Phytoparasitica

, Volume 36, Issue 2, pp 199–208 | Cite as

Role of stalk-anatomy and yield parameters in development of charcoal rot caused byMacrophomina phaseolina in winter sorghum

Phytopathology

Abstract

Charcoal rot caused byMacrophomina phaseolina (Tassi) Goid. damages stalk tissue and weakens stalk strength, leading to lodging of crop and loss in grain yield in sorghum. In an attempt to understand the pathogenicity byM. phaseolina in relation to stalk characters and plant outputs, the effects of morphological (stalk-thickness), anatomical (bundle-number, bundle-density, and vascular tissue) and physiological characters (water and soluble sugar content) of the stalks of winter sorghum genotypes on charcoal rot development were analyzed. Bundle-number and stalk-thickness had a significant influence on internal spread of charcoal rot. A thicker stalk facilitated the spread of lesions more than did a thinner one. A stalk with densely packed vascular bundles inhibited lesion advancement. Field studies with 24 winter sorghum genotypes demonstrated that most of the parameters that could improve grain and stover yield also increased the length of charcoal rot lesions. Lesion development in stalks showed a high degree of association with grain yield (R2=0.51) and 100-grain weight (R2=0.42). The rate of symptom development in stalks differed during dough and maturity stages. It was concluded that anatomical characters of sorghum stalk, especially bundle-number, along with yield parameters played an important role in determining the extent of stalk damage by charcoal rot in winter sorghum.

Key words

Grain yield stover yield vascular bundle density 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Anahosur, K.H., Naik, S.T. and Nadaf, S.K. (1987) Correlation and path coefficient analysis of loss in seed weight due to charcoal rot in sorghum.Indian Phytopathol. 40:478–481.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bashford, L.L., Maranvile, J.W., Weeks, S.A. and Campbell, R. (1976) Mechanical properties affecting lodging of sorghum.Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. 19:962–966.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Berry, P.M., Sterling, M., Spink, J.H., Baker, C.J., Sylvester-Bradley, R., Mooney, S.J.et al. (2004) Understanding and reducing lodging in cereals.Adv. Agron. 84:217–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bhattacharya, G., Siddiqui, K.A.I. and Chakraborty, S. (1994) The toxicity of phaseolinone to mice.Indian J. Pharmacol. 26:121–125.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Das, I.K., Fakrudin, B. and Arora, D.K. (2008) RAPD cluster analysis and chlorate sensitivity of some Indian isolates ofMacrophomina phaseolina from sorghum and their relationships with pathogenicity.Microbiol. Res. 163:215–224.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Das, I.K. and Prabhakar. (2003) Identification of stable morphological and anatomical characters of sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) stalk.Indian J. Genet. Plant Breed. 63:347–348.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dodd, J.L. (1980) The photosynthetic stress translocation balance concept or sorghum stalk rots.in: Sorghum Diseases, a World Review:Proc. Int. Workshop on Sorghum Diseases (Patancheru, India), pp. 300–305.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dubois, M., Gilles, K.A., Hamilton, J.K., Rebers, P.A. and Smith, F. (1956) Colorimetric method for determination of sugars and related substances.Anal. Chem. 28:350–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Esechie, H.A., Maranvile, J.W. and Ross, W.M. (1977) Relationship of stalk morphology and chemical composition to lodging resistance in sorghum.Crop Sci. 17:609–612.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kaigama, B.K., Teare, I.D., Stone, L.R. and Powers, W.L. (1977) Root and top growth of irrigated and non-irrigated sorghum.Crop Sci. 17:555–559.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Maranville, J.W. (1974) What’s new in sorghum physiology.Proc. 29 th Annual Corn and Sorghum Research Conf. (Washington, DC, USA), pp. 22–28.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mughogho, L.K. and Pande, S. (1984) Charcoal rot of sorghum.in: Sorghum Root and Stalk Rots — a Critical Review:Proc. Consultative Group Discussion on Research Needs and Strategies for Control of Sorghum Root and Stalk Rot Diseases (1983, Bellagio, Italy), pp. 11–24.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Odvody, G.N. and Dunkel, L.D. (1979) Charcoal stalk rot of sorghum: effect of environment on host parasite relations.Phytopathology 69:250–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pedgaonkar, S.M. and Mayee, C.D. (1990) Stalk water potential in relation to charcoal rot of sorghum.Indian Phytopathol. 43:192–196.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rosenow, D.T. (1980) Stalk rot resistance breeding in Texas.in: Sorghum Diseases, a World Review:Proc. Int. Workshop on Sorghum Diseases (1978, Hyderabad, India), pp. 306–314.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Seetharama, N., Bidinger, F.R., Rao, K.N., Gill, K.S. and Madhuri Mulgund. (1987) Effect of pattern and severity of moisture deficit stress on stalk rot incidence in Sorghum. I. Use of line source irrigation technique, and the effect of time of inoculation.Field Crops Res. 15:289–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Young, H.C. (1943) The toothpick method of inoculating corn for ear and stalk rots.Phytopathology 33:16 (abstr.).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Research Centre for Sorghum, RajendranagarHyderabad, Andhra PradeshIndia
  2. 2.National Research Centre for SorghumCentre on Rabi SorghumSolapur, MaharashtraIndia

Personalised recommendations