J. of Plant Protection and Pathology, Mansoura Univ., Vol. 11 (2): 63 - 72 , 2020 Journal of Plant Protection and Pathology Journal homepage: www.jppp.mans.edu.eg Available online at: www. jppp.journals.ekb.eg * Corresponding author. E-mail address: dr.khaled_2015@hotmail.com DOI: 10.21608/jppp.2020.78905 Using Green Chemicals and Biological Control Agents for Controlling the Seed-Borne Pathogen Fusarium moniliforme in Sugar Beet Shawki, K. F. M. 1* ; A. B. B. Elsayed 1 ; W. A. E. Abido 2 and Y. M. Shabana 3 1 Plant Pathology Research Institute, Agricultural Research Center, Giza, Egypt. 2 Agronomy Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Mansoura University, Egypt. 3 Plant Pathology Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Mansoura University, Egypt. Cross Mark ABSTRACT Seeds of fifteen sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) cultivars were collected in 2018 and 2019 in Egypt and screened for their seed-borne mycoflora using deep-freezing blotter method. Among those fungi recovered from sugar beet seeds, a plant pathogen Fusarium moniliforme was the most dominant. Thus, it was tested for its pathogenicity and transmission against sugar beet plants. Green chemicals (antioxidants) and biological control agents were used for suppressing F. moniliforme in comparison with Fludioxonil/Mefenoxam (Maxim XL 3.5% FS ® ; a chemical fungicide), Potassium silicate at concentrations (4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 ml/L), Nicotinic acid at concentrations (1, 5, 10, 15 and 20 mM/L), Trichoderma harzianum, T. hamatum and Bacillus subtilis were tested against F. moniliforme in vitro, in the greenhouse and in the field. The results assured that nicotinic acid at 5 mM/L, T. harzianum and T. hamatum and potassium silicate at 12 ml/L were the best treatments compared with the Maxim ® fungicide (control). But nicotinic acid at 5 mM/L was the most effective among all treatments. Keywords:Fusarium moniliforme, green chemicals, biological control agents, sugar beet. INTRODUCTION Sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) is a relatively new harvest cultivated in temperate regions and spreading widely just in the twentieth century and now developed in 50 countries (James, 2004). Most is grown at latitudes between 30 and 60ºN, as a summer crop in prairie, maritime, semi-tarry and some semi-dry and dried climates and as a summer and/or winter crop in Mediterranean and other semi-dried conditions (Draycott, 1972). Sugar beet is an perfect crop for production of sugar in Egypt. Its area increases year next year to meet the growing population calls. The total cultivated zone of sugar beet reached around 563422 feddans with 12.11 million ton as total production. However, the total cultivated zone in the world reached around 11.65 million feddans with 301.12 million ton as total production (FAO, 2018). 22 pests (2 bacteria, 14 fungi, 1 nematode, and 5 viruses) are restricted as connected with sugar beet seeds (Agarwal et al., 2006). The most common sugar beet seed-borne pathogens are Phoma betae, Peronospora farinose, Cercospora beticola, Ramularia beticola, Uromyces betae, Alternaria tenuis. Fusarium spp. and beet yellows virus (BYV) (Mariã and Jevtiã, 2001). Fusarium yellows in sugar beet is primarily rised by F. oxysporum f. sp. betae but can be caused by other Fusarium spp. including F avenaceum., F. acuminatum, F. moniliforme and F. solani (Hanson and Hill, 2004). Transmitted fungi on sugar beet seeds inspire significant losses wherever sugar beets are grown. However, in all sugar beet production zone not all these pathogens have been indicated. damages contain reduced sugar recovery white and reduced harvestable tonnage. Also, many of these pathogens cause post-harvest losses in storage piles. Control of diseases caused by these pathogens include avoidance of stresses, planting disease- resistant cultivars, cultural practices such as water management and the use of fungicides (Jacobsen, 2006). Pesticides cause cancers of the lung, prostate, lymphatic, hematopoietic and childhood cancer. In addition to cancer, there are several other chronic health effects that may be connected to pesticides. The nervous system is particularly vulnerable to many pesticides of sundry distinct chemical classes. It is well known that acute poisoning with organophosphates causes long-term neurobehavioral deficits and depression, but low-dose exposures without clinical poisoning effects on health are less clear (Baker and Wilkinson, 1990). One of the solutions for sustaining agricultural output and environmental quality known Biofungicides. In order to implement these environmental friendly biofungicide on plant fungal diseases, it is remarcable to pay notice to the way of application and formulation. Biofungicides have many traits over chemical fungicides i.e., they are safe on human health, cheaper, and harmful residues are not detected (Dhiraj et al., 2014). Thus, the main objective of this study was to control sugar beet seedlings damping off and root rot diseases by using green chemicals (antioxidants) and biological control agents for suppressing the seed-borne pathogen F. moniliforme in sugar beet via promoting the plant systemic acquired resistance and / or killing the pathogen.