Advertisement

European Journal of Plant Pathology

, Volume 124, Issue 2, pp 283–292 | Cite as

Soil application of imidacloprid and related SAR-inducing compounds produces effective and persistent control of citrus canker

  • M. I. Francis
  • A. Redondo
  • J. K. Burns
  • J. H. Graham
Article

Abstract

Soil application of the systemic insecticide imidacloprid (Admire®, Bayer Crop Science) produced season-long control of citrus canker caused by Xanthomonas citri sbsp. citri. Imidacloprid is a neo-nicotinoid that breaks down in planta into 6-chloronicotinic acid, a compound closely related to the systemic acquired resistance (SAR) inducer isonicotinic acid. Potted Swingle citrumelo seedlings (Citrus paradisi × Poncirus trifoliata) were treated with imidacloprid and the SAR inducers, isonicotinic acid, and acibenzolar-s-methyl as soil drenches or with acibenzolar-s-methyl as a foliar spray 1week prior to inoculation of immature leaves with X. citri sbsp. citri. Seedlings were re-inoculated four times over a 24-week period. SAR induction was confirmed by expression of the PR-2 gene (β-1,3 glucanase). Soil drenches of imidacloprid, isonicotinic acid, and acibenzolar-s-methyl induced a high and persistent up-regulation of PR-2 gene expression and reduced the number of canker lesions for up to 24 weeks compared to 4 weeks for foliar acibenzolar-s-methyl. Soil applied inducers of SAR reduced canker lesions up to 70% compared with the untreated inoculated plants. Lesions on leaves were small, necrotic, and flat compared to pustular lesions on inoculated untreated plants. Populations of X. citri sbsp. citri per leaf were reduced 1–3 log units in soil-treated plants compared to inoculated untreated plants.

Keywords

Gene expression Pathogenicity-related proteins Xanthomonas citri 

Abbreviations

ASM

acibenzolar-s-methyl

Imid

imidacloprid

INA

isonicotinic acid

PR-2

pathogenicity-related protein 2

SAR

systemic acquired resistance

SA

salicylic acid

Xcc

Xanthomonas citri sbsp. citri

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank to Alma Briseno, Maria Peacock and Diane Bright, (University of Florida, CREC) for their technical assistance, and Edwin Civerolo (USDA-ARS, Parlier, CA) and Zhonglin Mou (University of Florida, Gainesville) for suggestions in the revision of the manuscript.

References

  1. Alva, A. K., Graham, J. H., & Anderson, C. A. (1995). Soil pH and copper effects on young ‘Hamlin’ orange trees. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 59, 481–487.Google Scholar
  2. Beckers, G. J., & Conrath, U. (2007). Priming for stress resistance: from the lab to the field. Current Opinion in Plant Biology, 10(4), 425–431.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bonasera, J. M., Kim, J. F., & Beer, S. V. (2006). PR genes of apple: identification and expression in response to elicitors and inoculation with Erwinia amylovora. BioMed Central Plant Biology, 6, 23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Brisset, M. N., Cesbron, S., Thomson, S. V., & Paulin, J. P. (2000). Acibenzolar-S-methyl induces the accumulation of defence-related enzymes in apple and protects from fire blight. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 106(6), 529–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cubero, J., & Graham, J. H. (2005). Quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction for bacterial enumeration and allelic discrimination to differentiate Xanthomonas strains on citrus. Phytopathology, 95, 1333–1340.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. da Rocha, A. B., & Hammerschmidt, R. (2005). History and perspectives on the use of disease resistance inducers in horticultural crops. HortTechnology, 15(3), 518–529.Google Scholar
  7. Dekkers, M. G. H., Graham, J. H., Burns, J. K., Cubero, J., & Colburn, G. C. (2004). Evaluation of chemical inducers and PR protein reporters for induced systemic resistance to citrus bacterial diseases. Phytopathology, 94, S25.Google Scholar
  8. Durrant, W. E., & Dong, X. (2004). Systemic acquired resistance. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 42, 185–209.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gottwald, T. R., & Graham, J. H. (1992). A device for precise and nondisruptive stomatal inoculation of leaf tissue with bacterial pathogens. Phytopathology, 82, 930–935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gottwald, T. R., & Timmer, L. W. (1995). The efficacy of windbreaks in reducing the spread of citrus canker caused by Xanthamonas campestris pv. citri. Tropical Agriculture, 72, 194–201.Google Scholar
  11. Graham, J. H. (1998). Citrus Canker: control efforts in Brazil, prognosis for Florida. Citrus Industry, 79(8), 54–57.Google Scholar
  12. Graham, J. H., & Leite, R. P. (2004). Lack of control of citrus canker by induced systemic resistance compounds. Plant Disease, 88, 745–750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Graham, J. H., & Leite, R. P., Jr. (2007). Soil applied neonicotinoids for control of bacterial diseases on young citrus trees. Proceedings of International Workshop on PR-Proteins and Induced Resistance Against Pathogens and Insects. Doorn, The Netherlands. p. 107.Google Scholar
  14. Graham, J. H., Gottwald, T. R., Cubero, J., & Achor, D. S. (2004). Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. citri: factors affecting successful eradication of citrus canker. Molecular Plant Pathology, 5(1), 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Graham, J. H., Gottwald, T. R., & Leite, R. P. (2006). Prospects for control of citrus canker with novel chemical compounds. Proceedings of Florida State Horticultural Society, 119, 82–88.Google Scholar
  16. Hammerschmidt, R., Métraux, J.-P., & van Loon, L. C. (2001). Inducing resistance: a summary of papers presented at the first international symposium on induced resistance to plant diseases, Corfu, May 2000. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 107, 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kuhara, S. (1978). Present epidemic status and control of the citrus canker disease (Xanthomonas citri (Hasse) Dowson) in Japan. Review of Plant Protection Research, 11, 132–142.Google Scholar
  18. Leite, R. P., Jr. (1990). Cancro citrico - prevençao e controle no Parana. IAPAR, Londrina, PR, Brazil. Circular Number, 61.Google Scholar
  19. Leite Jr., R. P., & Mohan, S. K. (1990). Integrated management of citrus bacterial canker disease caused by Xanthomonas campestris pv. citri in the State of Paraná, Brazil. Crop Protection, 9, 3–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Leite Jr., R. P., Mohan, S. K., Pereira, A. L. G., & Campaccci, C. A. (1987). Controle integrado de cancro cítrico - efeito da resistencia genética e da aplicaçao de bactericidas. Fitopatologia. Brásileira, 12, 257–263.Google Scholar
  21. Marco, G. M., & Stall, R. E. (1983). Control of bacterial spot of pepper initiated by strains of Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria that differ in sensitivity to copper. Plant Disease, 67, 779–781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Maxson-Stein, K., He, S. Y., Hammerschmidt, R., & Jones, A. S. (2002). Effect of treating apple trees with Acibenzolar-S-Methyl on fire blight and expression of pathogenesis-related protein genes. Plant Disease, 86(7), 785–790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. McGuire, R. G. (1988). Evaluation of bactericidal chemicals for control of Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria that differ in sensitivity to copper. Plant Disease, 72, 1016–1020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Muraro, R. P., Roka, F. M., & Spreen, T. H. (2002). Grower costs of having citrus canker in Florida with an overview of Argentina’s citrus canker control program. Department of Food and Resource Economics, University of Florida, IFAS, Gaineville. Staff Pap. SP02-3.Google Scholar
  25. Rinaldi, D. A. M. F., & Leite Jr., R. P. (2000). Adaptation of Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. citri population to the presence of copper compounds in nature. Proceedings of the International Society of Citriculture, 2, 1064.Google Scholar
  26. Schubert, T. S., Rizvi, S. A., Sun, X., Gottwald, T. R., Graham, J. H., & Dixon, W. (2001). Meeting the challenge of eradicating citrus canker in Florida - again. Plant Disease, 85, 340–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Stall, R. E., Miller, J. W., Marcó, G. M., & Canteros de Echenique, B. I. (1980). Population dynamics of Xanthamonas citri causing cancrosis of citrus in Argentina. Proceedings of the Florida State Horticultural Society, 93, 10–14.Google Scholar
  28. Stall, R. E., Marcó, G. M., & Canteros de Echenique, B. I. (1982a). Importance of mesophyll in mature-leaf resistance to cancrosis of citrus. Phytopathology, 72, 1097–1100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Stall, R. E., Miller, J. W., Marco, G. M., & Canteros de Echenique, B. I. (1982b). Timing of sprays to control cancrosis of grapefruit in Argentina. Proceedings of the International Society of Citriculture, 1, 414–417.Google Scholar
  30. Timmer, L. W. (1988). Evaluation of bactericides for control of citrus canker in Argentina. Proceedings of the Florida State Horticultural Society, 101, 6–9.Google Scholar
  31. van Loon, L. C., Rep, M., & Pieterse, C. M. J. (2006). Significance of inducible defense-related proteins in infected plants. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 44, 135–162.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Viloria, Z., Drouillard, D. L., Graham, J. H., & Grosser, J. W. (2004). Screening triploid hybrids of ‘Lakeland’ Limequat for resistance to citrus canker. Plant Disease, 88, 1056–1060.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© KNPV 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. I. Francis
    • 1
  • A. Redondo
    • 1
  • J. K. Burns
    • 1
  • J. H. Graham
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Soil and Water Sciences, Citrus Research and Education CenterUniversity of Florida/IFASLake AlfredUSA

Personalised recommendations