Survival of Xanthomonas campestris pv. campestris associated with soil and cauliflower crop debris under Brazilian conditions
- 17 Downloads
This study investigated the survival of Xanthomonas campestris pv. campestris (Xcc) in the soil, under field and controlled conditions, and associated with cauliflower crop debris. Under field conditions, the soil temperature influenced the survival of Xcc, and the bacterium survived from 4 to 7 days. Under controlled conditions, the soil type and temperature influenced Xcc survival. Depending on the texture, pH and organic matter content of the soil, the bacterium survived from 10 to 24 days. Xcc survived in the soil for 14 days at 20 °C, and for 4 days when incubated at 30 °C. The soil moisture did not influence Xcc survival of 14 days at the three moisture contents evaluated. Similar behaviour was observed regarding the survival of four Xcc strains in the soil. The longest period of Xcc survival associated with cauliflower debris was 255 days. Our results suggest that the soil is not an important source of inoculum for Xcc. Considering the survival periods of Xcc in cauliflower crop residues under the Brazilian conditions studied, we recommend crop rotation with non-host species of Xcc for 1 year. This information may also be useful for the management of black rot in other brassica-producing countries.
KeywordsBlack rot Ecology, plant pathogenic bacteria Brassica crop
The authors thank the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) for granting the post-doc scholarship to the first author (FAPESP process 2011/18527-0) and for the financial support (FAPESP process 2012/13298-5).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
We have no conflict of interest to declare.
Research involving human participants and/or animals
We declare that no human or animal were involved during the research.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Agrios, G. N. (2005). Plant pathology (5th ed.p. 952). San Diego: Academic press.Google Scholar
- Bradbury, J. F. (1986). Guide to plant pathogenic bacteria. Slough: CAB International.Google Scholar
- Diggle, P. J., Heagerty, P., Liang, K. Y., & Zeger, S. L. (2002). Analysis of longitudinal data (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Hattori, T. (1973). Microbial life in the soil: An introduction. New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
- Henz, G. P., Takatsu, A., & Reifschneider, F. J. B. (1988). Avaliação de métodos de inoculação de Xanthomonas campestris patovar campestris para detecção de fontes de resistência em brássicas. Fitopatologia Brasileira, Brasília, 13(3), 207–210.Google Scholar
- Maringoni, A. C., & Silva Junior, T. A. F. (2016). Doenças das Brássicas. In L. Amorim, J. A. M. Rezende, A. Bergamin Filho, & L. E. A. Camargo (Eds.), Manual de Fitopatologia: doenças das plantas cultivadas (Vol. 2, 5th ed., pp. 165–173). São Paulo: Ceres.Google Scholar
- Silva-Júnior, T. A. F., Negrão, D. R., Itako, A. T., Soman, J. M., & Maringoni, A. C. (2012). Survival of Curtobacterium flaccumfaciens pv. flaccumfaciens in soil and bean crop debris. Journal of Plant Pathology, 94(2), 331–337.Google Scholar
- Westfall, P. H., Tobias, R. D., Rom, D., Wolfinger, R. D., & Hochberg, Y. (1999). Multiple comparisons and multiple tests using the SAS® system. Cary: SAS Institute.Google Scholar
- Zaccardelli, M., Campanile, F., Spasiano, A., & Merighi, M. (2007). Detection and identification of the crucifer pathogen, Xanthomonas campestris pv. campestris, by PCR amplification of the conserved Hrp/type III secretion system gene hrcC. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 118(3), 299–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar