One of the motivating reasons for the development of hydroponics was avoidance of root pathogens. Hydroponics involves growing crops in relatively sterile media, isolated from the underlying soil which may have disease pressure. However, even when hydroponics is coupled with controlled environments such as high tunnels and climate-controlled greenhouses, soil-borne pathogens can enter the growing area and proliferate due to optimal environmental conditions for pathogen growth. Control of root pathogens is difficult and usually achieved through synthetic fungicides since few biocontrol options are available. Compost water extracts (CWE) have recently been gaining the attention of greenhouse growers because they may be a low-cost, environmentally friendly approach to control root disease. CWE are mixtures of compost and water incubated for a defined period of time, either with or without aeration, and with or without additives intended to increase microbial populations, which in turn suppress disease. Much anecdotal, but very little scientific, evidence exists describing CWE effect on suppressing soil-borne pathogens. The present study 1) examined the effect of an aerated CWE on disease suppression at the laboratory scale and in container studies using different soilless substrates, 2) investigated a phenotypic change at the root level caused by CWE that may be associated with disease suppression, and 3) isolated some factors in the production of CWE that affect the ability of a CWE to suppress disease. The common model pathogen-host system of Fusarium solani f.sp. pisi and pea was used to examine CWE-induced disease suppression, with information then being translatable to similar patho-systems involved in greenhouse crop production. In the first study, laboratory-based root growth and infection assays resulted in 100% suppression of F. solani when roots were drenched in CWE. These protected seedlings were then taken to a greenhouse and transplanted into fine coconut coir, watered with hydroponic nutrient solution, and grown for five weeks. At the end of the experiment, 23% of the shoots of the pathogen-inoculated, CWE-drenched seedlings remained healthy while only 2% of the inoculated seedlings without CWE drench remained healthy. All of the roots of the inoculated seedlings developed lesions, even those drenched in CWE. However, 29% of the CWE drenched roots were able to recover from disease, growing white healthy roots past the lesion, while only 2% recovered naturally. A shorter-term container study was conducted in the laboratory to determine the effects of CWE-induced suppression when peas were grown in different substrates and to determine if the hydroponic nutrient solution had an effect on the suppression. Peas were grown in sterilized fine and coarse coconut coir fiber and sand irrigated with water, with a second set of fine coir irrigated with hydroponic nutrient solution. Pea seeds with 20-25mm radicles were inoculated with pathogen and sown directly into CWE-drenched substrate and grown for three weeks. At the end of the experiment, 80%, 60%, 90%, and 50% of the shoots of the inoculated, CWE-drenched seedlings remained healthy when grown in fine coir, coarse coir, sand, and fine coir irrigated with hydroponic nutrient solution, respectively. Nearly 100% of the roots grown in coconut coir substrates again developed necrotic lesions but 83%, 87%, 100%, and 87% grew healthy roots beyond the disease region. The hydroponic nutrient solution had a negative effect on suppression, with a reduction of at least 30 percentage points. Sand demonstrated a natural ability to suppress F. solani. Only 23% of inoculated seedlings had dead or dying shoots by the end of the experiment (compared to 77-80% in coir substrates) and although all but one of the roots developed lesions, all were able to recover on their own with CWE. CWE further increased shoot health and also prevented 57% of the roots from developing lesions. In a second study, two different CWE were used to examine the effect on root border cell dispersion and dynamics in pea, maize, cotton, and cucumber and its relation to disease suppression. Dispersal of border cells after immersion of roots into water or CWE was measured by direct observation over time using a compound microscope and stereoscope. Pictures were taken and the number of border cells released into suspension were enumerated by counting the total number of cells in aliquots taken from the suspension. Border cells formed a mass surrounding root tips within seconds after exposure to water, and most cells dispersed into suspension spontaneously. In CWE, >90% of the border cell population instead remained appressed to the root surface, even after vigorous agitation. This altered border cell phenomena was consistent for pea, maize, and cotton and for both CWE tested. For most cucumber roots (n=86/95), inhibition of border cell dispersal in both CWE was similar to that observed in pea, maize, and cotton. However, some individual cucumber roots (8±5%) exhibited a distinct phenotype. For example, border cells of one root immersed into CWE remained tightly adhered to the root tip even after 30 minutes while border cells of another root immersed at the same time in the same sample of CWE expanded significantly within 5 minutes and continued to expand over time. In a previous study, sheath development over time in growth pouches also was distinct in cucumber compared with pea, with detachment of the sheaths over time, and root infection was reduced by only 38% in cucumber compared with 100% protection in pea (Curlango-Rivera et al. 2013). Further research is needed to evaluate whether this difference in retention of border cell sheaths plays a role in the observed difference in inhibition of root infection. In the third study, a series of investigations were conducted to isolate different factors that contribute to the suppression ability of a CWE by changing incrementally changing some aspect of the CWE production process. The basic aerated CWE recipe (with molasses, kelp, humic acid, rock phosphate, and silica) provided 100% protection of pea from root disease while the non-aerated basic recipe CWE provided 72% protection. Aerated CWE made of only compost and water resulted in 58% protection. It was found that molasses did not contribute to the suppression ability of the ACWE, while kelp contributed strongly. When soluble kelp was added by itself to the compost and water, the CWE provided 80% suppression. However, when all additives were included except molasses and kelp, suppression remained high (93%) indicating that humic acids, rock phosphate, and/or silica were also major contributors toward the suppression effect. Optimal fermentation time for ACWE was 24 hr to achieve 100% suppression, with increased time resulting in inconsistent suppression results. Optimal fermentation time for NCWE was 3 days or 8 days. These studies are important contributions to understanding the differences that might be expected in CWE suppression when growing in different substrates, some of the factors in the production of CWE that affects the ability of a CWE to suppress disease, and the phenotypic effect CWE has on the root zone of plants and the possible relationship between that effect and disease suppression.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / Objective: The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of cinnamon water extract on nicotine-induced Streptococcus mutans biofilm. This study utilized S. mutans biofilm assays with varying concentrations of nicotine/cinnamon water extract levels. Design: A preliminary experiment was carried out to confirm the most likely effective concentration of cinnamon water extract on S. mutans biofilm. Then a 24-hour culture of S. mutans UA159 in microtiter plates was treated with varying nicotine concentrations (0-32 mg/ml) in TSBS at the same time with or without the optimum cinnamon water extract concentration. A spectrophotometer was used to determine total growth absorbance and planktonic growth. The microtiter plate wells were washed, fixed and stained with crystal violet dye and the absorbance measured to determine biofilm formation. Results: The results indicated that cinnamon water extract was able to inhibit biofilm formation significantly (p<0.05) at 5 mg/ml cinnamon water extract, therefore, 5 mg/ml of cinnamon water extract was recognized as the MIC for S. mutans biofilm formation. When combined with nicotine, cinnamon water extract sub-MIC (2.5 mg/ml) demonstrated a significant inhibitory effect (p<0.05) in biofilm and total absorbance measures at high concentrations of nicotine (8 mg/ml and above). In addition, cinnamon water extract showed a significant effect (p<0.05) at very low concentrations of nicotine (0.25 and 0.5 mg/ml) in all measures (biofilm, planktonic and total absorbance). However, at low concentrations of nicotine (2 and 4 mg/ml), there was a significant increase (p<0.05) in biofilm growth, whereas planktonic growth was significantly (p<0.05) decreased at the same concentrations. Conclusion: These results provided more evidence regarding the negative effects of nicotine and also demonstrated the positive influence of cinnamon water extract in reducing nicotine-induced biofilm formation, which needs be confirmed by in-vivo studies.

The aluminium content of water extracts is an important aspect for the food safety of paper board, as the content indicates the ability of the paper board material to transfer aluminium to the packaged food product. Aluminium intake in humans and its health effects have been discussed for many years as some research has seen potential links between, among other things, high aluminium levels in the brain and the development of hereditary Alzheimer's.BfR's method and recommendation is the one that is generally followed by producers around the world, as there is no common international law. The method involves leaving small pieces of the paper board in Milli-Q water for 24 hours, before a content determination of Al is made in the formed water extract. In 2021, BfR halved its recommended limit for aluminium in aqueous extracts from 2 mg/L to 1 mg/L. For Stora Enso Skoghall, this led to some of their paper board grades not meeting this limit.A specific liquid packaging board grade that previously did not meet BfR's new limit was selected and alum as a flocculant was replaced with PAC, among other things. The aim was to investigate whether the change in flocculation chemical, as well as varying dosages, could affect the Al content in water extracts and whether PAC could possibly result in a lower Al content. The method for the water extracts and their effect on the final Al content have also been investigated further. This is done by performing the BfR method with artificial tap water as well, and then comparing the Al content in these extracts.PAC as a flocculant instead of alum did not result in lower levels of Al in the water extracts. Variations in dosage and production without aluminium-containing flocculants also did not significantly affect the Al content of the extracts. The type of water used in the analysis turned out to play a major role in how much aluminium migrated from the board. All samples extracted in artificial tap water resulted in Al levels less than the 1 mg/L limit. For the majority of the samples extracted in Milli-Q water, the Al levels were instead closer to 2 mg/L. The difference in Al content between the water extracts is believed to be mainly due to differences in pH and thus varying amounts of soluble aluminium.The results showed a relatively large variation between the two external laboratories used. This is believed to be mainly due to variations in method and measuring equipment, but one must also consider the small sample size that was tested and what variations it entails.