3.8 Article

Six Species of Diaporthe Associated with Phomopsis Stem Canker of Sunflower in Southern Pampean Region of Argentina

期刊

PLANT HEALTH PROGRESS
卷 22, 期 2, 页码 136-142

出版社

AMER PHYTOPATHOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1094/PHP-07-20-0059-S

关键词

Phomopsis stem canker; sunflower; Diaporthe; Argentina

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A survey conducted in the southern Pampean region of Argentina between 2014 and 2019 identified Diaporthe helianthi and D. gulyae as the pathogens causing severe Phomopsis stem canker in sunflower. Additionally, this study reported for the first time the association of D. kongii, D. longicolla, D. caulivora, and D. sojae with the disease in Argentina.
A survey of 67 commercial fields in 19 locations was conducted in the southern Pampean region of Argentina for Phomopsis stem canker of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) between 2014 and 2019. A total of 210 plants having typical symptoms of Phomopsis stem canker were randomly sampled, and fungal isolation was performed. Of the 187 isolates of Diaporthe that were recovered, 94% of the isolates showed morphological characteristics similar to D. helianthi, 3% to D. gulyae, 1% to D. caulivora, 1% to D. sojae, 0.5% to D. kongii, and 0.5% to D. longicolla. Following morphological characterization, the identity of the six morphospecies was confirmed by phylogenetic analyses of beta-tubulin, translation elongation factor 1-alpha, and internal transcribed spacer gene regions. Koch's postulates were completed for the six fungi by inoculating one susceptible sunflower hybrid with one isolate each of the six species of Diaporthe using the stem-wound inoculation method. Seven days postinoculation, significant differences in disease severity were observed between the six isolates (P < 0.0001), with D. helianthi and D. gulyae isolates causing significantly greater disease severity. To our knowledge, this is the first report of D. kongii, D. longicolla, D. caulivora, and D. sojae associated with Phomopsis stem canker of sunflower in Argentina.

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

3.8
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