Bacterial diseases of almond rootstocks

Transcription

1 Bacterial diseases almond rootscks Psallidas P.G. in Felipe A.J. (ed.), Socias R. (ed.). Séminaire du GREMPA sur les portesgreffes de l' amier Paris : CIHEAM Options Méditerranéennes : Série A. Séminaires Méditerranéens; n pages 51 Article available on line / Article disponible en ligne à l adresse : To cite this article / Pour citer cet article Psallidas P.G. Bacterial diseases almond rootscks. In : Felipe A.J. (ed.), Socias R. (ed.). Séminaire du GREMPA sur les portesgreffes de l'amier. Paris : CIHEAM, p. 51 (Options Méditerranéennes : Série A. Séminaires Méditerranéens; n. 5)

2 ~~ CIHEAM Options Mediterraneennes P. G. PSALLIDAS BENAKI PHYTOPATHOLOGICAL INSTITUTE EKALIS STREET, GR KlPHlSSlA ATHENS (GREECE) On du Agrobacterium tumefaciens, la maladie à plus et en On de à vis Agrobacterium le On On la limitée au xylème, comme phony peach, almond leaf plum leaf scald. Crown gall disease caused by most common serious disease almond rootscks almond trees in general described behaviour some almond rootscks infection by crown gallpathogen possibility appbing biological control method in nursery practice in order control disease its limitations discussed Hyperplastic bacterial canker almond caused by is described leaf scorch plum leaf scald diseases caused by xylem limited fastidious bacterium Xylella fastidiosa are breefzy presented words: Almond, rootscks, bacterial diseases. Introduction almond phypathological point view most diseases, pests lime used on se 1. Almond seedlings almond which well adapted soil fungal diseases, as well as seedlings (Nemade S 7 S 60 lime nemade GF 05.. plum 64 8/1. 4. almond X peach, peach X almond (GF 557 GF 677) wich by cuttings. almond X almond Alnem N.n 1, 6 01) which nemades. only a few data in almond sne diseases almond. Almost all gall disease. Smith in 195 tested 40 i? ' susceptibility among species same species. found that peach persica) but ssp. (196) his testing S 7 almond infectionswith Agrobacteriumtumefaciens, found that gall among but in blood is gall (LAYNE, 1974). (1974) that almond Agrobacterium tumafaciens. by seedlings. that scion had a substantial influence on disease incidence, so no infected found on any same influence scion on on GF05 hasalso et al, 197). (197) that than sweet almond ones 1st but all healthy looking seedlings exhibited disease healthy soil. She concluded that with pathogen. Crown gall Sympms: mainsympm disease is galls at on some cases galls can be on plant 5 in when old. effect disease has on n.o : 51

3 CIHEAM Options Mediterraneennes Fig. 1. gall sympms on GF05 (a) (b, depends on location infections, size biotype have galls disease on disease is etal., 1978) some plant life et al., 1970). Galls on action gall on sne out on system. infected seedlings less than healthy ones, sometime die. galls. causal agentepidemiology: disease is caused by Agrobacterium tumefaciens soil has been detected in soils without plant tissues by by insects nemades 1970). multiplication pathogen gall induction located on (00 kb) plasmid 1984), (Ti) plasmid. gall induction involves this plasmid, about 4 plant et al., 1980). induction is a complicated phenomenon it seems that compounds synsized by plant cells involved. has been established 1974; 1977) that Agrobacterium tumefaciens can be on bases some biochemical physio J, in (Table 1). biotype 1 Agrobacterium tumefaciens have disease on 6 kid. Uk. Table 1 T Acid Alkali from )i Selective dia f W s p t

4 CIHEAM Options Mediterraneennes Crown gall control gall, as most diseases, is difficult by (lack effective chemicals, difficulties in application, etc.) disinfection might seem but it is expensive,difficult apply if it happens disease lack but because incipient infections may exist on all be heavylossescausedby gallin sne exceed 6 million US et al., 1970). control (197) in Agrobacterium tumefaciens based on use an antagonistic Agrobacteriumradiobacter diseased plants. is 84) 1980) which affects selectively biotype 1 A. tumefaciens in vitro in vivo. a few pathogenic both biotypes which in vitro consequently y not in vivo. All biotype 84. method is simple apply conditions ). this method seedlings, seeds cuttings dipped in a lo6 cfu/ml suspension just is also A. tumefaciens infections when planted in a contaminated soil. method some limitations in using which insensitive so method one should be that A. tumefaciens sensitive 84. Table is No. isolates Biotype A. Pathogenicity Table 84 Sensitivity agrocin 84 Biocontrol poteneid l 1 = positive = this table it is obvious that all biotype 1 pathogenic isolates A. tumefaciens sensitive all but pathogenic isolates biotype sensitive a single field, while none fifty one biotype ' isolates was sensitive investigate effectiveness using almond seedlings it became that effectiveness by new Table et' al., 1978). ON Bacterial forms V Table 1 A. Pathogenicity. Agrocin 84 production Sensitivity agrocin 84 = positive = biotype 1 constitute a Biotype 1 biotype 1 7

5 CIHEAM Options Mediterraneennes ~ severity ~~~ ~ ~~ since y pathogenic insensitive biotype 1 is a potencial agent since it is non pathogenic only plausible explanation this phenomenon is that in exchange among cells 1979). that behaves biotype 1 because all biotype not genes vice versa. should that with infected soils effectiveness method was spontaneous galls found in Resistant rootscks use gall 195) many attempts have been made have that some have not Naoussa in study sne Agrobacterium tumefaciens infections was also investigated. study in 1977 obtained following tables 4, 5, 6, 7 8. No GF ). pollination seeds) Table 5 I o 1 severity (climax 05) l * * O l O15 O I I 1 * seedlings which uninfected second inoculation. Table 6 No S7 8 Table 4 severity (climax 05) o O o 1 1 ) All healthy No GF G77 S7 0 GF 05 S7 14 ) (climax 05) o O O o 8 o 0.18 O O 6 6 O 0 O * 4 o 10 o 1 O O O O 1 9 o o o o O 0 * 4 seedlings one uninfected second inoculation. 8

6 CIHEAM Options Mediterraneennes No Table 7 ) I 1 Stella X 8 10/0/67 X 9 X 10 * Table 8 05) o *0 O O O O O 416 O O O O o o o 00 o O O Alml o o O 515 O O O ) in is that seedlings sne at but in subsequent inoculations y behave (one 0 two ) which not kept in house investigation. Hyperplastic bacterial canker Sympms in 1968 in isl disease is tion on twigs, shoots (fig. ). Usually but any wound can an pathogen. late a swelling in place infected leaf affected tissues split by not only but also on its age, thus length on two cm. long may de found. No severity (climax 05) o C Amygd. webbii G F 05 0 Stella nd inoculation Cuttings 0 Cuttings O O 5 O14 5 O 7 O O O O O O O 1 O O O O 8 O48 O O 9 O O O O *0 o o o o 6*0 O O O O Causal agentepidemiology disease is caused by amygdali 1975). infected plant tissues isdisseminatedinlongdistancesbyinfected pathogen does not have apiphytic life. is host specific infecting only almond dulcis). Seedlings amygdali data). especies not infected by Some * 9

7 CIHEAM Options Mediterraneennes Fig.. (b) Almond leaf scorch, peach phony, plum leaf scald diseases Sympms 1. ALMOND SCORCHING sympm disease et al., 1974) is leaf extends subsequent death on about midjune. on. PEACH PHONY show new compact flattened than leaves tend be disease does not death. PLUM LEAF SCALD is at leaves. become disease bs on leaves usually whole plant is affected size quality yield et al., 198). causal agentepidemiology All above diseases caused by same (WELLS et al., 1987) which is a fastidious xylem limited belonging same is is is both scions, Control plants in vicinity Bíblíography (1980): Nat. Acad Sci. U.S.A., 77, pp J. C. 84 from 84 on Soilborne plant parhogem Ed. W. Gams, Academy San 0

8 CIHEAM Options Mediterraneennes J., E. W., (1980): cagrobacterium turnefaciens catabolism*. JO Bacteriol, 144, pp JO Appl Bact. 5, pp A.; C. G., Agrobacterium tumefaciens Z., pp A., 64, pp. 40 (1974): Canada Hort Science, 9, pp C.: << influence on in C. Fr, 59, pp (197): << effect on susceptibility in Byull. GOS. Bot. Sada, 19, pp W. S. J. A., almondn. 58, pp J. J. for California r (1970): (( knot nemade Agrobacteriumtumefaciens in almond Hassadeh 50, pp C. G., (197): Agrobaclerium fumefaciem (E. F. Smith Townsend),, Conn. Appl Bact. 6, pp. 40. C. G.; A. S., (1978): &tudies on biotype Agrobacterium radiobacter 4th C. G.; A. S., (1979): Ed. W. (197): << effect by Agrobacteriumtumefaciens on young G., C. G., (1975): <<A new almond caused by sp. nov.>> Ann., pp C., causal agent Options pp (1988): application biological Bull 18, pp WELLS, J. LOWE, S. scald causal agentn. 7, pp N.; J., J. loss Cal Sta. BulL 845, pp. 9. C. O., (195): gallstudies J. Agr 1, pp WELLS, J. Xanthomouas spp.,) J Syst. Bacterial 7, pp