3.8 Article

Studies on symptom development, phenolic compounds and morphological defence responses in wheat cultivars differing in resistance to Fusarium head blight

Journal

Publisher

BLACKWELL VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1046/j.1439-0434.2002.00738.x

Keywords

cytology; ferulic acid; Fusarium head blight; immunocytochemistry; lignin; p-coumaric acid; wheat

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Development of Fusarium head blight, caused by Fusarium culmorum, was evaluated in seven winter wheat cultivars and one spring wheat cultivar in an outdoor pot experiment. Of the cultivars studied, only the spring wheat cultivar Frontana exhibited resistance against initial infection by the fungus. Significantly higher amounts of free phenolic compounds were found in the glumes, lemmas and paleas of Frontana prior to and at all sampling times after inoculation, in comparison to the winter wheat cultivar Agent. Furthermore, the amount of p-coumaric acid increased significantly in the glumes, lemmas and paleas of the cultivar Frontana 2 days after inoculation compared to that in uninoculated spike tissues. However, the amounts of ferulic acid between inoculated and healthy plant tissues did not differ. Ultrastructural studies indicated more pronounced structural defence responses, such as cell wall appositions, in the infected lemma tissue of the resistant cultivar Frontana compared with the susceptible Agent 3 days after inoculation. Immunogold labelling of lignin revealed no differences in the density of gold particles on the cell walls of healthy lemma tissue in the two cultivars. However, density of particles increased in the infected lemma tissue of the resistant cultivar Frontana on cell walls adjacent to the fungal cells, 3 days after inoculation. The susceptible cultivar Agent showed little or no response to the infection. Phenolic compounds appear to play a role in the resistance of the cultivar Frontana to F. culmorum.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available