4.7 Article

Reduced Sensitivity to Azoxystrobin of Monilinia fructicola Isolates From Brazilian Stone Fruits is Not Associated With Previously Described Mutations in the Cytochrome b Gene

期刊

PLANT DISEASE
卷 101, 期 5, 页码 766-773

出版社

AMER PHYTOPATHOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1094/PDIS-09-16-1247-RE

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Counsel of Technological and Scientific Development (CNPq) [79041/2010-5 Universal/CNPq]
  2. Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES) [2829/2010]
  3. CAPES
  4. FAPESP [2014/09472-5]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Quinone-outside inhibitor (QoI) fungicides are effective tools for pre-harvest control of brown rot of stone fruit. These fungicides have a very specific site of action so the risk of resistance selection is high. The sensitivity of Monilinia fructicola (G. Winter) Honey isolates to azoxystrobin (QoI) was investigated in 143 isolates collected between 2002 and 2011 from four Brazilian states in orchards with different frequencies of fungicide use (0 to 6 fungicides sprays/season). Sensitivity of the isolates to azoxystrobin was determined in vitro, by inhibition of mycelia' growth and spore germination on fungicide amended media or ex vivo by pathogen inoculation in untreated or treated fruit with azoxystrobin. Potential mutations in codons 143,137, and 129 of the cytochrome b (Cyt b) gene and the occurrence of an intron immediately after codon 143 were analyzed in a subpopulation of the isolates. The M. fructicola population of S (a) over tildeo Paulo State was less sensitive to the fungicide than the population from the states of Parana, Santa Catarina, and Rio Grande do Sul. The low sensitivity of the isolates was confirmed also by comparing to the sensitivity of the baseline isolates. Mutations in G143A, F129L, and G137R in Cyt b gene were not found. In addition, 58 isolates tested showed an intron after codon 143 in Cyt b gene. Our results indicate that other mechanisms of selection for low sensitivity to QoI fungicides should be investigated.

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

4.7
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