Advertisement

Phytoparasitica

, Volume 45, Issue 1, pp 1–8 | Cite as

Plasticity in plant-microbe interactions: a perspective based on the pitch canker pathosystem

  • T. R. Gordon
  • G. J. Reynolds
Article

Abstract

What we know about the life history of fungi that cause disease in plants is commonly based on studies of the pathogen’s interaction with a susceptible host: how and when infection occurs, growth and reproduction within the host, and survival during the interval when a growing host is not available. This focus is appropriate, given the need for information that will facilitate management of disease affecting an economically important crop, but it can limit recognition of the full range of resources that may be utilized by fungi that we classify as plant pathogens. This was certainly the case for Fusarium circinatum, which causes a destructive disease of pines known as pitch canker. Although F. circinatum was initially known only as a necrotrophic, wound-infecting pathogen of coniferous trees, recent research has revealed that an isolate of this fungus that will kill shoot tissue when inoculated into a wound can also have a biotrophic relationship with roots of pine seedlings, infect and grow within grasses without causing symptoms, and cause ear rot of corn. Thus, although F. circinatum became known to science because it induced visible symptoms on pines, it has the capacity for a much broader range of ecological activities than is captured by its designation as a necrotrophic pathogen. The physiological plasticity manifested by F. circinatum illustrates the challenge of obtaining a comprehensive understanding of the life history of a plant pathogenic fungus.

