Korean Journal of Plant Resources (한국자원식물학회지)

The Plant Resources Society of Korea (한국자원식물학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of Extraction Efficacy for Endoparasitic Nematodes Pratylenchus vulnus from Roots

내부기생성선충 Pratylenchus vulnus 분리 효율 비교

  • Sungchan Huh (Plant Bioscience, College of Natural Resources and Life Science, Pusan National University) ;
  • Namsook Park (Life and Industry Convergence Research Institute, Pusan National University) ;
  • Jaeyong Chun (Department of Plant Quarantine, Animal and Plant Quarantine Agency) ;
  • Myoungseung Jeon (Incheon International Airport Regional Office, Animal and Plant Quarantine Agency) ;
  • Heonil Kang (Plant Bioscience, College of Natural Resources and Life Science, Pusan National University) ;
  • Insoo Choi (Plant Bioscience, College of Natural Resources and Life Science, Pusan National University)
  • 허성찬 (부산대학교 생명자원과학대학 식물생명과학과) ;
  • 박남숙 (부산대학교 생명자원과학대학 생명산업융합연구원) ;
  • 전재용 (농림축산검역본부 식물검역부) ;
  • 전명승 (농림축산검역본부 인천공항지역본부) ;
  • 강헌일 (부산대학교 생명자원과학대학 식물생명과학과) ;
  • 최인수 (부산대학교 생명자원과학대학 식물생명과학과)
  • Received : 2023.12.02
  • Accepted : 2024.04.09
  • Published : 2024.08.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

To speed up the extract of endoparasitic nematodes from roots, four extraction methods with or without root-grinding were compared; 1) immersion, 2) immersion + Air, 3) Oostenbrink dish, and 4) Mistifier. The experiments were conducted for nine days by using perilla roots infested with Pratylenchus vulnus. Root-lesion nematodes continuously extracted from perilla roots during the experiments and as much as 3-10% in 9th days. The total number of nematodes extracted from 2 g of perilla root in nine days were varied among methods (379-1,824 nematodes); the most nematodes were extracted by root grinding + immersion + air (1,824) and the root-grinding + mistifier method (1,349) (p = 0.05). In the first two days of extraction, root-grinding + mistifier extracted the most nematodes (725 nematodes), followed by root-grinding + immersion + Air (555 nematodes), and root-grinding + Oostenbrink dish (421 nematodes). Root-grinding effected as much as 16-108% more nematodes extraction when compared to without root-grinding (p = 0.01).

식물 뿌리로부터 내부기생성 선충을 단기간에 효율적으로 분리하기 위하여 1) 뿌리 침지 분리, 2) 뿌리 침지+산소공급 분리, 3) 오스텐접시 분리, 4) 미스트장치 등 4가지 분리방법과 뿌리 파쇄법을 접목하여 상호 비교하였다. 시험은 뿌리썩이선충(Pratylenchus vulnus)에 감염된 들깨뿌리를 이용하였고, 9일간 선충을 분리하였다. 뿌리썩이선충은 들깨 뿌리로부터 9일까지 계속 분리되었으며, 9일째에도 전체 선충의 3~10%가 분리되었다. 들깨 뿌리 2 g에서 9일간 분리된 뿌리썩이선충 최종 밀도는 379~1,824 마리로 처리 간에 큰 차이가 있었는데, 선충이 많이 분리된 처리는 뿌리 파쇄+침지+공기주입(1,824마리) 처리와 뿌리 파쇄+미스트장치(1,349 마리)였다(p = 0.05). 2일째까지 뿌리썩이선충이 가장 많이 분리된 처리는 뿌리파쇄+미스트장치(725 마리), 다음으로 뿌리파쇄+침지+산소공급(555 마리), 뿌리파쇄+오스텐접시법(421 마리)이었다. 뿌리를 파쇄한 후 분리한 방법은 파쇄하지 않고 분리한 방법보다 모든 분리방법에서 16~108%까지 더 많은 수의 선충이 분리되었다(p = 0.01).

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This work was carried out with the support of "Cooperative research Program for Agriculture Science and Technology Department", Rural Development Administration (project number RS-2023-00218522), Republic of Korea

