Septoria and Stagonospora Diseases of Cereals - CIMMYT ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

that this continuing work will help to complete the map more successfully. Mapping, field trials, and disease screening are now in progress on the SCR populations for chromosomes 2A, 3D, and 7D. Our results have shown that S. nodorum resistance in wheat is inherited in a complex manner involving several genes. By studying them in single chromosome recombinant lines, we should be more able to fully understand their heritability as well as highlighting linked markers. Using Precise Genetic Stocks to Investigate the Control of Stagonospora nodorum Resistance in Wheat 153 References Lincoln, S.E., Daly, M., and Lander, E.S. 1992. Constructing genetic maps with MAPMAKER/EXP 3.0. Whitehead Institute Technical Report (Second edition). Lui, C.J., and Gale, M.D. 1989. Ibf-1, a highly variable marker system in Triticeae. TAG 77:233-240. McFadden, E.S., and Sears, E.R. 1946. The origin of Triticum spelta and its free-threshing hexaploid relatives. J. Heredity 37:81-89 and 107-116. Nicholson, P., Rezanoor, H.N., and Worland, A.J. 1993. Chromosomal location of resistance to Septoria nodorum in a synthetic hexaploid wheat determined by the study of chromosomal substitution lines in ‘Chinese Spring’ wheat. Plant Breeding 110:177-184. Scott, P.R., and Benedikz, P.W. 1977. Septoria Plant Breeding Institute Annual Report 128-129. Sears, E.R. 1954. The aneuploids of common wheat. Missouri Agricultural Experimental Station Research Bulletin 572, pp. 1-58. Sears, E.R. 1976. A synthetic hexaploid wheat with fragile rachis. Wheat Information Service 41-42, 31-32. Southern, E.M. 1975. Detection of specific sequences among DNA fragments separated by gel electrophoresis. J. Mol. Biol. 98:503-517.
154 Evaluating Triticum durum x Triticum tauschii Germplasm for Resistance to Stagonospora nodorum L.R. Nelson 1 and M.E. Sorrells 2 (Poster) 1 Agricultural Research & Extension Center, Texas A&M University, Overton, TX, USA 2 Dept. of Plant Breeding, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA Abstract This study was conducted to determine resistance of 50 CIMMYT Triticum durum x Triticum tauschii populations to septoria glume blotch. Seedlings were inoculated at the 2-leaf stage, and data were recorded on disease severity and latent period. Several lines from this population demonstrated good resistance compared to check entries and are being used as sources of resistance to septoria glume blotch in the wheat breeding program. Septoria glume blotch caused by Stagonospora nodorum is a significant disease of wheat in the southern and eastern USA. Immunity of wheat to S. nodorum has not been found (Dantuma, 1955), but variation in resistance is apparent. New sources of genetic resistance are needed in order to reduce yield losses cause by this fungal disease. In our research we have studied components of partial resistance (Nelson and Marshall, 1990). A relatively simple test to evaluate resistance is based on measuring incubation period and disease severity at a different length(s) of time after inoculation. In this study, we utilized these two components to evaluate resistance of wheat germplasm to septoria glume blotch. The objective of this study was to screen a collection of 50 exotic CIMMYT germplasm accessions for resistance to septoria glume blotch, and compare any resistance found with that of moderately resistant checks to determine the potential of exotic germplasm. Materials and Methods Seed of 50 CIMMYT populations and a susceptible (TAM 107) and a resistant (TX76- 40-2) check (Nelson et al., 1994) were planted in rows in soil in flats. The CIMMYT germplasm consisted of 50 amphiploids from crosses between Triticum durum and Triticum tauschii obtained from Dr. A. Mujeeb Kazi, CIMMYT, via Dr. Mark Sorrells at Cornell University. The wheat was germinated and grown in the greenhouse until the 2-leaf stage. At that time spores of S. nodorum were sprayed on the wheat, which was then placed in a humidity chamber. The plants were removed from the humidity chamber after 50 hours. During this 50 hour period, a cool mist blower operated for 15 minutes every 2 hours during the day, and for 15 minutes every 4 hours during the night, which kept the leaves moist, but did not cause run-off. After the 50-hour period, the flats were removed from the chamber and allowed to continue growing in the greenhouse. Five days after being removed from the humidity chamber, some plants began to show leaf necrosis. Disease ratings were recorded for each row, or entry, on a 0 to 9 disease rating (0 = no symptoms; 9 = severe necrosis) on day 5, 8, and 11, to obtain an estimate of incubation period and disease severity. A mean rating over the above three days was also calculated. Results Data are presented in Table 1 for each day’s rating and the mean disease rating. The susceptible and resistant checks provided a benchmark or standard upon which to compare these lines. Any lines that have disease ratings similar or less than the resistant check (TX76-40-2) may be useful in a wheat-breeding program and could provide new resistance. Any lines similar to the susceptible check TAM 107 will not be useful for increasing resistance to septoria glume blotch. TAM 107 was already highly diseased by day 5, indicating a very short incubation period. Some lines had low disease ratings on day 5, but by day 11, had high disease ratings, similar to TAM 107. This indicates a longer incubation period, and this resistance may be useful in a breeding program to delay the buildup of the disease.