Keywords

Fusarium circinatum Induced resistance Pitch canker 

References

  1. Anagnostakis, S. L. (1987). Chestnut blight: the classical problem of an introduced pathogen. Mycologia, 79, 23–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barrows-Broaddus, J. B., & Dwinell, L. D. (1983). Histopathology of Fusarium moniliforme var. subglutinans in four species of southern pines. Phytopathology, 73, 882–889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bonello, P., & Blodgett, J. T. (2003). Pinus nigraSphaeropsis sapinea as a model pathosystem to investigate local and systemic effects of fungal infection of pines. Physiological and Molecular Plant Pathology, 63, 249–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bonello, P., Gordon, T. R., & Storer, A. J. (2001). Systemic induced resistance in Monterey pine. Forest Pathology, 31, 99–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Britz, H., Coutinho, T. A., Gordon, T. R., & Wingfield, M. J. (2001). Characterisation of the pitch canker fungus, Fusarium circinatum, from Mexico. South African Journal of Botany, 67, 609–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Desjardins, A. E., Plattner, R. D., & Gordon, T. R. (2000). Gibberella fujikuroi mating population A and Fusarium subglutinans from teosinte species and maize from Mexico and Central America. Mycological Research, 104, 865–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dwinell, L. D., Barrows-Broaddus, J. B., & Kuhlman, E. G. (1985). Pitch canker: a disease complex of southern pines. Plant Disease, 69, 270–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Franceschi, V. R., Krokene, P., Christiansen, E., & Krekling, T. (2005). Anatomical and chemical defenses of conifer bark against bark beetles and other pests. New Phytologist, 167, 353–375.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Friel, C. J., Desjardins, A. E., Kirkpatrick, S. C., & Gordon, T. R. (2007). Evidence for recombination and segregation of virulence to pine in a hybrid cross between Gibberella circinata and G. subglutinans. Mycological Research, 111, 827–831.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Gordon, T. R. (2011). Biology and management of Gibberella circinata, cause of pitch canker in pines. In F. M. Alves-Santos & J. Diez (Eds.), Control of Fusarium diseases (pp. 195–208). Kerala, India: Research Signpost.Google Scholar
  11. Gordon, T. R., & Martyn, R. D. (1997). The evolutionary biology of Fusarium oxysporum. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 35, 111–128.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Gordon, T. R., & McRoberts, D. N. (2012). Altered distribution of susceptibility phenotypes implies environmental modulation of genetic resistance. Pages 156–158 in. U.S. Forest Service General Technical Report PSW-GTR-240.Google Scholar
  13. Gordon, T. R., Storer, A. J., & Okamoto, D. (1996). Population structure of the pitch canker pathogen, Fusarium subglutinans f. sp. pini, in California. Mycological Research, 100, 850–854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gordon, T. R., Wikler, K. R., Clark, S. L., Okamoto, D., Storer, A. J., & Bonello, P. (1998a). Resistance to pitch canker disease, caused by Fusarium subglutinans f. sp. pini, in Monterey pine (Pinus radiata). Plant Pathology, 47, 706–711.Google Scholar
  15. Gordon, T. R., Okamoto, D., Storer, A. J., & Wood, D. L. (1998b). Susceptibility of five landscape pines to pitch canker disease, caused by Fusarium subglutinans f. sp. pini. HortScience, 33, 868–871.Google Scholar
  16. Gordon, T. R., Storer, A. J., & Wood, D. L. (2001). The pitch canker epidemic in California. Plant Disease, 85, 1128–1139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gordon, T. R., Kirkpatrick, S. C., Aegerter, B. J., Fisher, A. J., Storer, A. J., Wood, D. L. (2011). Evidence for the occurrence of induced resistance to pitch canker, caused by Gibberella circinata (anamorph Fusarium circinatum) in populations of Pinus radiata. Forest Pathology, 41, 227–232.Google Scholar
  18. Guerra-Santos, J. J. (1999). Pitch canker in Monterey pine in Mexico. In: Devey, M., Matheson, C., Gordon, T. (Eds.), Current and Potential Impacts of Pitch Canker in Radiata Pine. Proc. IMPACT Monterey Workshop, Monterey, CA. CSIRO, Australia, pp. 58–61.Google Scholar
  19. Hepting, G. H., & Roth, E. R. (1946). Pitch canker, a new disease of some southern pines. Journal of Forestry, 44, 742–744.Google Scholar
  20. Jones, N. B., Ford, C. M., Light, M. E., Nadel, R. L., Greyling, I., Fourie, G., Wingfield, M. J., & Morris, A. R. (2014). Effect on nursery and field performance of Pinus patula seedlings after inoculation with Fusarium circinatum. Southern Forests, 76, 125–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kuhlman, E. G. (1987). Effects of inoculation treatment with Fusarium moniliforme var. subglutinans on dieback of loblolly and slash pine seedlings. Plant Disease, 71, 161–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Loo, J. A. (2009). Ecological impacts of non-indigenous invasive fungi as forest pathogens. Biological Invasions, 11, 81–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Martín-Rodrigues, N., Sanchez-Zabala, J., Salcedo, I., Majada, J., González-Murua, C., & Duñabeitia, M. K. (2015). New insights into Radiata pine seedling root infection by Fusarium circinatum. Plant Pathology, 64, 1336–1348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. McCain, A. H., Koehler, C. S., & Tjosvold, S. A. (1987). Pitch canker threatens California pines. California Agriculture, 41, 22–23.Google Scholar
  25. Pruzzo, C., Vezzulli, L., & Colwell, R. R. (2008). Global impact of Vibrio cholerae interactions with chitin. Environmental Microbiology, 10, 1400–1410.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Reynolds, G. J., Gordon, T. R., & McRoberts, N. (2016). Quantifying the impacts of systemic acquired resistance to pitch canker on Monterey Pine growth rate and hyperspectral reflectance. Forests, 7, 20. doi: 10.3390/f7010020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Runion, G. B., Cade, S. C., & Bruck, R. I. (1993). Effects of carbofuran and thiabendazole on incidence of pitch canker in loblolly pine. Plant Disease, 77, 166–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sakamoto, J. M., & Gordon, T. R. (2006). Factors influencing infection of mechanical wounds by Fusarium circinatum on Monterey pines (Pinus radiata). Plant Pathology, 55, 130–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Slinski, S. L., Zakharov, F., & Gordon, T. R. (2015). The effect of resin and monoterpenes on spore germination and growth in Fusarium circinatum. Phytopathology, 105, 119–125.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Slinski, S. L., Kirkpatrick, S. C., & Gordon, T. R. (2016). Inheritance of virulence in Fusarium circinatum, the cause of pitch canker in pines. Plant Pathology, 65, 1292–1296.Google Scholar
  31. Storer, A. J., Gordon, T. R., & Clark, S. L. (1998). Association of the pitch canker fungus, Fusarium subglutinans f. sp. pini with Monterey pine seeds and seedlings in California. Plant Pathology, 47, 649–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Storer, A. J., Bonello, P., Gordon, T. R., & Wood, D. L. (1999). Evidence of resistance to the pitch canker pathogen (Fusarium circinatum) in native stands of Monterey pine (Pinus radiata). Forest Science, 45, 500–505.Google Scholar
  33. Swett, C. L., & Gordon, T. R. (2012). First report of grass species (Poaceae) as naturally occurring hosts of the pine pathogen Gibberella circinata. Plant Disease, 96, 908–908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Swett, C. L., & Gordon, T. R. (2015). Endophytic association of the pine pathogen Fusarium circinatum with corn (Zea mays). Fungal Ecology, 13, 120–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Swett, C. L., & Gordon, T. R. (2016). Exposure to a pine pathogen enhances growth and disease resistance in Pinus radiata seedlings. Forest Pathology, In Press. Google Scholar
  36. Swett, C., Porter, B., Fourie, G., Steenkamp, E. T., Gordon, T. R., & Wingfield, M. J. (2014). Association of the pitch canker pathogen Fusarium circinatum with grass hosts in commercial pine production areas of South Africa. Southern Forests, 76, 161–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Swett, C. L., Kirkpatrick, S. C., & Gordon, T. R. (2016). Evidence for a hemibiotrophic association of the pitch canker pathogen Fusarium circinatum with Pinus radiata. Plant Disease, 99, 1–6.Google Scholar
  38. Wikler, K. R., & Gordon, T. R. (2000). An initial assessment of genetic relationships among populations of Fusarium circinatum in different parts of the world. Canadian Journal of Botany, 78, 709–717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wingfield, M. J., Hammerbacher, A., Ganley, R. J., Steenkamp, E. T., Gordon, T. R., Wingfield, B. D., & Coutinho, T. A. (2008). Pitch canker caused by Fusarium circinatum: a growing threat to pine plantations and forests worldwide. Australasian Plant Pathology, 37, 319–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Plant PathologyUniversity of CaliforniaDavisUSA
  2. 2.Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, U.S. Department of AgricultureLindenUSA

Personalised recommendations