Loading…

Identification of Cauliflower Cultivars that Differ in Susceptibility to Verticillium longisporum using Different Inoculation Methods

The response of 13 European cauliflower cultivars to Verticillium longisporum was evaluated using two greenhouse tests and one in vitro inoculation test. The greenhouse tests involved dipping roots of 3‐week‐old seedlings in a conidial suspension or inoculating the soil of 3‐week‐old seedlings with...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of phytopathology 2005-05, Vol.153 (5), p.257-263
Main Authors: Debode, J., Declercq, B., Höfte, M.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4615-ffe7aa92a0afeaacce5fd74ea229dbdc92d5de7d1994273b4e152c411e1232ee3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4615-ffe7aa92a0afeaacce5fd74ea229dbdc92d5de7d1994273b4e152c411e1232ee3
container_end_page 263
container_issue 5
container_start_page 257
container_title Journal of phytopathology
container_volume 153
creator Debode, J.
Declercq, B.
Höfte, M.
description The response of 13 European cauliflower cultivars to Verticillium longisporum was evaluated using two greenhouse tests and one in vitro inoculation test. The greenhouse tests involved dipping roots of 3‐week‐old seedlings in a conidial suspension or inoculating the soil of 3‐week‐old seedlings with Verticillium microsclerotia. The in vitro test involved the inoculation of 9‐day‐old seedlings with Verticillium conidia. Useful disease parameters were the area under disease progress curve and plant growth reduction for the greenhouse tests and fresh weight reduction for the in vitro test. Significant correlations were found among the three inoculation methods. Irrespective of the inoculation method used, cultivar ‘Sernio’ was most resistant to V. longisporum, while ‘Minaret’ was the most susceptible cultivar. The pathogen could be re‐isolated from the hypocotyls and from the stem of ‘Minaret’ 4 and 49 days after inoculation respectively, whereas V. longisporum could never be re‐isolated from ‘Sernio’. These results suggest that the more resistant cauliflower cultivar ‘Sernio’ can suppress the ascent and the proliferation of V. longisporum into the plant.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/j.1439-0434.2005.00965.x
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_17508759</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>17508759</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4615-ffe7aa92a0afeaacce5fd74ea229dbdc92d5de7d1994273b4e152c411e1232ee3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkM1uEzEUhUcIJELhHbyB3QT_jMexxAYF2gaF30JZWo7Hbm9wxsH20OQBeG88TFS2eOOr6_OdI5-qQgTPSTkvt3PSMFnjhjVzijGfYyxbPj88qGb3Dw-rGZaM1EQs-OPqSUpbjClmGM-q36vO9hkcGJ0h9Cg4tNSDB-fDnY1oOfgMv3RMKN_qjN6Ac2ULPboakrH7DBvwkI8oB3RtYwYD3sOwQz70N5D2IZZ5SNDfnNCShVZ9MIOf4t7bfBu69LR65LRP9tnpPqu-nb_9urys1x8vVsvX69o0LeF1cRBaS6qxdlZrYyx3nWisplR2m85I2vHOio5I2VDBNo0lnJqGEEsoo9ays-rF5LuP4edgU1Y7KP_wXvc2DEkRwfFCcFmEi0loYkgpWqf2EXY6HhXBauxdbdVYrxrrVWPv6m_v6lDQ56cMnYz2LureQPrHt0I2hI4RrybdHXh7_G9_9e7TZRkKXk84pGwP97iOP1QrmODq-4cLha_I5zVrr9UX9gc21qnJ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>17508759</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Identification of Cauliflower Cultivars that Differ in Susceptibility to Verticillium longisporum using Different Inoculation Methods</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Read &amp; Publish Collection</source><creator>Debode, J. ; Declercq, B. ; Höfte, M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Debode, J. ; Declercq, B. ; Höfte, M.</creatorcontrib><description>The response of 13 European cauliflower cultivars to Verticillium longisporum was evaluated using two greenhouse tests and one in vitro inoculation test. The greenhouse tests involved dipping roots of 3‐week‐old seedlings in a conidial suspension or inoculating the soil of 3‐week‐old seedlings with Verticillium microsclerotia. The in vitro test involved the inoculation of 9‐day‐old seedlings with Verticillium conidia. Useful disease parameters were the area under disease progress curve and plant growth reduction for the greenhouse tests and fresh weight reduction for the in vitro test. Significant correlations were found among the three inoculation methods. Irrespective of the inoculation method used, cultivar ‘Sernio’ was most resistant to V. longisporum, while ‘Minaret’ was the most susceptible cultivar. The pathogen could be re‐isolated from the hypocotyls and from the stem of ‘Minaret’ 4 and 49 days after inoculation respectively, whereas V. longisporum could never be re‐isolated from ‘Sernio’. These results suggest that the more resistant cauliflower cultivar ‘Sernio’ can suppress the ascent and the proliferation of V. longisporum into the plant.