Pals and enemies: Streptomycetes as promoters of plant illness and symbiosis

Abstract

The ecological functions of soil streptomycetes within the plant root surroundings are currently gaining multiplied interest. This assessment describes our recent advances in elucidating the complex interactions between streptomycetes, plant lifes, and pathogenic and symbiotic microorganisms. Streptomycetes play diverse roles in plant-related microbial groups. Some act as biocontrol tools, inhibiting plant interactions with pathogenic organisms. As a result of the adversarial properties of streptomycetes, they exert a selective strain on soil microbes, which won’t constantly be for plant benefit. Others modulate the formation of symbioses among plant roots and microbes, and that is made possible due to their direct superb influence at the symbiotic association, expressed as, for example, enabling of hyphal elongation of symbiotic fungi. At present, streptomycetes have been diagnosed as modulators of plant defense using repressing plant responses to pathogens that they facilitate root colonization with pathogenic fungi. In contrast, other strains induce local and systemic resistance against pathogens or promote plant growth. In conclusion, while streptomycetes have an obvious ability of appearing as biocontrol agents, care has to be taken to avoid strains that become virulent pathogens or promote disease development. We argue toward using an included screening approach in the look for efficient biocontrol agents, consisting of assays on in vitro antagonism, plant growth, and disorder suppression.

Full text

Adesh University Journal of Medical Sciences & Research • Article in Press | PB Adesh University Journal of Medical Sciences & Research • Article in Press | 1
Review Article
Pals and enemies: Streptomycetes as promoters of plant
illness and symbiosis
David Adeiza Zakari1, Israel Abiodun Olorunmowaju1, Nasir Opisa Audu2, Oluwatunmise Israel Aiyedogbon1,
Josephine Onize Omaku1, Daniel Ebamosi George1
1Department of Microbiology, Kogi State University, Anyigba, Kogi State, 2Department of Microbiology, Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta, Ogun
State, Nigeria.
INTRODUCTION
Streptomyces is the biggest genus of Actinobacteria and the sort genus of the family
Streptomycetaceae. Over 500 species of Streptomyces micro-organism had been dened.[1] As with
the other Actinobacteria, streptomycetes are Gram-positive, and have genomes with excessive GC
content.[2] ey are located predominantly in soil and decaying plant life, most streptomycetes
produce spores, and are notable for their awesome “earthy” odor that comes from the production
of a volatile metabolite, geosmin.
Streptomycetes form an imperative part of soil microbial communities making up about 10% of
general soil microbial owers.[3] ese Gram-positive, lamentous Actinobacteria, are properly
tailored to the soil surroundings and able to interrupt down complicated biological polymers,
such as chitin or lignin.
Streptomycetes are notable antibiotic manufacturers, which may additionally assist them to protect
their nutrient sources. Even though streptomycetes are traditionally considered as soil microorganism,
ABSTRACT
e ecological functions of soil streptomycetes within the plant root surroundings are currently gaining
multiplied interest. is assessment describes our recent advances in elucidating the complex interactions
between streptomycetes, plant lifes, and pathogenic and symbiotic microorganisms. Streptomycetes play diverse
roles in plant-related microbial groups. Some act as biocontrol tools, inhibiting plant interactions with pathogenic
organisms. As a result of the adversarial properties of streptomycetes, they exert a selective strain on soil microbes,
which won’t constantly be for plant benet. Others modulate the formation of symbioses among plant roots and
microbes, and that is made possible due to their direct superb inuence at the symbiotic association, expressed
as, for example, enabling of hyphal elongation of symbiotic fungi. At present, streptomycetes have been diagnosed
as modulators of plant defense using repressing plant responses to pathogens that they facilitate root colonization
with pathogenic fungi. In contrast, other strains induce local and systemic resistance against pathogens or
promote plant growth. In conclusion, while streptomycetes have an obvious ability of appearing as biocontrol
agents, care has to be taken to avoid strains that become virulent pathogens or promote disease development. We
argue toward using an included screening approach in the look for ecient biocontrol agents, consisting of assays
on in vitro antagonism, plant growth, and disorder suppression.
Keywords: Streptomycetes, Biocontrol, Symbiotic association, Colonization, Hyphal elongation
is is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 4.0 License, which allows others
to remix, transform, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
©2023 Published by Scientic Scholar on behalf of Adesh University Journal of Medical Sciences & Research
*Corresponding author:
David Adeiza Zakari,
Department of Microbiology,
Kogi State University, Anyigba,
Kogi State, Nigeria.