References

  1. Araya, M. and E.P. Caswell-Chen. 1993. Enzymatic digestion of roots for the recovery of root-knot nematode developmental stages. J. of Nematol. 25:590-595.
  2. Baermann, G. 1917. Ein einfache methode zur auffindung von anklyostomum (nematoden) larven in Erdproben. Geneesk. Tijdschr. Nederlandsch-Indie 57:131-137 (in Hooper, 1986).
  3. Bhuiyan, S.A., B.J. Croft, G. Stirling, L.M. Meagher and E. Wong. 2014. Development of methods for screening sugarcane and Erianthus germplasm for resistance to plant-parasitic nematodes. Proceedings of the Australian Society of Sugarcane Technologists 36:166-176.
  4. California Department of Food and Agriculture-Pest rating system(CDFA). 2021. http://nemaplex.ucdavis.edu/Mangmnt/CDFA-Ratings.htm.
  5. Chapman, R.A. 1957. The effects of aeration and temperature on the emergence of species of Pratylenchus from roots. Plant Dis. Rep. 41:836-841.
  6. Chawla, M.L. and S.K. Prasad. 1975. Techniques in nematology. II. Comparative efficiency of sampling tools and nematode extraction methods. Indian J. of Nematol. 4:115-123.
  7. Choi, I.S., J.K. Lee, B.Y. Park, H.R. Ko and S.K. Park. 2022. Nematode Extraction Manual. pp. 29-49 (in Korean).
  8. Coolen, W.A., G. Hendrickx and C.J. d'Herde. 1971. Method for the quantitative extraction of nematodes from plant tissue and its application in the testing of rose rootstocks for resistance to endoparasitic root nematodes. Rijksstation voor Nematologie en Entomologie, Wetteren, Belgium. W6:34.
  9. Geraert, E. 2013. The Pratylenchidae of the World. Identification of the Family Pratylenchidae (Nematoda: Pratylenchidae). Academia Press, Tielt, Belgian. p. 430.
  10. Gowen, S.R. and J.E. Edmunds. 1973. An evaluation of some simple extraction techniques and the use of hydrogen peroxide for estimating nematode populations in banana roots. Plant Dis. Rep. 57:678-681.
  11. Helwig, J.T. and K.A. Council. 1979. SAS User's Guide, 1979 edition. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, N. Carolina (USA). pp. 494.
  12. Hooper, D.J. 1986. Extraction of nematodes from plant material. In Southey, J.F. (ed.), Laboratory Methods for Work with Plant and Soil Nematodes. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, London, UK. pp. 51-58.
  13. McSorley, R., J.L. Parrado and W.H. Dankers. 1984. A quantitative comparison of some methods for the extraction of nematodes from roots. Nematropica 14:72-84.
  14. Oostenbrink, M. 1954. Een doelmatige methode voor het toetsen van aaltjesbestrijdingsmiddelen in grond met Hoplolaimus uniformis als proefdier. Mededelingen Landbouwhogeschool Gent 19:377-408 (in Hooper, 1986).
  15. Oostenbrink, M. 1960. The family Criconematidae. In Sasser, J.N. and W.R. Jenkins (eds.), Nematology. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill. Chapel hill, N. Carolina (USA). pp. 196-205.
  16. Park, S.H., H.S. Je, N.S. Park, H.I. Kang and I.S. Choi. 2022. Plant-parasitic nematodes on the ridge of rice-field. Korean J. Plant Res. 35(1):23-28. https://doi.org/10.7732/KJPR.2022.35.1.023
  17. Prot, J.C., E.B. Gergon and D.M. Matias. 1993. Influence of extraction procedures from root samples on the recovery and infectivity of Pratylenchus zeae and Hirschmanniella oryzae. Nematologica Mediterranea 21:133-137.
  18. Qing, X., W. Bert, A. Gamliel, P. Bucki, S. Duvrinin, T. Alon, and S.B. Miyara. 2019. Phylogeography and molecular species delimitation of Pratylenchus capsici n. sp., a new root-lesion nematode inIsrael on pepper (Capsicum annuum). Phytopathology 109(5):847-858. https://doi.org/10.1094/PHYTO-09-18-0324-R
  19. Seinhorst, J.W. 1950. De betekenis van de toestand van de grond voor het optreden van aantasting door het stengelaalt je (Ditylenchus dipsaci (Kuhn) Filipjev). Tijdschrift over Plantenziekten 56:289-348 (in Hooper, 1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01989990
  20. Seinhorst, J.W. 1988. The estimation of densities of nematode populations in soil and plants. Vaxtskyddsrapporter No. 51, Uppsala (SE).
  21. Tarjan, A.C. 1960. A comparison of polyethylene plastic bags and glass jars as incubation chambers for obtaining nematodes from roots. Plant Dis. Rep. 44:574-577.
  22. Van Bezooijen, J. 2006. Methods and techniques for nematology. pp. 112, https://www.wur.nl/en/research-results/chair-groups/plant-sciences/laboratory-of-nematology.htm
  23. Viaene, N., Mahieu, T. and de la Pena, E. 2007. Distribution of Meloidogyne chitwoodi in potato tubers and comparison of extraction methods. Nematology 9:143-150. https://doi.org/10.1163/156854107779969637
  24. Whitehead, A.G. and J.R. Hemming. 1965. A comparison of some quantitative methods of extracting small vermiform nematodes from soil. Ann. Appl. Biol. 55:25-38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7348.1965.tb07864.x
  25. Young, T.W. 1954. An incubation method for collecting migratory endo-parasitic nematodes. Plant Dis. Rep. 38:794-795.