Page 1 and 2:
Septoria and Stagonospora Diseases
Page 3 and 4:
ii The Organizing Committee express
Page 5 and 6:
iv 87 Genetic Variability in a Coll
Page 7 and 8:
vi Foreword In the mid-1970s the id
Page 9 and 10:
2 Opening Remarks — S. Rajaram ar
Page 11 and 12:
4 Opening Remarks — S. Rajaram Ta
Page 13 and 14:
6 Opening Remarks — S. Rajaram cu
Page 15 and 16:
8 Opening Remarks — S. Rajaram br
Page 17 and 18:
10 Opening Remarks — S. Rajaram T
Page 19 and 20:
12 Opening Remarks — S. Rajaram t
Page 21 and 22:
14 Opening Remarks — S. Rajaram C
Page 23 and 24:
16 Opening Remarks — S. Rajaram r
Page 26 and 27:
Session 1: Pathogen Biology Biology
Page 28 and 29:
Table 2. The Septoria tritici/Stago
Page 30 and 31:
Molecular Analysis of a DNA Fingerp
Page 32 and 33:
histidine kinase in yeast, although
Page 34 and 35:
According to the previous observati
Page 36 and 37:
cultivars. The presence of pycnidia
Page 38 and 39:
Provided that S. nodorum fungal gen
Page 40 and 41:
;; yy ;; yy 6 28% 1 32% ;y; ; y y ;
Page 42 and 43:
Table 1. Sources of isolates or DNA
Page 44 and 45:
Septoria/Stagonospora Leaf Spot Dis
Page 46:
Interrelations among Septoria triti
Page 49 and 50:
42 Session 2 — B.M. Cunfer disper
Page 51 and 52:
44 Session 2 — B.M. Cunfer beyond
Page 53 and 54:
46 Aggressiveness of Phaeosphaeria
Page 55 and 56:
48 Session 2 — P. Halama, F. Lala
Page 57 and 58:
50 Growth of Stagonospora nodorum L
Page 59 and 60:
52 Session 3A — G.H.J. Kema and E
Page 61 and 62:
54 A Possible Gene-for-Gene Relatio
Page 63 and 64:
56 Diallel Analysis of Septoria Tri
Page 65 and 66:
58 Session 3A — X. Zhang, S.D. Ha
Page 67 and 68:
60 Session 3A — L. Gilchrist, C.
Page 69 and 70:
62 Session 3A — L. Gilchrist, C.
Page 71 and 72:
64 Session 3B — E. Arseniuk and P
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
68 Cultivar variances Cultivar vari
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
72 Session 3B — N.E.A. Murphy, R.
Page 81 and 82:
74 Inheritance of Septoria Nodorum
Page 83 and 84:
76 Session 3B — N.E.A. Murphy, R.
Page 85 and 86:
78 Session 4 — B.A. McDonald, C.C
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
84 Session 4 — E. Arseniuk, H.S.
Page 93 and 94:
86 Session 4 — C. Cowger, C.C. Mu
Page 95 and 96:
88 each isolate. Two of the probes
Page 97 and 98:
90 Mating Type-Specific PCR Primers
Page 99 and 100:
92 Session 4 — Bennett, R.S., S.-
Page 101 and 102:
94 Session 5 — M.W. Shaw and the
Page 103 and 104:
96 Session 5 — M.W. Shaw The path
Page 105 and 106:
98 Spore Dispersal of Leaf Blotch P
Page 107 and 108:
Session 5 — C.A. Cordo, M.R. Sim
Page 109 and 110: 102 Epidemiology of Seedborne Stago
Page 111 and 112: Session 5 — D.A. Shah and G.C. Be
Page 113 and 114: 106 Session 6A / Session 6B — J.M
Page 119 and 120: Session 6A / Session 6B — C.C. Mu
Page 125 and 126: 118 Session 6C — M. van Ginkel an
Page 135 and 136: Session 6C — G. Shaner 128 An exa
Page 137 and 138: Session 6C — G. Shaner 130 Anothe
Page 139 and 140: Session 6C — M. Díaz de Ackerman
Page 141 and 142: 134 Septoria tritici Resistance Sou
Page 143 and 144: Session 6C — L. Gilchrist et al.
Page 145 and 146: Session 6C — L. Gilchrist et al.
Page 147 and 148: 140 Selecting Wheat for Resistance
Page 149 and 150: Session 6C — R.M. Gonzalez I., S.
Page 151 and 152: Session 6C — R.M. Gonzalez I., S.
Page 153 and 154: Session 6C — R. Loughman, R.E. Wi
Page 155 and 156: 148 Field Resistance of Wheat to Se
Page 157 and 158: 150 Using Precise Genetic Stocks to
Page 159: Session 6C — C.M. Ellerbrook, V.
Page 163 and 164: 156 Sources of Resistance to Septor
Page 165 and 166: Session 6C — H. Toubia-Rahme and
Page 167 and 168: 160 Partial Resistance to Stagonosp
Page 169 and 170: Session 6C — C.G. Du, L.R. Nelson
Page 171 and 172: Session 6C — D.E. Fraser, J.P. Mu
Page 173 and 174: Session 6C — C.G. Du, L.R. Nelson
Page 175 and 176: Session 6C — M. Mincu 168 Arcsin
Page 177 and 178: 170 Comparison of Greenhouse and Fi
Page 179 and 180: Session 6C — S.L. Walker, S. Leat
Page 181 and 182: Session 6D — L.N. Jørgensen, K.E
Page 183 and 184: 176
Page 185 and 186: Concluding Remarks — Z. Eyal 178
Page 191 and 192: 184 Dr. Patrice Halama Professor In
Page 193 and 194: 186 Dr. Hala Toubia-Rahme Research
show all

Septoria and Stagonospora Diseases of Cereals - CIMMYT ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?