david.z@ksu.edu.ng
Received: 14November 2022
Accepted: 13May2023
EPub Ahead of Print: 08 June 2023
Published:
DOI
10.25259/AUJMSR_79_2022
Quick Response Code:
www.aujmsr.com
Adesh University Journal of Medical
Sciences & Research Article in Press

Zakari, et al.: Streptomyces
Adesh University Journal of Medical Sciences & Research • Article in Press | 2Adesh University Journal of Medical Sciences & Research • Article in Press | 3
several reports indicate that they are related to owers and fungal
hyphae. Bacterial laments are capable of colonizing fungal
hyphae and had been suggested from saprophytic, pathogenic
and mycorrhizal fungi, as well as from areas lled with symbiotic
fungal mycelia; the mycorrhizospheres of plants.[4,5] Some
Streptomyces species are capable of entering the root tissues
and establishing an endophytic way of life with owers, or
result in plant illnesses.[6,7] e importance of streptomycetes as
promoters of plant sicknesses has targeted them in several great
reviews.[8,9] Plant pathogenic streptomycetes these days had been
the point of interest of an in depth evaluation,[10] as have been
non-streptomycetes plant-related actinomycetes,[10] and Frankia
and actinorhizal symbiosis.[11]
HISTORY OF STREPTOMYCES AND
ANTIBIOTICS
Almost 200 years aer Antony van Leeuwenhoek gave the
rst remark of bacteria in 1684 the usage of his own hand
made microscope, other pioneers, together with Ferdinand
Cohn and Robert Koch, based present-day standards
approximately bacteriology as a technological know-how
area. It took some other 200years to pick out and attain the
contemporary understanding of Actinobacteria. Similarly,
204 years aer van Leeuwenhoek research, the primary
description of a microorganism that nally has become
known as an actinobacterium was described, while Hasani
Armauer discovered a microorganism inside the tissues
of leprosy patients, which was later described because the
etiologic agent of this disorder in 1874.[12]
Rangarajan et al., in 1984, reported the primary
Actinobacteria species, in which he named Strepthrotrix
foersteri. He isolated this microbe from samples of
human tear ducts supplied using R. Foerster, a medical
buddy. Cohn meant that Strepthrotrix foerster was not
related to any sickness, but that it reached the patient’s eye
through airborne soil particles. Later, he discovered that
Strepthrotrix foerster had morphological functions of fungi
and microorganism.[12] However, the proposed nomenclature
for the bacterial genus became deemed invalid because
Strepthrotrix had already been categorized as a real fungus
as reported by Patel in 1974.[13] en, in 1974, Patel reported
the etiologic agent of “lampy jaw.” Harz located structures
just like reproductive bodies and hyphae of fungi; therefore,
he considered the microorganism to be a fungus and named
it Actinomyces bovis.[12] In 1974, Patel reported another
microorganism for the duration of his observations the
usage of mild microscopy that this is now diagnosed as an
actinobacterium: e tuberculosis pathogen Mycobacterium
tuberculosis.[14] Patel, in 1974, reported that the microbes
presented morphological traits that were just like the ones of
microorganisms previously dened with the aid of Hansen
related to leprosy sickness.[15]
Even though there was a clear relationship among those
microorganisms, it became non-existent till 1916 that
R. E. Buchanan suggested a nomenclature and class.
Buchanan proposed the order Actinomycetales, containing
the family Actinomycetaceae and the subsequent genera:
Actinobacillus, Leptotrichia, Actinomyces, and Nocardia.[16]
In 1943, Waksman and Henrici proposed a new type for the
actinomycetes, which was based on their capability to shape
branching cells. Waksman and Henrici observed that one
actinomycete group shaped a condensed mat of interlinked
branching hyphae that produced reproductive spores. e
Streptothrix described using Cohn fell into this organization,
but due to the invalid genus name, Waksman and Henrici
named it Streptomyces, this means “twisted fungus.”[17]
In the fourth decade of the 20th century, Streptomyces
was diagnosed. Many studies were achieved during this
time to nd chemotherapeutic remedies to manipulate
tuberculosis.[15] In 1943, Waksman once more obtained
attention, this time due to his best discovery: e antibiotic
streptomycin from Streptomyces griseus was eective against
the tuberculosis pathogen.[18]
Approximately 600 validated species of Streptomyces have
now been dened following their isolation from many
environmental assets. ey are now the topic of studies to
discover new bioactive compounds for the pharmaceutical
and agricultural industries.[19] e primary proposed
nomenclature of Actinobacteria was primarily based on
sporulation patterns. Despite the fact that morphological
traits are generally critical for Streptomyces identication, a
few researchers have established that classication based on
cellular morphology, colony pigmentation, and physiological
functions do not always mirror the herbal phylogenetic
relationship between Actinobacteria and related organisms.[20]
Creation of the polyphasic taxonomic approach combined
molecular and biochemical analyses which elucidated
streptomycetes systematics. In addition, improved availability
of 16S rRNA collection facts has enabled correct studies of
taxonomic aliations and phylogenetic relationships.[13]
e taxonomy of streptomycetes
1. Domain: Prokaryota
2. Phylum: Actinobacteria
3. Class: Actinomycetes
4. Order: Streptomycetes
5. Family: Streptomycetaceae
6. Genus: Streptomyces
Streptomycetaceae is a circle of relatives within the order
Actinomycetales, actinomycetes best recognized for their
capacity to supply antibiotics and are Gram-positive bacteria
which include a set of branching unicellular microorganisms,
and they produce branching mycelium which may be of
kind’s, namely, substrate mycelium and aerial mycelium.
