» Articles » PMID: 32668673

Methodical Considerations and Resistance Evaluation Against and Head Blight in Wheat. The Influence of Mixture of Isolates on Aggressiveness and Resistance Expression

Overview
Journal Microorganisms
Specialty Microbiology
Date 2020 Jul 17
PMID 32668673
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

In resistance tests to Fusarium head blight (FHB), the mixing of inocula before inoculation is normal, but no information about the background of mixing was given. Therefore, four experiments (2013-2015) were made with four independent isolates, their all-possible (11) mixtures and a control. Four cultivars with differing FHB resistance were used. Disease index (DI), Fusarium damaged kernels (FDK) and deoxynivalenol (DON) were evaluated. The isolates used were not stable in aggressiveness. Their mixtures did not also give a stable aggressiveness; it depended on the composition of mix. The three traits diverged in their responses. After the mixing, the aggressiveness was always less than that of the most pathogenic component was. However, in most cases it was significantly higher than the arithmetical mean of the participating isolates. A mixture was not better than a single isolate was. The prediction of the aggressiveness level is problematic even if the aggressiveness of the components was tested. Resistance expression is different in the mixing variants and in the three traits tested. Of them, DON is the most sensitive. More reliable resistance and toxin data can be received when instead of one more independent isolates are used. This is important when highly correct data are needed (genetic research or cultivar registration).

Citing Articles

What Is Fusarium Head Blight (FHB) Resistance and What Are Its Food Safety Risks in Wheat? Problems and Solutions-A Review.

Mesterhazy A Toxins (Basel). 2024; 16(1).

PMID: 38251247 PMC: 10820574. DOI: 10.3390/toxins16010031.


Updating the Breeding Philosophy of Wheat to Fusarium Head Blight (FHB): Resistance Components, QTL Identification, and Phenotyping-A Review.

Mesterhazy A Plants (Basel). 2020; 9(12).

PMID: 33287353 PMC: 7761804. DOI: 10.3390/plants9121702.


: Mycotoxins, Taxonomy, Pathogenicity.

Stepien L Microorganisms. 2020; 8(9).

PMID: 32932595 PMC: 7563225. DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms8091404.

References
1.
Perlikowski D, Wisniewska H, Kaczmarek J, Goral T, Ochodzki P, Kwiatek M . Alterations in Kernel Proteome after Infection with Fusarium culmorum in Two Triticale Cultivars with Contrasting Resistance to Fusarium Head Blight. Front Plant Sci. 2016; 7:1217. PMC: 4987376. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2016.01217. View

2.
Garvin D, Stack R, Hansen J . Quantitative trait locus mapping of increased Fusarium head blight susceptibility associated with a wild emmer wheat chromosome. Phytopathology. 2009; 99(4):447-52. DOI: 10.1094/PHYTO-99-4-0447. View

3.
Chen P, Liu W, Yuan J, Wang X, Zhou B, Wang S . Development and characterization of wheat- Leymus racemosus translocation lines with resistance to Fusarium Head Blight. Theor Appl Genet. 2005; 111(5):941-8. DOI: 10.1007/s00122-005-0026-z. View

4.
Kollers S, Rodemann B, Ling J, Korzun V, Ebmeyer E, Argillier O . Whole genome association mapping of Fusarium head blight resistance in European winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). PLoS One. 2013; 8(2):e57500. PMC: 3579808. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0057500. View

5.
Chu C, Niu Z, Zhong S, Chao S, Friesen T, Halley S . Identification and molecular mapping of two QTLs with major effects for resistance to Fusarium head blight in wheat. Theor Appl Genet. 2011; 123(7):1107-19. DOI: 10.1007/s00122-011-1652-2. View