4.4 Article

Sources of resistance to ascochyta blight in wild species of lentil (Lens culinaris Medik.)

期刊

GENETIC RESOURCES AND CROP EVOLUTION
卷 57, 期 7, 页码 1053-1063

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10722-010-9547-7

关键词

Ascochyta blight; Lens culinaris Medik.; Resistance

资金

  1. Saskatchewan Pulse Growers (SPG)
  2. Saskatchewan Agriculture, Food and Rural Revitalization

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cultivated lentil (Lens culinaris Medik. subsp. culinaris) has a relatively narrow genetic base and many commercial cultivars are susceptible to ascochyta blight caused by Ascochyta lentis Vassilievsky. A total of 375 accessions of six wild species of lentil received from ICARDA and 18 cultivated genotypes were screened for resistance to A. lentis under both field and greenhouse conditions in Saskatoon, Canada. A mixture of three monoconidial isolates of A. lentis was used as an inoculum and the level of infection rated using the Horsfall-Barratt scale (0-11). Accessions with resistance to A. lentis were observed in all wild species except for L. culinaris subsp. tomentosa (Ladiz.) Ferguson et al. showing no resistant accessions. Several consistently resistant accessions were found among entries of L. ervoides (Brign.) Grande and L. nigricans, (M. Bieb.) Godr., both of which belong to the secondary gene pool and a few in L. culinaris subsp. orientalis (Boiss.) Ponert and L. culinaris subsp. odemensis (Ladiz.) Ferguson et al. belonging to the primary gene pool. Some accessions of L. ervoides exhibited lower disease ratings and AUDPC values than the resistant control cv. 'Indianhead.' Thirteen accessions, previously reported as resistant to Syrian isolates of A. lentis were also resistant to the Canadian isolates; some also had resistance to anthracnose. The highest frequency of resistance was found in accessions of L. ervoides which originated from Syria and Turkey. These wild accessions represent a useful and untapped source for improving disease resistance in lentil.

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

4.4
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