Among Actinomycetales, the family Streptomycetes are the

Zakari, et al.: Streptomyces
Adesh University Journal of Medical Sciences & Research • Article in Press | 2Adesh University Journal of Medical Sciences & Research • Article in Press | 3
dominant. e genus Streptomyces changed into proposed
with the aid of Waksman and Henrici for cardio and spore
forming actinomycetes. Streptomyces species are the biggest
genus of actinomycetes determined predominately within the
soil and in decaying vegetable, Streptomyces species produce
spore and are noted for his or her distinct earthy odor that
results from manufacturing of unstable metabolites.[19]
Soil oers a natural reservoir for microorganisms and
their antimicrobial merchandise.[19] Streptomyces species
are predominantly present within the soil and are broadly
diagnosed as industrially crucial microorganisms due to
their capability to provide many types of novel secondary
metabolites along with antibiotics and enzymes. A huge
range of Streptomyces spp. had been isolated and screened
from the soil inside the past several a long time, accounting
for 70–80% applicable secondary metabolites available
commercially.[19]
MORPHOLOGICAL DIFFERENTIATION AND
PHYSIOLOGY
Streptomycetes have a markedly extraordinary cell envelope
shape than Gram-negative micro-organism, such that
Streptomyces genus has been identied using cellular
wall composition.[21] Similar to other actinobacteria,
streptomycetes have not any outer membrane and their
mobile partitions have a thick peptidoglycan (or murein)
layer. e presence of LL-diaminopimelic within the
mobile wall confers a normal chemotaxonomic feature to
all members of the Streptomyces genus[22] and its presence
collectively with glycine characterizes the cell wall as typeI.
Teichoic acids (anionic glycopolymers) include another
crucial cellular wall factor that confers a negative rate to the
mobile surface and contributes to physiological functioning
and cell coaggregation.[23,24]
Streptomyces are lamentous Gram high-quality
microorganism widely allotted in specic surroundings such as
clean water, terrestrials, and marine surroundings. Streptomyces
are aerobic, non-acid speedy and with high G-C content within
the genomes, and normally spore forming and cited for their
wonderful early odor. ey produce layers of aerial hyphae that
may dierentiate them in to a sequence spores.
Streptomyces is the biggest antibiotic generating genus
producing antibacterial, antifungal, and antiparasitic
drugs and additionally a wide variety of dierent bioactive
compounds. Almost all of the bioactive compounds
produced with the aid of Streptomyces are initiated at some
stage in the time coinciding with aerial hyphal formation
from the substrate mycelium.[19]
e most crucial traits of Streptomyces are their potential to
supply secondary metabolite with antibacterial, antifungal,
antiviral and anti-tumoral, and antiulcer activity.[25]
It generally plays physiological capabilities inside the
organism. Anumber one metabolite is usually aords in lots
of organism or cellular. Secondary metabolites are organic
compounds that are not without delay concerned in regular
growth, improvement, or duplicate of an organism.[19]
It seems in time of environmental troubles that nutrient
depletion restricting growth situations allow formation of
secondary metabolites.[10] It is been also discovered that
distinctive organism can produce metabolite that has various
biological capacity which consists of metal transporting
retailers, sex hormones, pollution, pigments, pesticides,
immunomodulating sellers, entagonist, and receptors
antagonists. e intermediate products of primary metabolic
pathways are acquired from their very own articial pathways
for the synthesis of secondary metabolites.[26]
LIFE CYCLE OF STREPTOMYCETES
e lifestyles cycle is initiated while favorable
environmental situations and nutrient availability sell spore
germination.[27] Next, germ tubes develop to shape syncytial
vegetative or substrate mycelia, which include interconnected
feeding hyphae which can be liable for nutrient uptake.
While nutrients end up scarce, or some other pressure
condition occurs, programmed cell dying of the substrate
mycelia and cellular dierentiation at the center of the colony
bring about aerial hyphae.[23] ese aerial hyphae are subtly
distinguishable from the feeding hyphae, as they may be
blanketed by a hydrophobic brous layer, possibly to help
the aerial hyphae damage the oor tension on air pockets in
the soil, while the feeding hyphae have a clean hydrophilic
surface.[28]
e growth of Streptomyces involves hyphal tip extension
and sub-apical branching.[29] In contrast to the procedure
in rod-formed bacteria wherein cytokinesis is primarily
based on building a cross wall by way of depositing murein
into lateral walls, Streptomyces growth takes place by way
of hyphae manufacturing on the cell pole. Even though it
is not always really elucidated, this cellular growth sample
is regulated using the apical protein complex DivIVA. In
Bacillus subtilis, DivIVA interacts with the Min machine to
coordinate division on the middle of the cell. In contrast,
in Streptomyces, the Min system is absent, for this reason,
DivIVA impacts division on the cellular tip. Another aspect
of streptomycetes increase includes the conservation of two
agencies of proteins, the tubulin homolog FtsZ and several
membrane proteins, which can be both related to cytokinetic
Z-ring and septal peptidoglycan.[27] e closing segment
of the Streptomyces lifestyles cycle includes the apical cells
of the aerial hyphae dierentiating right into a spore chain.
A dierentiating apical compartment grows through tip
extension and starts synchronous, multiple cellular divisions
right into a developmentally managed form. Again, there is

Zakari, et al.: Streptomyces
Adesh University Journal of Medical Sciences & Research • Article in Press | 4Adesh University Journal of Medical Sciences & Research • Article in Press | 5
the participation of FtsZ, which leads to sporulation septa
and then those pre-spores bring together thick spore walls by
way of depositing actin.[27] e scale of Streptomyces spores
can variety from 0.7 to 1.2 µm.[30] ese ultimate levels of
the Streptomyces life cycle are intently related to antibiotic
production.[12] All through programmed cell dying of the
substrate mycelia, antibiotics are simultaneously produced,
possibly to defend the nutrient sources against competitor
microorganisms.[31]
PATHOGENIC ACTIVITY OF
STREPTOMYCETES
Even though highly few in number, plant-pathogenic
Streptomyces species honestly infect a wide variety of crop
species. Streptomyces infection is limited to the underground
plant elements, and necrosis is frequently the rst symptom
of these sicknesses. Systemic plant infection has never been
stated, despite the fact that aerial quantities of plants may be
stunted or wilted if root contamination is severe.
