4.4 Article

Low-Level Detection of Candidatus Liberibacter Solanacearum in Bactericera cockerelli (Hemiptera: Triozidae) by 16s rRNA Pyrosequencing

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL ENTOMOLOGY
Volume 42, Issue 5, Pages 868-873

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1603/EN12260

Keywords

detection method; potato psyllid; Bactericera cockerelli; zebra chip; Candidatus Liberibacter solanacearum

Categories

Funding

  1. Frito Lay, Inc.
  2. Texas Department of Agriculture
  3. U.S. Department of Agriculture-Specialty Crop Research Initiative (USDAD-SCRI) [2009-51181-20176]
  4. NIFA [581389, 2009-51181-20176] Funding Source: Federal RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Accurate detection and quantification of Candidatus Liberibacter solanacearum (CLs), the putative causal agent of zebra chip disease of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.), in the potato psyllid, Bactericera cockerelli (Sulc), has become necessary to better understand the biology of the disease cycle. Studies on the transmission efficiency of potato psyllids have shown inconsistencies with field surveys. There have also been reports of laboratory colonies inexplicably losing and regaining CLs infection as detected by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Until now, DNA primers were used to detect CLs in potato psyllid tissue using conventional polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and gel electrophoresis or by real-time quantitative PCR. In this study, CLs was detected using bacterial tag-encoded FLX amplicon pyrosequencing (bTEFAP) at levels identifiable by PCR, and low levels, including samples with only one cell of CLs. Potato psyllids with <300 pyrosequencing reads did not show positive using conventional PCR. These results indicate that the currently accepted PCR diagnostic technique produces false negatives due to detection limits higher than what is generally present in field collected psyllids, and also provides an explanation as to why laboratory colonies seem to lose and regain CLs infection.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available