Advertisement

American Potato Journal

, Volume 63, Issue 11, pp 629–638 | Cite as

Fusarium dry-rot resistant potato germplasm

  • Dennis Corsini
  • Joseph J. Pavek
Article

Abstract

The level ofFusarium dry-rot resistance found in important potato varieties has been improved with agronomically acceptableSolanum tuberosum genotypes. Three breeding selections, A74114-4, A76260-16, and BR6316-7 were highly resistant to the two commonFusarium dry-rot species (F. roseum Lk ex Fr. f. sp.sambucinum [Fs], andF. solani var.coeruleum (Sacc), Booth [Fc]). Resistance was determined separately for each of these species. Resistance to Fs was genetically distinct from resistance to Fc since there was no correlation between Fs and Fc reaction for 180 progeny clones from six crosses representing all combinations of resistance. Resistance to each of theseFusarium species was readily transmitted to progeny. Seventy-five percent of the progeny from resistant X resistant parents were also resistant to Fs, while 95% of the progeny from susceptible X susceptible parents were susceptible. Mixed infections withErwinia atroseptica and eitherFusarium species resulted in a qualitative change from a resistant reaction to a susceptible reaction. Bacterial interaction withFusarium spp. is, therefore, an important consideration in determining storage-rot resistance.

Key Words

Solanum tuberosum disease resistance Erwinia soft rot 

Resumen

El nivel de resistencia a la pudrición seca porFusarium, econtrado en variedades importantes de papa, ha sido mejorado con genotipos agronomicamente aceptables deSolanum tuberosum. Tres selecciones de papa mejoradas, A74114-4, A76260-16, y BR6316-7 fueron altamente resistentes a las dos especies comunes deFusarium (F. roseum LK ex Fr. f. sp.sambucinum [Fs],y F. solani varcoeruleum (Sacc), Booth [Fc]. Se determinó, por separado, la resistencia para cada una de estas especies. La resistencia a Fs fue genéticamente distinta de la resistencia a Fc desde que no hubo correlación entre las reacciones a Fs y Fc de 180 clones de las progenies de seis cruzas que representaban todas las combinaciones de resistencia. La resistencia de cada una de las especies deFusarium fue transmitida fácilmente a las progenies. El 75% de la progenie de padres resistente X resistente fueron también resistentes a Fs, mientras que el 95% de la progenie de padres susceptible x susceptible fueron también susceptibles. Infecciones combinadas deErwinia atroseptica y cualquiera de las especies deFusarium, dieron por resultado un cambio cualitativo, pasando de una reacción resistente a una susceptible. Por lo tanto, la interacción resistente a una susceptible. Por lo tanto, la interacción bacteriana conFusarium spp., es una importante consideración para determinar la resistencia a la pudrición en el almacenamiento.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. 1.
    Ayers, G.W. 1956. The resistanceof potato varieties to storage decay caused byFusarium sambucinum F.G. andFusarium coeruleum. Am Potato J 33:249–254.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boyd, A.E.W. 1952. Dry rot disease of the potato VI. varietal differences in tuber susceptibility obtained by injection and riddle-abrasion methods. Ann Appl Biol 39:339–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boyd, A.E.W. 1972. Dry RotFusarium spp. in, ‘Potato Storage Diseases’. Rev Plant Pathol 51:305–311.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Corsini, D. and J.J. Pavek. 1980. Phenylalanine ammonia lyase activity and fungitoxic metabolites produced by potato cultivars in response toFusarium tuber rot. Physiol Plant Pathol 16:63–72.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Corsini, D. and J. Pavek. 1982. Dry rot resistance, Fusarium species, and temperature effects. Am Potato J 59:462 (abstr).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Davis, J.R., L.H. Sorensen and Gale S. Corsini. 1983. Interaction ofErwinia spp. andFusarium roseum ‘Sambucinum’ on the Russet Burbank potato. Am Potato J 60:409–421.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dobias, Karel. 1976. Methoden zur prufung der resistenz vonkartoffeln gegenden erregerder knollennassfaule Tag. Ber Akad. Landwirtsch-Wiss 140:221–230.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jellis, G.J. 1975. Screening potato clones for resistance to dry rot (Fusarium solani var.coeruleum). Ann Appl Biol 81:417–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lapwood, D.H., P.J. Read and Janis Spokes. 1984. Methods for assessing the susceptibility of potato tubers of different cultivars to rotting byErwinia carotovora subspeciesatroseptica andcarotovora. Plant Pathol 33:13–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Leach, S.S. and R.K. Webb. 1981. Resistance of selected potato cultivars and clones toFusarium dry rot. Phytopathology 71:623–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    O’Brien, Valerie J. and Simeon S. Leach. 1983. Investigations into the mode of resistance of potato tubers toFusarium roseum ‘Sambucinuml. Am Potato J 60:227–233.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sorensen, Leland H. and Walter C. Sparks. 1980. A method for determining the bruise resistance of potatoes. Am Potato J 57:494 (abstr).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 1986 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dennis Corsini
    • 1
  • Joseph J. Pavek
    • 1
  1. 1.USDA-ARSAberdeen

Personalised recommendations