Advertisement

American Potato Journal

, Volume 59, Issue 1, pp 1–8 | Cite as

Nonpathogenic bacteria associated with potato stems cross-react withCorynebacterium sepedonicum antisera in immunofluorescence

  • C. F. Crowley
  • S. H. De Boer
Article

Abstract

Forty-three and 16% of stem smears from ostensibly healthy potato plants tested in 1980 and 1981, respectively, by immunofluorescence usingCorynebacterium sepedonicum antisera, had fluorescing bacterial cells. Eight different bacteria that cross-reacted withC. sepedonicum antisera in immunofluorescence were isolated from stems. Four of these bacteria were Gram negative, three were Gram positive, and one was Gram variable. All bacteria differed fromC. sepedonicum in morphological and biochemical characteristics except the Gram variable bacteria which were morphologically similar toC. sepedonicum at some growth stages. None of the cross-reacting bacteria was pathogenic on eggplant (Solanum melongena L. cv. Black Beauty). Three of the bacteria also formed precipitin bands in double diffusion withC. sepedonicum antiserum. Adsorption of antiserum with any one of the cross-reacting bacteria did not prevent immunofluorescence staining of all the isolated strains. Due to the cross-reactions, reliability of immunofluorescence for detection of latent bacterial ring rot infection was limited

Key Words

Bacterial ring rot Corynebacterium sepedonicum immunofluorescence crossreaction indirect fluorescent antibody stain 

Resumen

Cuarenta y tres y 16% de los frotis de tallos provenientes de plantas sanas de papas probados en 1980 y 1981, respectivamente, por medio de immunofluorescencia usando antisuero deCorynebacterium sepedonicum presentaron células bacterianas fluorescentes. Ocho diferentes bacterias que reaccionaron con antisuero deC. sepedonicum en immunofluorescencia fueron aisladas de los tallos. Cuatro de estas bacterias fueron Gram positivo, tres fueron Gram negativo y una fue Gram variable. Todas estas bacterias fueron diferentes deC. sepedonicum en sus características morfológicas y bioquímicas, excepto la Gram variable cuyas características morfológicas fueron similares a las deC. sepedonicum el algunos de sus estados de desarrollo. Ninguna de estas bacterias fue patogénica en berenjena (Solanum melongena L. cv. Black Beauty). Tres de estas bacterias también formaron bandas de precipitación en doble difusión con antisuero deC. sepedonicum. La absorción de antisuero por cualquiera de estas bacterias no previno el teñido por immunofluorescencia de todos los strains aislados. Debido a estas reacciones cruzadas, la confiabilidad de la immunofluorescencia para detectar infección latente de pudrición anular fue limitada

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. 1.
    Adler, J. 1966. Chemotaxis in bacteria. Science 153:708–716.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baribeau, B. et M. Marcotte. 1968. Méthode de dépistage de la flétrissure bactérienne de la pomme de terre,Corynebacterium sepedonicum Spieck, et Kotth. Phytoprotection 49:110–113.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Collins, C.H. and P.M. Lyne. 1976. Microbiological Methods. 4th Ed. Butterworth and Co. Publishers Ltd. London. 521 pp.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    De Boer, S.H. and R.J. Copeman. 1974. Endophytic bacterial flora inSolarium tuberosum and its significance in bacterial ring rot diagnosis. Can J Plant Sci 54:115–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    De Boer, S.H. and R.J. Copeman. 1980. Bacterial ring rot testing with the indirect fluorescent antibody staining procedure. Am Potato J 57:457–465.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lelliott, R.A. and P.W. Sellar. 1976. The detection of latent ring rot (Corynebacterium sepedonicum [Spieck. et Kotth.] Skapt. et Burkh.) in potato stocks. EPPO Bull 6: 101–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Racicot, H.N., D.B.O. Savile and I.L. Conners. 1938. Bacterial wilt and rot of potatoes Some suggestions for its detection, verification and control. Am Potato J 15:312–318.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Samson, R. et F. Poutier. 1979. Comparaison de trois méthodes d’identification deCorynebacterium sepedonicum dans les tubercules de pomme de terre. Potato Res 22:133–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Trigalet, A., R. Samson, and A. Coléno. 1978. Problems related to the use of serology in phytobacteriology. Proc 4th Int Conf Plant Path Bact, Angers 1978. pp. 271–288.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. F. Crowley
    • 1
  • S. H. De Boer
    • 2
  1. 1.B.C. Ministry of Agriculture and FoodVancouverCanada
  2. 2.Agriculture CanadaVancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations