4.5 Article

Phytophthora Community Structure Analyses in Oregon Nurseries Inform Systems Approaches to Disease Management

期刊

PHYTOPATHOLOGY
卷 104, 期 10, 页码 1052-1062

出版社

AMER PHYTOPATHOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1094/PHYTO-01-14-0014-R

关键词

hazard analysis

资金

  1. USDA Forest Service Pacific Southwest Research Station
  2. Nature Conservancy
  3. USDA Agricultural Research Floriculture and Nursery Research Initiative

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nursery plants are important vectors for plant pathogens. Understanding what pathogens occur in nurseries in different production stages can be useful to the development of integrated systems approaches. Four horticultural nurseries in Oregon were sampled every 2 months for 4 years to determine the identity and community structure of Phytophthora spp. associated with different sources and stages in the nursery production cycle. Plants, potting media, used containers, water, greenhouse soil, and container yard substrates were systematically sampled from propagation to the field. From 674 Phytophthora isolates recovered, 28 different species or taxa were identified. The most commonly isolated species from plants were Phytophthora plurivora (33%), P cinnamomi (26%), P syringae (19%), and P. citrophthora (11%). From soil and gravel substrates, P. plurivora accounted for 25% of the isolates, with P taxon Pgchlamydo, P ctyptogea, and P cinnanzomi accounting for 18, 17, and 15%, respectively. Five species (P. plurivora, P syringae, P. taxon Pgchlamydo, P gonapodyides, and P cryptogea) were found in all nurseries. The greatest diversity of taxa occurred in irrigation water reservoirs (20 taxa), with the majority of isolates belonging to internal transcribed spacer clade 6, typically including aquatic opportunists. Nurseries differed in composition of Phytophthora communities across years, seasons, and source within the nursery. These findings suggest likely contamination hazards and target critical control points for management of Phytophthora disease using a systems approach.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据