The Plant Pathology Journal

The Korean Society of Plant Pathology (한국식물병리학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Evaluation of Shiranuhi, a Hybrid of Kiyomi Tangor and Nakano No.3 Ponkan, for Resistance to Citrus Canker in Growth Chamber

  • Myung, Inn-Shik (Plant Pathology Division, National Institute of Agricultural Science and Technology, RDA) ;
  • Hyun, Jae-Wook (Plant Environment Division, National Jeju Agricultural Experiment Station, RDA) ;
  • Kim, Kwang-Sik (Plant Environment Division, National Jeju Agricultural Experiment Station, RDA) ;
  • Lee, Seong-Chan (Plant Environment Division, National Jeju Agricultural Experiment Station, RDA) ;
  • Lim, Han-Cheol (Plant Environment Division, National Jeju Agricultural Experiment Station, RDA)
  • Published : 2003.10.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Citrus canker disease is caused by bacteria Xanthomonas axonopodis .pv. Citri. Shiranuhi cultivar, a hybrid of Kiyomi tangor and Nakano No.3 ponkan was evaluated for resistance to citrus canker based on initiation of disease, percent area of lesion infected and growth rate of bacteria in the leaf under growth chamber condition. Significant differences between susceptible plant and resistant plants were observed in these assays. Resistant plants showed delayed disease symptoms compared to the susceptible plants after spray inoculation of the pathogen. The resistant verities, satsuma, yuzu, and Shiranuhi showed symptoms after six days where as susceptible, mexican lime showed the symptoms just after three days of inoculation. 18 days after inoculation, percent area of lesions developed on leaf and disease severity differed significantly in susceptible and resistant plants, and were ranked as follows: mexican lime > early satsuma =Shiranuhi =yuzu (P <, 0.01). However, 30 days after inoculation, percent area of lesion was further differentiated into resistant and highly resistant plants. That was ranked as follows: sweet orange> early satsuma =Shiranuhi =Kiyomi > yuzu (P < 0.01). These results indicate that host reaction to the bacterial was more distinct when the disease developed for a longer period. Growth rates of a citrus canker bacterium during 16 40 h also were distinct after infiltration into leaves of susceptible and resistant plants, and were ranked as follows: sweet orange> early satsuma =Shiranuhi =Kiyomi =yuzu (P < 0.01). Based on these results, we concluded that Shiranuhi is resistant to citrus canker as compared to Kiyomi, early satsuma, and yuzu.