Most research on plant pathogenic Streptomyces species has
centered on illnesses of potato. Sadly, the terminology used
to explain these sicknesses has no longer been consistently
applied. In this text, we are able to group potato tuber
illnesses into the ones that are typied by means of decidedly
erumpent (raised) or pitted scab signs and those which can be
usually supercial. We consider that this distinction perhaps
relevant to the mechanisms of pathogenicity employed by
means of the causal organisms.
ERUMPENT POTATO SCAB ILLNESSES
At least three species of Streptomyces result in erumpent
lesions on potato tubers. Two of those, Streptomyces scabies
and Streptomyces acidiscabies, are properly referred to as
potato pathogens. A3rdspecies has currently been dened by
way of researchers in Japan.[32] Although the identity of this
species is not always but decided, it is miles without a doubt
awesome from S. scabies and S. acidiscabies based totally on
physiological, morphological, and genetic criteria. Extreme
erumpent scab signs and symptoms are oen followed with
the aid of pitting of the tuber oor. Incredibly, virulent traces
of S. scabies can produce pitted symptoms, and as we can
discuss eventually, this symptom may be due to high ranges
of thaxtomin production. In 1890, axter[33] recognized the
causal agent of commonplace scab and named it Oospora
scabies. Pathogenic traces produced a soluble brown pigment
(melanin) and gray spores borne in spiral chains. e sort
subculture turned into no longer maintained, and the species
became renamed Actinomyces scabies by Gussow[34] and
then S. scabies by means of Waksman and Henrici.[17] Due
to faulty designation of the sort stress that became used in a
large taxonomic look at called the international Streptomyces
undertaking (ISP), the species turned into considered
invalid and changed into indexed as species incertae sedis
(“kind stress not extant, many taxonomically special lines
to be had”). e name call S. scabies became lately revived,
and neotype strains were recognized based on research
performed in Europe[35] and the USA.[36] Using both
morphological and physiological characteristics, S. scabies
forms a relatively homogenous group. e current species
description is constant with that of axter in that it is miles
characterized through manufacturing of melanin and easy
gray spores borne in spiral chains and with the aid of usage
of the nine sugars used for characterization of Streptomyces
species with the aid of the ISP. With the aid of default,
maximum of the S. scabies strains which have been properly
characterized are pathogens. However, now not all S. scabies
traces are pathogenic, and this species seems to be intently
associated with strictly saprophytic species.[37] erefore,
reading the population dynamics of pathogenic traces of this
species is hard.
S. scabies is the maximum essential plant pathogen in
the genus Streptomyces global. is pathogen can reason
supercial, erumpent, or pitted lesion sorts, but erumpent
lesions are maximum commonplace, and most lesions have
a raised, rough, and corky appearance. S. scabies reasons scab
of potato in many nations in Japanese and Western Europe,
South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, and Israel, as well as
within the America and Canada. is pathogen also incites
scab of root crops which include radish, turnip, and carrot
in a few countries.[38] Interestingly, S. scabies infects peanut,
ensuing in a sickness referred to as “pod wart of peanut”[39]
that is characterized by means of raised, necrotic lesions on
peanut hulls in South Africa.[35] Other Streptomyces species
may additionally purpose this sickness in Israel.[39] Due to its
relative importance, almost all of the research carried out so
far on the ecology and management of illnesses resulting from
Streptomyces species has targeted on S. scabies. e pathogen
may be soil- or tuber-borne and is ubiquitous in potato
manufacturing soils. is species seems to be tailored to the
nicely-drained, near-neutral-pH soils wherein potatoes and
root crop greens are usually grown. e superior temperature
for boom of S. scabies is 30°C, steady with observations of
expanded potato scab severity at some stage in growing
seasons with higher than normal temperatures. S. scabies is
inhibited at excessive soil moisture, which has led to the use
of irrigation for sickness manage.[40] Infection of potato tubers
is usually through immature lenticels; consequently, tubers
are maximum vulnerable to contamination all through the
duration of speedy tuber growth that commences when the
tuber diameter reaches twice that of the stolon and continues
for approximately 6–8 weeks. By means of keeping high
soil moisture at some stage in this period, eective ailment
manage has been executed inside the United Kingdom.
However, retaining excessive soil moisture for such prolonged

Zakari, et al.: Streptomyces
Adesh University Journal of Medical Sciences & Research • Article in Press | 4Adesh University Journal of Medical Sciences & Research • Article in Press | 5
intervals of time is impractical for many potato growers in
North the USA.
STREPTOMYCETES AND PLANT SYMBIOSIS
FORMATION
Nitrogen-solving symbioses between owers and bacteria can
be both inhibited or promoted using Actinobacteria.[41] Gregor
et al.[42] investigated the function of antibiotic resistance in
Streptomyces kanamyceticus–Bradyrhizobium japonicum
interplay. Nodule formation through wild-kind B. japonicum
turned into strongly inhibited by way of S. kanamyceticus. To
isolate antibiotic-resistant mutants of B. japonicum, antibiotic
combos had been used. ree of the mutant traces of B.
