4.5 Article

Morphology, phylogeny and pathogenicity of Botryosphaeria and Neofusicoccum species associated with drupe rot of olives in southern Italy

Journal

PLANT PATHOLOGY
Volume 57, Issue 5, Pages 948-956

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3059.2008.01842.x

Keywords

disease severity; Fusicoccum; ITS; Olea europaea; phylogeny

Funding

  1. European Regional Development Fund
  2. Fundaao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia (FCT) [POCI/AGR/56140/2004]
  3. CIPE [17/2003, B3/2003]
  4. FCT [SFRH/BPD/24509/2005, SFRH/BCC/15810/2006]
  5. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [POCI/AGR/56140/2004, SFRH/BPD/24509/2005, SFRH/BCC/15810/2006] Funding Source: FCT

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Species of Botryosphaeria and Neofusicoccum are well known as pathogens of woody hosts. In this study the species that occur on rotting olive drupes in the main production areas of southern Italy were studied. Species were identified from the morphology of their conidial states in culture and from sequence data of the ITS rDNA operon and partial sequence of the translation elongation factor 1-alpha gene. Botryosphaeria and Neofusicoccum species were isolated from more than 60% of the affected drupes, suggesting that they are the main contributors to this disease. The most common species was B. dothidea, which was isolated from 34% of the drupes. However, N. australe and N. vitifusiforme were also common and were isolated from 16 and 12%, respectively. Two other species (N. parvum and N. mediterraneum) were uncommon and occurred on less than 1% of the drupes. All five species were pathogenic on the two cultivars of olive tested. The most aggressive species was N. vitifusiforme, followed by N. australe and B. dothidea. The two olive cultivars differed in their susceptibility to the pathogens. The results show that B. dothidea, N. vitifusiforme and N. australe are important pathogens of olives.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available