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0931-1785</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1439-0434</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0434.2005.00965.x</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JPHYEB</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin, Germany: Blackwell Verlag GmbH</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Brassica oleraceae var. botrytis ; disease assessment parameters ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Fungal plant pathogens ; Phytopathology. Animal pests. Plant and forest protection ; Verticillium dahliae ; Verticillium longisporum ; Verticillium wilt</subject><ispartof>Journal of phytopathology, 2005-05, Vol.153 (5), p.257-263</ispartof><rights>2005 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4615-ffe7aa92a0afeaacce5fd74ea229dbdc92d5de7d1994273b4e152c411e1232ee3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4615-ffe7aa92a0afeaacce5fd74ea229dbdc92d5de7d1994273b4e152c411e1232ee3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=16794129$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Debode, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Declercq, B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Höfte, M.</creatorcontrib><title>Identification of Cauliflower Cultivars that Differ in Susceptibility to Verticillium longisporum using Different Inoculation Methods</title><title>Journal of phytopathology</title><description>The response of 13 European cauliflower cultivars to Verticillium longisporum was evaluated using two greenhouse tests and one in vitro inoculation test. The greenhouse tests involved dipping roots of 3‐week‐old seedlings in a conidial suspension or inoculating the soil of 3‐week‐old seedlings with Verticillium microsclerotia. The in vitro test involved the inoculation of 9‐day‐old seedlings with Verticillium conidia. Useful disease parameters were the area under disease progress curve and plant growth reduction for the greenhouse tests and fresh weight reduction for the in vitro test. Significant correlations were found among the three inoculation methods. Irrespective of the inoculation method used, cultivar ‘Sernio’ was most resistant to V. longisporum, while ‘Minaret’ was the most susceptible cultivar. The pathogen could be re‐isolated from the hypocotyls and from the stem of ‘Minaret’ 4 and 49 days after inoculation respectively, whereas V. longisporum could never be re‐isolated from ‘Sernio’. These results suggest that the more resistant cauliflower cultivar ‘Sernio’ can suppress the ascent and the proliferation of V. longisporum into the plant.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Brassica oleraceae var. botrytis</subject><subject>disease assessment parameters</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Fungal plant pathogens</subject><subject>Phytopathology. Animal pests. Plant and forest protection</subject><subject>Verticillium dahliae</subject><subject>Verticillium longisporum</subject><subject>Verticillium wilt</subject><issn>0931-1785</issn><issn>1439-0434</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2005</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkM1uEzEUhUcIJELhHbyB3QT_jMexxAYF2gaF30JZWo7Hbm9wxsH20OQBeG88TFS2eOOr6_OdI5-qQgTPSTkvt3PSMFnjhjVzijGfYyxbPj88qGb3Dw-rGZaM1EQs-OPqSUpbjClmGM-q36vO9hkcGJ0h9Cg4tNSDB-fDnY1oOfgMv3RMKN_qjN6Ac2ULPboakrH7DBvwkI8oB3RtYwYD3sOwQz70N5D2IZZ5SNDfnNCShVZ9MIOf4t7bfBu69LR65LRP9tnpPqu-nb_9urys1x8vVsvX69o0LeF1cRBaS6qxdlZrYyx3nWisplR2m85I2vHOio5I2VDBNo0lnJqGEEsoo9ays-rF5LuP4edgU1Y7KP_wXvc2DEkRwfFCcFmEi0loYkgpWqf2EXY6HhXBauxdbdVYrxrrVWPv6m_v6lDQ56cMnYz2LureQPrHt0I2hI4RrybdHXh7_G9_9e7TZRkKXk84pGwP97iOP1QrmODq-4cLha_I5zVrr9UX9gc21qnJ</recordid><startdate>200505</startdate><enddate>200505</enddate><creator>Debode, J.</creator><creator>Declercq, B.</creator><creator>Höfte, M.