Characterization of Rhizoctonia solani AG-3 Isolates Causing Target Spot of Flue-Cured Tobacco in China

Article Preview

Abstract:

Rhizoctonia solani Kühn is the causal pathogen of tobacco target spot, a serious fungal disease of tobacco that severely impairs yield and quality in northeast China. The objective of this study was to characterize isolates of R. solani from tobacco in China. Among 58 Rhizoctonia isolates examined, all of them were multinucleate. Phylogenetic analyses and hyphal anastomosis criteria suggest that the isolates belonged to R. solani anastomosis group (AG) 3. Target spot isolates from Liaoning province formed a single phylogenetic group together with tomato isolates of R. solani AG-3 from Japan and are more closely related to R. solani AG-3 isolates in tomato and potato than that in tobacco from USA. Pathogenicity test for each isolates was fulfilled using a method of inoculating tobacco leaves from plants grown for 8 weeks (cv. NC89).

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Info:

Periodical:

Advanced Materials Research (Volumes 726-731)

Pages:

4321-4325

Citation:

Online since:

August 2013

Export:

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Permissions PLS:

Сopyright:

© 2013 Trans Tech Publications Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Share:

Citation:

* - Corresponding Author

[1] H.D. Shew, and C.E. Main. Plant Dis. 69 (1985) 901.

Google Scholar

[2] H. Date, S. Yagi, Y. Okamoto, and N.vOniki. Ann.Phytopathol. Soc. Jpn. 50 (1984) 399.

Google Scholar

[3] D.E. Carling, R.E. Baird, R.D. Gitaitis, K.A. Brainard, and S. Kuninaga. 92 (2002) 893.

Google Scholar

[4] D. González, D.E. Carling, S. Kuninaga, and R. Vilgalys. Mycologia. 93 (2001) 1138.

Google Scholar

[5] D. González, M.A. Cubeta, and R. Vilgalys. Mol, Phylogenet. Evol. 40 (2006) 459.

Google Scholar

[6] Y.H. Wu, Y.Q. Zhao, Y. Fu, X.X. Zhao, J.G. Chen. Plant Dis. 96 (2012) 12: 1824.

Google Scholar

[7] L.J. Herr, and D.L. Roberts. Phytopathology. 70 (1980) 476.

Google Scholar

[8] J. R. Parmeter and H. S. Whitney. Biology and Pathology University of California Press, Berkeley. (1970) 7.

Google Scholar

[9] J. R. Parmeter, M.W. Sherwood and W.D. Platt. 59 (1969) 1270.

Google Scholar

[10] G.C. MacNich, D.E. Carling and K.A. Brainard. Mycological Research. 101 (1997) 61.

Google Scholar

[11] F. E. Bartz, M.A. Cubeta, T. Toda, S. Naito and K.L. Ivors. Plant Dis. 94 (2010) 515.

Google Scholar

[12] S.L. Mpofu and A.M. Julian. Phytopathology. 140 (1994) 367.

Google Scholar

[13] S. Kuninaga and R. Yokosawa. Mycol. Soc. Jpn. 33 (1992) 449.

Google Scholar

[14] E.E. Butler and C. E. Bracker. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles. (1970).

Google Scholar

[15] A. Ogoshi and T. Ui. Annals of the Phytopathological Society of Japan. 45 (1978) 47.

Google Scholar

[16] M.A. Cubeta and R. J. Vilgalys. Acadmic Press, San Diego, CA. 4 (2000) 109.

Google Scholar

[17] J.A. LaMondia and C.R. Vossbrinck. Plant Dis. 96 (2012) 1378.

Google Scholar

[18] J.A. LaMondia and C.R. Vossbrinck. Plant Dis. 95 (2010) 469.

Google Scholar

[19] J.C. Meye, W. R. J. Van and A. J. L. Phillips. Plant Pathology. 39 (1990) 206.

Google Scholar

[20] P.C. Ceresini, H.D. Shew, T. Y. James, R. J. Vilgalys and M.A. Cubeta. Mycologia 94 (2002) 437.

DOI: 10.2307/3761778

Google Scholar

[21] P.C. Ceresini, H.D. Shew, T.Y. James, R. J. Vilgalys and M.A. Cubeta. BMC Evol. Biol. 7 (2007) 163.

Google Scholar