japonicum conrmed an exciting L phenotype: once they have
been coinoculated with S. kanamyceticus, huge increases
in nodule variety (as much as 55%), and shoot nitrogen
composition occurred. is suggests that the production of
antimicrobials with the aid of the streptomycete masked its
capacity to facilitate nodulation. All through the interplay
of roots of younger pea seedlings with Streptomyces lydicus
WYEC108 and Rhizobium spp., multiplied numbers, size,
and the interaction of the roots vigor of root nodules had
been determined.[25] WYEC108 showed extra plant benecial
sports. e streptomycete suppressed root pathogenic fungi
and promoted plant growth. Recently, Solans[43] dened a
tremendous have an eect on with the aid of streptomycetes
on root nodule formation by Frankia spp. in Discaria
trinervis, indicating that the impact of Streptomyces spp. on
nitrogen-solving symbioses may be enormous. On nitrogen
xing symbiosis may be widespread. e observation that
vital pea nodules from agricultural elds housestreptomycetes
laments[25] emphasises the ecological relevance of these
associations. Mycorrhiza, an intimate aliation of plant roots
and symbiotic fungi, is the dominating plant symbiosis in
terrestrial ecosystems and the primary means for nutrient
uptake for maximum land plants.[44] As mentioned with
nitrogen-solving symbioses, actinomycetes may also both
reduce or promote mycorrhiza formation.[45] Mycorrhiza
formation is promoted by means of so-called ‘‘mycorrhization
helper bacteria’’ including several actinomycete species
inclusive of 001, (Rhodococcus spp.;[46] Streptomyces spp.).
Inoculation with Streptomyces coelicolor 2389 notably elevated
the intensity of mycorrhizal root colonization in sorghum.
e authors determined that the occurrence of mycorrhizal
colonization and the prevalence of arbuscules, the web sites
for nutrient transfer, had been considerably higher in roots
of plant life grown in soil inoculated with S. coelicolor in
comparison with untreated mycorrhizal vegetation. Maier
et al.[4] described Streptomyces sp. AcH 505 and Streptomyces
setonii 1003, MHBs that substantially promoted.
Mycelial growth and mycorrhization rate of spruce (Picea
abies) with Aninata muscaria (y garlic) and pine (Pinus
sylvestris) with Suillus Bovinus and enhanced branching
of ne roots was concomitant with increased mycorriza
formation.[46] Enhanced branching of ne roots become
concomitant with expanded mycorrhiza formation, in
addition growing the web sites for symbiosis established
order. On the premise of these eects, a awesome ability
exists for the use of specic streptomycete strains to enhance
plant symbiosis improvement.
STREPTOMYCETES AS PLANT SYMBIONTS
Streptomyces spp. display lifestyles starting from benign
saprophytes to benecial plant endosymbionts to plant
pathogens. ey have a aggressive advantage over many
dierent microorganisms in soil ecosystems, due to their
lamentous and sporulating life-style, which lets in them
to persist at some point of harsh environmental conditions.
e lamentous way of life of streptomycetes additionally
gives bacteria of this genus the capacity to colonize close by
roots and subsequently without delay penetrate plant cells
to advantage entry into the host, leading to endophytic and
pathogenic phenotypes.[6]
PLANT ENDOPHYTIC STREPTOMYCETES
Endophytic Actinobacteria had been remoted from a extensive
type of ora and the maximum oen remoted species belong
to the genera Microbispora, Nocardia, Micromonospora, and
Streptomyces, the closing of that is the with the aid of some
distance the maximum abundantly determined. Endophytic
and plant pathogenic Streptomyces species have comparable
existence cycles in that they each colonize plant roots and
in the end invade the plant host. However, in contrast to
pathogenic streptomycetes, endophytic species persist in
the plant host for long durations of time without causing
observable ailment signs and absence regarded virulence
determinants common to phytopathogenic Streptomyces
spp.[6] Endophytic Streptomyces bacteria are not actually plant
commensals, however confer benecial traits to their hosts
that oen fall into two classes: increase merchandising and
safety from phytopathogens.
Endophytic streptomycetes may additionally beautify
the boom of their plant host through the production of
auxin that is a plant hormone crucial for root increase and
improvement.[6] Auxin manufacturing is not always limited
to endophytes, but is enormous in the genus Streptomyces
and other soil microorganism and probable displays the
fulllment of those organisms in the rhizosphere. In
addition to production of vital plant hormones, endophytic
Streptomyces spp. are able to increasing nutrient
assimilation through their plant host. As an instance,
endophytic colonization of the pea plant Pisum sativum
with the endophyte S. lydicus will increase the frequency of

Zakari, et al.: Streptomyces
Adesh University Journal of Medical Sciences & Research • Article in Press | 6Adesh University Journal of Medical Sciences & Research • Article in Press | 7
root nodulation using Rhizobium spp., ensuing in extended
iron and molybdenum assimilation and extra strong
boom.[25]
It is far properly ordinary that participants of the genus
Streptomyces are prolic producers of antimicrobial
compounds, and endophytic streptomycetes are no exception.
Several endophytic Streptomyces isolates inhibit the boom
of fungal phytopathogens in vitro and in planta, and this
antibiosis has been proposed to be one of the mechanisms
by means of which endophytes suppress plant illnesses.[6] In
addition to antibiosis as a method of resistance to pathogens,
endophytic Actinobacteria set o plant defense pathways
inside the model plant Arabidopsis thaliana; this systemic
induction of plant defense pathways is thought to serve as a
primer for defense and allows the plant host to respond more
quickly to pathogen assault.
e houses of endophytic Streptomyces spp. make them
attractive biocontrol sellers. Indeed, experiments both
in the greenhouse and in experimental farm plots have
established that endophytic streptomycetes increase the yield
of wheat and decrease the incidence of ailment resulting
from Gaeumannomyces graminis.[6] e documented
agricultural usefulness of endophytic Streptomyces species
will no question stimulate future studies to better apprehend
the complicated relationship among those Streptomyces
symbionts and their plant hosts. In an age where our destiny
meals security is a critical issue, there is signicant interest
in know-how and selling the benecial bacterial interactions
within the plant rhizosphere to growth crop manufacturing
and decrease the occurrence of disease.
