Septoria and Stagonospora Diseases of Cereals - CIMMYT ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

cultivar genotype. Nonetheless, the differences in virulence among isolates were large enough to make cultivar response range from resistant to susceptible, depending on the isolate used (Tables 2, 6, 3, 4). The effect of cultivar by isolate interaction was not significant only for SNB assessment on leaves of spring genotypes (Table 7). In all other cases, the latter effect, though highly significant, contributed only slightly to the total variance (Tables 1 and 7). The significance of cultivar by isolate interaction indicated that there is some degree of specificity in the host-pathogen relationship. The low specificity in the pathosystem was confirmed through Spearman rank correlations. They revealed that rankings of the genotypes on their disease reaction to inoculation with individual S. nodorum isolates, and conversely, the rankings of isolates on their virulence expressed on the genotypes were correlated. The analyses of variance of the disease scores revealed significant differences between disease scoring dates, primarily on leaves. This means that the disease progressed with the passing of time. For SNB on heads, scoring dates were bordering on significance for both winter and spring genotypes. This indicates that, due to adverse environmental conditions (primarily summer droughts), disease progress over time was slower on heads than on leaves (Tables 1 and 7). The highly significant interactions between disease scoring dates and other components of the analysis of variance indicate that the disease response progressed at different rates (Tables 1 and 7) on individual genotypes (S.d. by C) between consecutive scoring dates, and that the isolates (S.d. by I) caused more disease during the intervals between consecutive scoring dates. This may have something to do with the susceptibility of plant tissue at different growth stages. Older tissue may be more susceptible. The significance of second and third degree interactions among years, scoring dates, isolates, and cultivars indicated that disease progress was influenced by all factors involved, i.e. host and pathogen genotypes, as well as the environment. It should be pointed out that the interactions of years with isolates and cultivars (Table 1 and 7), although significant, were low and contributed only slightly to total variation. Thus rankings of cultivars based on their SNB reaction and isolates on their Cultivar variances 4.6 4.2 3.8 3.4 3.0 2.6 Cv. variance = 1.306 + 0.488 (mean isolate virulence) r = 0.682, p
68 Cultivar variances Cultivar variances Isolate variances 5.6 5.4 5.2 7 6 5 4 3.2 2.8 Session 3B — E. Arseniuk and P.C. Czembor Mixture 5.0 Gw-3-1 TS87-1-1 4.8 4.6 Lb-4-1 Ch90-3-1 Z-22-1 4.4 T91-1-4 Lu90-1-1 Lb-3-1 4.2 4.0 3.8 2.6 Wr-6-1 Ch-9-1 2.8 MI-2-1 Lb-2-1 Z-20-1 3.0 Rd93-1-1 3.2 Cv. variance = 1.203 + 1.094 (mean isolate virulence) r = 0.607, p
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: 66 Session 3B — E. Arseniuk and P
Page 77 and 78: 70 Session 3B — E. Arseniuk and P
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 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 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
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 and 160:
Session 6C — C.M. Ellerbrook, V.
Page 161 and 162:
154 Evaluating Triticum durum x Tri
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 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
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?