4.5 Article

Molecular diagnostics, taxonomy, and phylogeny of the stem nematode Ditylenchus dipsaci species complex based on the sequences of the internal transcribed spacer-rDNA

期刊

PHYTOPATHOLOGY
卷 95, 期 11, 页码 1308-1315

出版社

AMER PHYTOPATHOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1094/PHYTO-95-1308

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The stem nematode Ditylenchus dipsaci is of great economic importance worldwide as a parasite of agricultural crops and horticultural plants. The internal transcribed spacer (ITS) of rDNA from 23 populations of the D. dipsaci complex from various host plants were amplified and sequenced. Seven previously studied populations were also included in the study. The phylogenetic analysis of the full ITS and ITS2 sequence alignments using minimum evolution, maximum parsimony, and Bayesian inference under the complex model of DNA evolution revealed trees with two main clades: (i) D. dipsaci sensu stricto with diploid chromosome numbers and comprising most isolates from agricultural, ornamental, and several wild plants, and (ii) Ditylenchus spp. with polyploid chromosome numbers, reproductively isolated from diploid populations, and subdivided into six subclades (giant race from Vicia faba, Ditylenchus species parasitizing various Asteraceae, and a Ditylenchus sp. from Plantago maritima). Using the energy minimization approach and comparative sequence analysis, it has been found that the secondary structure of ditylenchid ITS2 is organized in three main domains. The importance of knowledge on the RNA structure for phylogenetic analysis is discussed. Conventional polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and real-time PCR with SYBR green dye I with a species specific primer have been developed for detection and quantification of D. dipsaci sensu stricto. Validation tests revealed a rather high correlation between real numbers of fourth-stage juveniles of the stem nematodes in a sample and expected numbers detected by real-time PCR. Problems of accuracy of quantification are discussed.

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