Association of Streptomyces species with fungi
Fungi and streptomycetes are considerable and numerous
inside the soil, but little is thought approximately particular
symbiotic interactions. Because many Streptomyces spp.
produce secondary metabolites with antifungal homes or
secrete chitinolytic enzymes, they are usually considered
antagonists of both plant pathogenic and saprophytic soil
fungi, but a few cases had been dened wherein streptomycetes
promote the growth of rhizosphere fungi, drastically the
ones which can be worried in forming ectomycorrhizae with
owers.[4,46] Specically, Streptomyces sp. AcH 505 produces
the compound auxofuran, which promotes mycelial boom
in the y agaric (A. muscaria), an important mycorrhizal
fungus of Norway spruce. Cocultivation of A. muscaria
with Streptomyces AcH 505 inspired the manufacturing of
auxofuran by means of the streptomycete at the same time
as suppressing the biosynthesis of the antifungal compound
WS-5995 B, a potent inhibitor of plant pathogenic fungi.
In A. muscaria, on the other hand, the interplay with AcH
505 strongly inuenced the increase sample, cytoskeleton
shape, and gene expression ranges.[46] Numerous dierent
streptomycetes isolated from Norway spruce also promoted
the growth of the mycorrhizal fungus, however did now not
have an eect on plant pathogenic fungi.[4] ese examples
illustrate that soil streptomycetes could have growth-
promoting in addition to inhibiting outcomes on fungal
increase, and it seems in all likelihood that many dierent
interactions among streptomycetes and rhizosphere fungi
have not begun to be exposed.
DISCOVERY OF STREPTOMYCES IN
CONVENTIONAL MEDICATION AND
CONCLUSION
Traditional medication containing antibiotics has been
round and used in nearby treatments for millennia without
understanding of its lively standards. One of the earliest
connections among Streptomyces and traditional medication
is the red Soil of Jordan, which has been used as a cure for
pores and skin infections for millennia, extra denitive
connections have been determined in Africa, where
researchers determined that a few historic Nubian bones
(~300AD) contained tetracycline. is changed into traced
again to a local beer drunk through the Nubians containing
oats that had Streptomyces developing on them[47] Following
the United Kingdom scientic Act, conventional clinical
practitioners who were now not formally identied had
been prohibited from claiming to cure illnesses. is noticed
traditional remedy in the UK fade into the heritage aside from
in remote rural areas.[48] It’d then be some other 80years before
antibiotics made an legitimate appearance in clinical practice
with the discovery of penicillin.[49] One of the inspirations for
research into conventional medication may have come from
Georey Cordell, who devised a chain of systematic searches
of plant metabolites for anticancer drug treatments. is
protected an ethnomedical technique, which evaluated written
or historical evidence from traditional medicinal exercise[50]
considering that then, many Streptomyces have been isolated
from conventional plant medicines, mainly in areas of low
nutrient availability or intense physiological conditions.[51,52]
ese Streptomyces can exist as endophytes that live at least
a part of their life cycle inner plant tissues without causing
harm, or epiphytes that live at the outdoor of the plant life.[53]
Proteobacteria and Actinobacteria had been reported as the
most common endophytic species. Many research focused
on the largest areas of conventional medicinal drug along
with China and India; however, there have additionally been
discoveries in South the USA and Africa.[54,55]
Authors contributions
e authors of this review are qualied for authorship
and have checked this work for plagiarism. Zakari Adeiza
David (ZAD) conceived and designed the study, conducted
research, provided research materials, and collected and

Zakari, et al.: Streptomyces
Adesh University Journal of Medical Sciences & Research • Article in Press | 6Adesh University Journal of Medical Sciences & Research • Article in Press | 7
organized data. Olorunmowaju Israel Abiodun (OAI)
analyzed and interpreted data, manuscript editing, concept
design, and reference validation. ZAD wrote initial and nal
dra of article and provided logistic support. All authors
have critically reviewed and approved the nal dra and
are responsible for the content and similarity index of the
manuscript.
Ethical approval
Ethical approval was not obtained as no patients or the likes
were used for this study.
Declaration of patient consent
Patient’s consent not required as there are no patients in this
st u dy.
Financial support and sponsorship
Nil.
Conicts of interest
ere are no conicts of interest.
REFERENCES
1. Euzéby JP. Genus Streptomyces. List of Prokaryotic Names with
Standing in Nomenclature; 2008. Available from : www.ncbi.
nlm.nih,gov/pmc [Last accessed on 2008 Jul 09].
2. Madigan M, Martinko J, editors. Brock Biology of
Microorganisms. 11thed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall; 2005.
3. Janssen PH. Identifying the dominant soil bacterial taxa in
libraries of 16S rRNA and 16S rRNA genes. Appl Environ
Microbiol 2006;72:1719-28.
4. Maier A, Riedlinger J, Fiedler HP, Hampp R. Actinomycetales
bacteria from a spruce stand: Characterization and eects on
growth of root symbiotic, and plant parasitic soil fungi in dual
culture. Mycol Progr 2004;3:129-36.
5. Poole EJ, Bending GD, Whipps JM, Read DJ. Bacteria associated
with Pinus sylvestris-Lactarius rufus ectomycorrhizas and
their eects on mycorrhiza formation in vitro. New Phytol
2001;151:743-51.
6. Coombs JT, Franco CM. Isolation and identication of
Actinobacteria from surface-sterilized wheat roots. Appl
Environ Microbiol 2003;69:5603-8.
7. Sardi P, Saracchi M, Quaroni S, Petrolini B, Borgonovi GE,
Merli S. Isolation of endophytic Streptomyces strains from
surface-sterilized roots. Appl Environ Microbiol 1992;58:2691-3.
8. Emmert EA, Handelsman J. Biocontrol of plant disease:
A (Gram+) positive perspective. FEMS Microbiol Lett
1999;171:1-9.
9. Weller DM, Raaijmakers JM, Gardener BB, omashow LS.
Microbial populations responsible for specic soil
suppressiveness to plant pathogens. Annu Rev Phytopathol
2002;40:309-48.
10. El-Tarabily KA, Sivasithamparam K. Non-streptomycete
actinomycetes as biocontrol agents of soil-borne fungal plant
pathogens and as plant growth promoters. Soil Biol Biochem
2006;38:1505-20.
11. Sellstedt A, Normand P, Dawson J. Frankia-the friendly
bacteria-infecting actinorhizal plants. Physiol Plant
2007;130:315-7.
12. Hopwood DA. Streptomyces in Nature and Medicine: e
Antibiotic Makers. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007.
13. Dworkin M. e Prokaryotes. Proteobacteria: Delta and
Epsilon Subclasses. Deeply Rooting Bacteria. Vol. 7. Berlin:
Springer Science and Business Media; 2006.
14. Cambau E, Drancourt M. Steps towards the discovery of
Mycobacterium tuberculosis by Robert Koch, 1882. Clin
Microbiol Infect 2014;20:196-201.
15. Daniel OJ, Oladapo OT, Alausa OK. Default from tuberculosis
treatment programme in Sagamu, Nigeria. Niger J Med
2006;15:63-7.
16. Buchanan RE. Life phases in a bacterial culture. J Infect Dis
1918;23:109-25.
17. Waksman SA, Henrici AT. Family II. Actinomycetaceae
Buchanan and family Streptomycetaceae Wakesman and
Henrici. In: Breed RS, Murray EG, Hitchens AP, editors.
Bergey’s Manual of Determinative Bacteriology. 6th ed.
Baltimore: e Williams and Wilks Co.; 1948. p.892-980.
18. Waksman SA. Streptomycin: Background, isolation, properties,
and utilization. Science 1953;118:259-66.
19. Kämpfer P. e family Streptomycetaceae, Part I: Taxonomy.
In: Dworkin M, Falkow S, Rosenberg E, Schleifer KH,
Stackebrandt E, editors. e Prokaryotes. Berlin: Springer;
2006. p.538-604.
20. Chandra G, Chater KF. Developmental biology of Streptomyces
from the perspective of 100 actinobacterial genome sequences.
FEMS Microbiol Rev 2014;38:345-79.
21. Schleifer KH, Kandler O. Peptidoglycan types of bacterial
cell walls and their taxonomic implications. Bacteriol Rev
1972;36:407-77.
22. Tatar D, Veyisoglu A, Saygin H, Sahin N. Streptomyces
boncukensis sp. nov., isolated from saltern soil. Arch Microbiol
2014;203:279-85.
23. Hasani A, Kariminik A, Issazadeh K. Streptomycetes:
Characteristics and their antimicrobial activities. Int J Adv Biol
Biomed Res 2014;2:63-75.
24. Lechevalier MP, Lechevalier H. Chemical composition as a
criterion in the classication of aerobic actinomycetes. Int J
Syst Evol Microbiol 1970;20:435-43.
25. Davelos AL, Kinkel LL, Samac DA. Spatial variation in
frequency and intensity of antibiotic interactions among
Streptomycetes from prairie soil. Appl Environ Microbiol
2004;70:1051-8.
26. Acharyabhatta A, Kandula SK, Terli R. Taxonomy and
polyphasic characterization of alkaline amylase producing
marine actinomycete Streptomyces rochei BTSS 1001. Int J
Microbiol 2013;2013:276921.
27. Flärdh K, Buttner MJ. Streptomyces morphogenetics: Dissecting
dierentiation in a lamentous bacterium. Nat Rev Microbiol
2009;7:36-49.
28. Petrus ML, Claessen D. Pivotal roles for Streptomyces cell

Zakari, et al.: Streptomyces
Adesh University Journal of Medical Sciences & Research • Article in Press | 8Adesh University Journal of Medical Sciences & Research • Article in Press | PB
surface polymers in morphological dierentiation, attachment
and mycelial architecture. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek
2014;106:127-39.
29. Hamid M. e use of morphological and cell wall chemical
markers in the identication of Streptomyces species associated
with Actinomycetoma. Afr J Clin Exp Microbiol 2013;14:45-50.
30. Pimentel-Elardo SM, Scheuermayer M, Kozytska S,
Hentschel U. Streptomyces axinellae sp. nov., isolated from the
Mediterranean sponge Axinella polypoides (Porifera). Int J Syst
Evol Microbiol 2009;59:1433-7.
31. Rangarajan M, Ravindran AD, Hariharan K. Occurrence of
a lysogenic Streptomyces sp. on the nodule surface of black
gram (Vigna mungo (L.) Hepper). Appl Environ Microbiol
1984;48:232-3.
32. Takeuchi T, Sawada H, Tanaka F, Matsuda I. Phylogenetic
analysis of Streptomyces spp. causing potato scab based on 16S
rRNA sequences. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1996;46:476-9.
33. axter R. e potato scab. Conn Agric Exp Sta Rep
1891;1890:81-95.
34. Gussow HT. e systematic position of the organism of the
common potato scab. Science 1994;39:431-2.
35. DeKlerk A, McLeod A, Faurie R, Swart WJ, Denner FD.
Identication and Toxin Production of Streptomyces Isolates
Responsible for Common Scab in the Northern Cape Province
of South Africa. Proceedin Europe Association Potato Research
Triennial Conference. 13thed. Veldhoven: e Netherlands; 1996.
36. Lambert DH, Loria R. Streptomyces scabies sp. nov. nom. rev.
Int J Syst Bacteriol 1989;39:387-92.
37. Healy FG, Lambert DH. Relationships among Streptomyces
spp. causing potato scab. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1991;41:479-82.
38. Hooker WJ. Compendium of Potato Diseases. St. Paul, MN:
American Phytopathological Society; 2003. p.33-4. Available
from: http://ipm.cahnr,uconn.edu/common-scab
39. Kritzman G, Shani-Cahani A, Kirshner B, Riven Y, Bar Z,
Katan J, et al. Pod wart disease of peanut. Phytoparasitica
2000;24:293-304.
40. Flärdh K, Leibovitz E, Buttner MJ, Chater KF. Generation of a
non‐sporulating strain of Streptomyces coelicolor A3(2) by the
manipulation of a developmentally controlled sZ promoter.
Mol Microbiol 2000;38:737-49.
41. Patel JJ. Antagonism of actinomycetes against rhizobia. Plant
Soil 1974;41:395-402.
42. Gregor AK, Klubek B, Varsa EC. Identication and use
of Actinomycetes for enhanced nodulation of soybean co-
inoculated with Bradyrhizobium japonicum. Can J Microbiol
2003;49:483-91.
43. Solans M. Discaria trinervis-Frankia symbiosis promotion by
saprophytic actinomycetes. JBasic Microbiol 2007;47:243-50.
44. Smith SE, Read DJ. Mycorrhizal Symbiosis. 2nded. Cambridge,
UK: Academic Press; 1997. p.1-605.
45. Ames RN, Reid CP, Ingham ER. Rhizosphere bacterial
population responses to root colonization by a vesicular-
arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus. New Phytol 1984;96:555-63.
46. Schrey SD, Schellhammer M, Ecke M, Hampp R, Tarkka MT.
Mycorrhiza helper bacterium Streptomyces AcH 505 induces
dierential gene expression in the ectomycorrhizal fungus
Amanita muscaria. New Phytol 2005;168:205-16.
47. Nelson ML, Dinardo A, Hochberg J, Armelagos GJ. Brief
communication: Mass spectroscopic characterization of
tetracycline in the skeletal remains of an ancient population
from Sudanese Nubia 350-550 CE. Am J Phys Anthropol
2010;143:151-4.
48. Roberts MJ. e politics of professionalization: MPs, medical
men, and the 1858 Medical Act. Med Hist 2009;53:37-56.
49. Fleming A. On the antibacterial action of cultures of a
penicillium, with special reference to their use in the isolation
of B. inuenzæ. Br J Exp Pathol 1929;10:226-36.
50. Cordell GA, Farnsworth NR, Beecher CW, Soejarto DD,
Kinghorn AD. Novel strategies for the discovery of plant-
derived anticancer agents. In: Anticancer Drug Discovery and
Development: Natural Products and New Molecular Models.
Developments in Oncology. Boston, MA: Springer; 1994.
51. Wardecki T, Brotz E, De Ford C, von Loewenich FD, RebetsY.
Endophytic Streptomyces in the traditional medicinal plant
Arnica montana L.: Secondary metabolites and biological
activity. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 2015;108:391-402.
52. Oberhofer M, Hess J, Leutgeb M, Gössnitzer F, Rattei T.
Exploring Actinobacteria associated with rhizosphere and
endosphere of the native alpine medicinal plant Leontopodium
nivale subspecies alpinum. Front Microbiol 2019;10:2531.
53. Nalini MS, Prakash HS. Diversity and bioprospecting of
actinomycete endophytes from the medicinal plants. Lett Appl
Microbiol 2017;64:261-70.
54. Colombo ME, Kunova A, Cortesi P, Saracchi M, Pasquali M.
Critical assessment of Streptomyces spp. able to control
toxigenic Fusaria in cereals: Aliterature and patent review. Int J
Mol Sci 2019;20:6119.
55. Qin S, Li J, Chen HH, Zhao GZ, Zhu WY. Isolation, diversity,
and antimicrobial activity of rare Actinobacteria from
medicinal plants of tropical rain forests in Xishuangbanna,
China. Appl Environ Microbiol 2009;75:6176-86.
How to cite this article: Zakari DA, Olorunmowaju IA, Audu NO,
Aiyedogbon OI, Omaku JO, George DE. Pals and enemies: Streptomycetes
as promoters of plant illness and symbiosis. Adesh Univ J Med Sci Res,
doi 10.25259/AUJMSR_79_2022