4.2 Article

Occurrence of Fusarium langsethiae Strains Isolated from Durum Wheat in Italy

Journal

JOURNAL OF PHYTOPATHOLOGY
Volume 163, Issue 7-8, Pages 612-619

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/jph.12361

Keywords

cereals; fungi; HT-2 toxin; plant diseases; T-2 toxin; trichothecenes

Categories

Funding

  1. Italian Ministry of Agricultural, Food and Forestry Policies, MiPAAF (project MICOPRINCEM)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Surveys on the occurrence of type A trichothecenes in wheat, and particularly for the T-2 and HT-2 toxins, and information on the biology and epidemiology of the causative Fusarium species (i.e. F.langsethiae, F.sporotrichioides) are scarce in Italy, as compared to the more common type B trichothecene, deoxynivalenol and its producers. This 4-year monitoring of phytopathogenic Fusarium species on 183 seed lots of durum wheat shows wide distribution of F.langsethiae in Italy and the potential of several isolates of this fungus to produce high amounts of T-2 and HT-2 in wheat. Fusarium langsethiae was observed for approximately 48% of the analysed samples, with a maximum incidence for a single lot of 10.5%. Fusarium sporotrichioides was observed only in 2011, with an average incidence of 2% (range, 0-3%). A collection of F.langsethiae isolates representative of the main cultivation areas in Italy was established. These isolates showed great variability for their toxin production in vitro. Of 28 strains, all except one isolate can produce the T-2 and HT-2 toxins. HT-2 was generally in greater amounts than T-2, with an average concentration ratio for HT-2 to T-2 of 2.1 (range, 0.7-5.4). The artificial inoculation of wheat with three isolates of F.langsethiae produced no Fusarium head blight symptoms under field conditions. However, significantly higher incidence of F.langsethiae was seen on the kernels of inoculated plants, compared to the uninoculated controls.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available