infection (% rotting area) 4 weeks after fumigation with EO components. A statistical assessment of the experiments was done using an analysis of variance (one-factor ANOVA). All data are means from three replications, and each replication is represented by seven tubers; various letters within columns indicate statistically significant differences (p < 0.01) based on Tukey’s HSD test.
Figure 4. Mean intensity of F. solani var. coeruleum tuber infection (% rotting area) 4 weeks after fumigation with EO components. A statistical assessment of the experiments was done using an analysis of variance (one-factor ANOVA). All data are means from three replications, and each replication is represented by seven tubers; various letters within columns indicate statistically significant differences (p < 0.01) based on Tukey’s HSD test.
Agronomy 15 01126 g004
Agronomy 15 01126 g005
Figure 5. Mean intensity of F. solani var. coeruleum tuber infection (% rotting area) four weeks after dressing tubers with EO components. A statistical assessment of the experiments was done using an analysis of variance (one-factor ANOVA). All data are the means from three replications, and each replication is represented by seven tubers; various letters within columns indicate statistically significant differences (p < 0.01) based on the Tukey’s HSD test.
Figure 5. Mean intensity of F. solani var. coeruleum tuber infection (% rotting area) four weeks after dressing tubers with EO components. A statistical assessment of the experiments was done using an analysis of variance (one-factor ANOVA). All data are the means from three replications, and each replication is represented by seven tubers; various letters within columns indicate statistically significant differences (p < 0.01) based on the Tukey’s HSD test.
Agronomy 15 01126 g005
Table 1. Differences in the mean mycelial growth inhibition (MGI) of F. solani var. coeruleum among various concentrations of EO components.
Table 1. Differences in the mean mycelial growth inhibition (MGI) of F. solani var. coeruleum among various concentrations of EO components.
EO ComponentConcentration of EO Component (µL/L)
01002004008001600
(R)-(+)-limonene002.22 lm12.96 hijk15.56 hij29.26 g
α-pinene0006.32 jklm22.46 gh41.05 f
D-carvone09.82 ijklm66.32 de92.63 ab100 a100 a
carvacrol092.59 ab100 a100 a100 a100 a
eucalyptol00 010.37 ijkl69.26 de91.11 ab
cinnamaldehyde016.67 hi60.00 e100 a100 a100 a
L-linalool022.50 gh41.25 f75.00 cd100 a100 a
L-menthone05.19 klm39.63 f83.33 bc100 a100 a
L-menthol042.59 f82.96 bc100 a100 a100 a
thymol046.25 f100 a100 a100 a100 a
All data are means from three replications. Mean values within the column sharing the same superscript do not differ significantly from one another based on Tukey’s HSD test (p < 0.01). Different lowercase letters in table indicate statistically significant differences. MGI—mycelial growth inhibition.
Table 2. Antifungal activity of EO components against the mycelial growth of F. solani var. coeruleum.
Table 2. Antifungal activity of EO components against the mycelial growth of F. solani var. coeruleum.
EO ComponentIC50
(µL/L)		MIC
(µL/L)		MFC
(µL/L)
(R)-(+)-limonene280056005600
α-pinene190038003900
D-carvone210420900
carvacrol60120150
eucalyptol67013401600
cinnamaldehyde180360400
L-linalool250500600
L-menthone270540600
L-menthol150300900
thymol100200250
The values are the means from three independent replications for each pathogen–EO component combination. IC50—a concentration having a 50% inhibitory effect; MIC—minimum inhibitory concentration and MFC—minimum fungicidal concentration.
Table 3. Efficacy of fumigation and potato tuber dressing using EO components on Fusarium solani var. coeruleum (%).
Table 3. Efficacy of fumigation and potato tuber dressing using EO components on Fusarium solani var. coeruleum (%).
EO ComponentFumigationDressing
Carvacrol40.0381.44
Cinnamaldehyde69.6356.07
Thymol57.3161.16
Table 4. Evaluation of tuber cooking quality after EO component application by dressing and fumigation.
Table 4. Evaluation of tuber cooking quality after EO component application by dressing and fumigation.
VariantOdorTaste Flesh Firmness and Cooking Behavior
Fumigationcarvacrol62114
cinnamaldehyde72213
thymol72213
control72513
Dressingcarvacrol3 (odor of EO comp.)3 (taste of EO comp.)12
cinnamaldehyde4 (odor of EO comp.)5 (taste of EO comp.)13
thymol3 (odor of EO comp.)8 (taste of EO comp.)13
control82713
Legend: Odor, 5–8: pleasant, typical, 1–4: satisfactory (occasionally off-odor), and 0: unsatisfactory (off-odor); Taste, 31–40: excellent, 21–30: very good, 11–20: good, 1–10: less good, and 0: unsatisfactory; Flesh firmness and cooking behavior, 13–16: waxy, solid, fine texture, firm, 9–12: slightly mealy, semi-solid, semi-fine, occasionally disintegrating slightly during cooking, 5–8: mealy, semi-coarse texture, slight disintegration during cooking, 1–4: strongly mealy, coarse texture, medium to strong disintegration during cooking, and 0: thin, very watery, soggy, strong disintegration during cooking.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Kmoch, M.; Loubová, V.; Švecová, R.; Jílková, B. Effect of Essential Oil Components on the Growth Inhibition of Fusarium solani var. coeruleum During Potato Storage. Agronomy 2025, 15, 1126. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15051126

AMA Style

Kmoch M, Loubová V, Švecová R, Jílková B. Effect of Essential Oil Components on the Growth Inhibition of Fusarium solani var. coeruleum During Potato Storage. Agronomy. 2025; 15(5):1126. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15051126

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kmoch, Martin, Věra Loubová, Renata Švecová, and Barbora Jílková. 2025. "Effect of Essential Oil Components on the Growth Inhibition of Fusarium solani var. coeruleum During Potato Storage" Agronomy 15, no. 5: 1126. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15051126

APA Style

Kmoch, M., Loubová, V., Švecová, R., & Jílková, B. (2025). Effect of Essential Oil Components on the Growth Inhibition of Fusarium solani var. coeruleum During Potato Storage. Agronomy, 15(5), 1126. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15051126

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop