Fig. 2

In vitro and in planta screening of maize endophytes for antifungal activity against R. solani. a-g. In planta screen. Shown are tubes with creeping bentgrass treated with a. no fungal pathogen and no endophyte, b. the pathogen but no endophyte, c-f. the pathogen and successful anti-fungal endophytes, specifically c. endophyte 3A12, d. endophyte 3C11, e. endophyte 4H12, and f. endophyte 5C9, g. fungicide treatment (Propiconazole). h-i. Graphs showing the results of in vitro and in planta screening for h. endophytes 1–95 (Additional file 1: Table S3) and i. endophytes 96–190 (Additional file 1: Table S3). The left y-axis is the plant visual health score per tube (average of 3 tubes, 30 plants per tube), based on the majority being very healthy (green, score of 2), very sick (showing chlorosis, score of 0) or intermediate (score of 1). An asterisk indicates that the in planta anti-fungal activity was not observed in Trial 2 (Additional file 2: Table S4). The right y-axis indicates the mean diameter of the zone of inhibition of R. solani on agar plates (n = 3). j. An example PDA agar screening plate showing that Zea endophytes (3A12, 4H12 and 5C9) create an inhibition zone of R. solani growth in vitro. NY denotes Nystatin and PCZ denotes Propiconazole