Keywords

References

  1. Civerolo, E. L. 1984. Bacterial canker disease of citrus. J. Rio Grande Val. Hortic. Soc. 37:127-146
  2. Egel, D. S., Graham, J. H. and Reley, T. D. 1991. Population dynamics of strains of Xanthomonas campestris differing in aggressiveness on Swingle citrumelo and Grapefruit. Phytopathology 81:666-671 https://doi.org/10.1094/Phyto-81-666
  3. Graham, J. H. and Gattwald, T. R. 1989. Variation in aggressiveness of Xanthomonas campestris pv. citrumello associated with citrus bacterial spot in Florida citrus nurseries. Phytopathology 80:190-196 https://doi.org/10.1094/Phyto-80-190
  4. Gottwald, T. R., Graham, J. H., Civerolo, E. L., Barrett, H. C. and Hearn, C. J. 1993. Differential host range reaction of citrus and citrus relatives to citrus canker and citrus bacterial spot determined by leaf mesophyll susceptibility. Plant Dis. 77: 1004-1009 https://doi.org/10.1094/PD-77-1004
  5. Graham, J. H., Gottwald, T. R. and Fardelmann, D. 1990. Cultivar-specific interactions for strains of Xanthomonas campertirs from Florida tha cause citrus canker and citrus bacterial spot. Plant Dis. 74:753-756 https://doi.org/10.1094/PD-74-0753
  6. Koizumi, M. 1977. Behavior of Xanthomonas citri (Hasse) Dowson and histological changes of diseased tissues in the process of lesion extention. Ann. Phytopath. Soc. Japan 43: 129-136 https://doi.org/10.3186/jjphytopath.43.129
  7. Koizumi, M. 1979. Ultrastructural changes in susceptible and resistant plants of citrus following artificial inoculation with Xanthomonas citri (Hasse) Dowson. Ann. Phytopath. Soc. Japan 45:635-644 https://doi.org/10.3186/jjphytopath.45.635
  8. Koizumi, M. 1981. Resistance of citrus plants to bacterial canker disease: a review. Proc. Int. Soc. Citriculture 1:402-405
  9. Koizumi, M. and Kuhara, S. 1982. Evaluation of citrus plants for resistance to bacterial canker disease in relation to the lesion extension. Bull. Fruit Tree Res. Stn. Ser. D. (Kuchinotsu) 4:7392
  10. Lamari, L. 2002. Assess: Image analysis software for plant disease quantification. The American Phytopathological Soceity
  11. Matsumoto, R. 2001. 'Shiranuhi', a late-maturing citrus cultivar. Bull. Natl. Inst. Fruit Tree Sci. 35:115-120
  12. McLean, F. T.and Lee, H. A. 1921. The resistance to citrus canker of Citrus nobilis and a suggestion as to the production of resistant varieties in other citrus. Phytopathology 11: 109-114
  13. McLean, F. T. and Lee, H. A. 1922. Pressures required to cause stomatal infections with the citrus-canker organisim. Philippine J. Sci. 20:309-321
  14. Myung, I.-S., Cho, Y, Lee, Y.-H. and Kwon, H.-M. 2001. Phage typing and Iysotype distribution of Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. citri, the causal agent of citrus bacterial canker in Korea. Plant Pathol. J. 17:336-341
  15. Myung, I.-S., Nam, K.-W. and Cho, Y. 2002. Cultural characteristics of Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. citri bacteriophagee CPl from Korea. Plant Pathol. J. 18:333-337 https://doi.org/10.5423/PPJ.2002.18.6.333
  16. Myung, I. S., Nam, K. W. and Kwon, H. M. 2003. Dispersal of citrus bacterial canker caused by Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. citri in nursery plots of Unshiu orange. Plant Pathol. J. 19:205-209 https://doi.org/10.5423/PPJ.2003.19.4.205
  17. Peltier, G. L. and Frederich, W J. 1924. Further studies on the relatives susceptibility to citrus canker of different species and hybrids of the genus Citrus, including the, wild relatives. J. Agr. Res. 28:227-239
  18. Pruvost, O., Boher, B., Brocherieux, C., Nicole, M. and Chiroleu, F. 2002. Survival of Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. citri in leaf lesions under tropical environmental conditions and simulated splash dispersal of inoculum. Phytopathology 92:336-346 https://doi.org/10.1094/PHYTO.2002.92.4.336
  19. Stall, R. E., Canteros de E., B. I. and Marco, G. 1982. Importance of mesophyll in mature-leaf resistance to cancrosis of citrus. Phytopathology 72: 1097-1100 https://doi.org/10.1094/Phyto-72-1097
  20. Stall, R. E. and Seymour, C. P. 1983. Canker, a threat to citrus in the gulf-coast states. Plant Dis. 67:581-585 https://doi.org/10.1094/PD-67-581

Cited by

  1. Differential structure and physiological response to canker challenge between ‘Meiwa’ kumquat and ‘Newhall’ navel orange with contrasting resistance vol.128, pp.2, 2011, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2011.01.010
  2. Citrus junos as a host of citrus bacterial canker vol.15, pp.6, 2017, https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4876
  3. Comparative ultrastructure of nonwounded Mexican lime and Yuzu leaves infected with the citrus canker bacteriumXanthomonas citripv.citri vol.72, pp.7, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1002/jemt.20707