</creator><general>Blackwell Verlag GmbH</general><general>Blackwell</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200505</creationdate><title>Identification of Cauliflower Cultivars that Differ in Susceptibility to Verticillium longisporum using Different Inoculation Methods</title><author>Debode, J. ; Declercq, B. ; Höfte, M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4615-ffe7aa92a0afeaacce5fd74ea229dbdc92d5de7d1994273b4e152c411e1232ee3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2005</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Brassica oleraceae var. botrytis</topic><topic>disease assessment parameters</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Fungal plant pathogens</topic><topic>Phytopathology. Animal pests. Plant and forest protection</topic><topic>Verticillium dahliae</topic><topic>Verticillium longisporum</topic><topic>Verticillium wilt</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Debode, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Declercq, B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Höfte, M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Journal of phytopathology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Debode, J.</au><au>Declercq, B.</au><au>Höfte, M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Identification of Cauliflower Cultivars that Differ in Susceptibility to Verticillium longisporum using Different Inoculation Methods</atitle><jtitle>Journal of phytopathology</jtitle><date>2005-05</date><risdate>2005</risdate><volume>153</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>257</spage><epage>263</epage><pages>257-263</pages><issn>0931-1785</issn><eissn>1439-0434</eissn><coden>JPHYEB</coden><abstract>The response of 13 European cauliflower cultivars to Verticillium longisporum was evaluated using two greenhouse tests and one in vitro inoculation test. The greenhouse tests involved dipping roots of 3‐week‐old seedlings in a conidial suspension or inoculating the soil of 3‐week‐old seedlings with Verticillium microsclerotia. The in vitro test involved the inoculation of 9‐day‐old seedlings with Verticillium conidia. Useful disease parameters were the area under disease progress curve and plant growth reduction for the greenhouse tests and fresh weight reduction for the in vitro test. Significant correlations were found among the three inoculation methods. Irrespective of the inoculation method used, cultivar ‘Sernio’ was most resistant to V. longisporum, while ‘Minaret’ was the most susceptible cultivar. The pathogen could be re‐isolated from the hypocotyls and from the stem of ‘Minaret’ 4 and 49 days after inoculation respectively, whereas V. longisporum could never be re‐isolated from ‘Sernio’. These results suggest that the more resistant cauliflower cultivar ‘Sernio’ can suppress the ascent and the proliferation of V. longisporum into the plant.</abstract><cop>Berlin, Germany</cop><pub>Blackwell Verlag GmbH</pub><doi>10.1111/j.1439-0434.2005.00965.x</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0931-1785
ispartof Journal of phytopathology, 2005-05, Vol.153 (5), p.257-263
issn 0931-1785
1439-0434
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_17508759
source Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection
subjects Biological and medical sciences
Brassica oleraceae var. botrytis
disease assessment parameters
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
Fungal plant pathogens
Phytopathology. Animal pests. Plant and forest protection
Verticillium dahliae
Verticillium longisporum
Verticillium wilt
title Identification of Cauliflower Cultivars that Differ in Susceptibility to Verticillium longisporum using Different Inoculation Methods
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-24T09%3A42%3A23IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Identification%20of%20Cauliflower%20Cultivars%20that%20Differ%20in%20Susceptibility%20to%20Verticillium%20longisporum%20using%20Different%20Inoculation%20Methods&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20phytopathology&rft.au=Debode,%20J.&rft.date=2005-05&rft.volume=153&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=257&rft.epage=263&rft.pages=257-263&rft.issn=0931-1785&rft.eissn=1439-0434&rft.coden=JPHYEB&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1439-0434.2005.00965.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E17508759%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4615-ffe7aa92a0afeaacce5fd74ea229dbdc92d5de7d1994273b4e152c411e1232ee3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=17508759&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true