Advertisement

Australasian Plant Pathology

, Volume 41, Issue 3, pp 283–293 | Cite as

Molecular diversity in the barley pathogen Bipolaris sorokiniana (Cochliobolus sativus)

  • H. Ghazvini
  • A. Tekauz
Article

Abstract

Spot blotch, caused by Bipolaris sorokiniana, is a prevalent disease of barley in Canada and elsewhere in the world. To evaluate the genetic variation among pathogen isolates, 93 isolates of B. sorokiniana representative of eight different virulence groups (VIGs) identified in a previous study, were subjected to an AFLP assay. AFLP analysis indicated that pathogen isolates collected from different regions of Canada and from other countries had a high level of genetic variability. Isolates possessing low virulence (VIG 0.0.0.0) and differential virulence (VIG 6.0.0.0) on barley genotypes were clearly discernible from other pathogenic isolates. However, molecular analysis did not provide a robust differentiation among the other six VIGs identified by the classical method of pathotype designation. There was a closer correlation between the AFLP patterns and virulence than between AFLP pattern and geographic origin of isolates. To evaluate causes of genetic variation among isolates, the influence of mutation, migration and gene flow, and recombination on the B. sorokiniana population were discussed. The genetic profiles of the three isolates of VIG 6.0.0.0, which were located between low virulence and high virulence isolates, invited speculation that such a virulence group may be the result of genetic recombination between isolates possessing extreme virulences in the population of the pathogen.

Keywords

Cluster analysis Neighbor-joining tree Parasexual recombination 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We wish to thank Dr. Bruce Ford, Dr. Michele Piercey-Normore and Dr. Anne Worley, Dept of Botany, University of Manitoba, for their valuable comments and suggestions and also the help they provided with data analysis of this study. We also would like to thank Leslie Bezte for her valuable technical assistance.

Supplementary material

13313_2012_131_MOESM1_ESM.doc (180 kb)
Supplementary Table 1 (DOC 179 kb)

References

  1. Asigbetse KB, Fernandez D, Dubois MP, Geiger JP (1994) Differentiation of Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. vasinfectum races on cotton by random amplified polymorphic DNA analysis. Phytopathology 84:622–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bulat SA, Mironenko NV (1993) Genetic differentiation of the phytopathogenic fungus Cochliobolus sativus (Ito and Kurib.) Drechsl. ex Dastur (Bipolaris sorokiniana (Sacc.: Sorok.) Shoem.) revealed by a universally primed polymerase chain reaction UP-PCR technique: Correlation with host-specificity. (In Russian). Genetika 29:1295–1301Google Scholar
  3. Burdon JJ, Silk J (1997) Sources and patterns of diversity in plant pathogenic fungi. Phytopathology 87:664–669PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Burdon JJ, Roelfs AP (1985a) Isozyme and virulence variation in asexually reproducing populations of Puccinia graminis and P. recondita on wheat. Phytopathology 75:907–913CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burdon JJ, Roelfs AP (1985b) The effect of sexual and asexual reproduction on the isozyme structure of populations of Puccinia graminis. Phytopathology 75:1068–1073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chand R, Pandey SP, Singh HV, Kumar S, Joshi AK (2003) Variability and its probable causes in natural populations of spot blotch pathogen Bipolaris sorokiniana of wheat (T. aestivum L.) in India. Z Pflanzenkr Pflanzenschutz 110:27–35Google Scholar
  7. Christensen JJ, Davies FR (1937) Nature of variation in Helminthosporium sativum. Mycologia 29:85–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Clark RV (1979) Yield losses in barley cultivars caused by spot blotch. Can J Plant Pathol 2:113–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. de Moura Nascimento EJ, Van Der Sand ST (2008) Restriction analysis of the amplified ribosomal DNA spacers ITS1 and ITS2 of Bipolaris sorokiniana isolates. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 24:647–652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. de Oliveira AM, Matsumura AT, Prestes AM, Van Der Sand ST (2002) Intraspecific variability of Bipolaris sorokiniana isolates determined by random-amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD). Genet Mol Res 1:350–358PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Dice LR (1945) Measures of the amount of ecologic association between species. Ecology 26:297–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dostaler D, Couture L, Pelletier GJ (1987) Étude de la tolérance de cultivars d’ orge à la tache helminthosporienne. Can J Plant Sci 67:153–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Felsenstein J (1985) Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39:783–791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fetch TG, Steffenson BJ (1994) Identification of Cochliobolus sativus isolates expressing differential virulence on two-row barley genotypes from North Dakota. Can J Plant Pathol 16:202–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fordyce M, Meldrum S (2001) Verification of conventional pathotype screening for Australian isolates of Cochliobolus sativus using molecular fingerprinting. In: Proc of the 10th Australian Barley Technical Symposium, 16–20 September 2001. Canberra, Australia. [Online article].Google Scholar
  16. Ghazvini H, Tekauz A (2004) Yield loss in barley inoculated with high and low virulence isolates of Bipolaris sorokiniana. In: Proc of the 9th International Barley Genetic Symposium, June 20–26, 2004, Brno, Czech Republic, pp. 774–780Google Scholar
  17. Ghazvini H, Tekauz A (2007) Virulence diversity in the population of Bipolaris sorokiniana. Plant Dis 91:814–821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ghazvini H, Tekauz A (2008) Host–pathogen interactions among barley genotypes and Bipolaris sorokiniana isolates. Plant Dis 92:225–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Harding H, Tinline RD (1983) The existence of differentially fertile strains in two populations of Cochliobolus sativus. Can J Plant Pathol 5:17–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hosford RM Jr, Solangi GRM, Kiesling RL (1975) Inheritance in Cochliobolus sativus. Phytopathology 65:699–703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Knight NL, Platz GJ, Lehmensiek A, Sutherland MW (2010) An investigation of genetic variation among Australian isolates of Bipolaris sorokiniana from different cereal tissues and comparison of their abilities to cause spot blotch on barley. Australas Plant Pathol 39:207–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kolmer JA (2001) Molecular polymorphism and virulence phenotypes of the wheat leaf rust fungus Puccinia triticina in Canada. Can J Bot 79:917–926Google Scholar
  23. Kolmer JA, Liu JQ, Sies M (1995) Virulence and molecular polymorphism in Puccinia recondita f. sp. tritici in Canada. Phytopathology 85:276–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Leisova-Svobodova L, Minarikova V, Kucera L, Pereyra SA (2011) Structure of the Cochliobolus sativus population variability. Plant Pathol. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3059.2011.02547.x
  25. Levy M, Romao J, Marchetti MA, Hamer JE (1991) DNA fingerprinting with a dispersed repeated sequence resolves pathotype diversity in the rice blast fungus. Plant Cell 3:95–102PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Levy M, Correa-Victoria FJ, Zeigler RS, Xu S, Hamer JE (1993) Genetic diversity of the rice blast fungus in a disease nursery in Columbia. Phytopathology 83:1427–1433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Limpert E, Muller K (1994) Designation of pathotypes of plant pathogens. J Phytopathol 140:346–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Liu JQ, Kolmer JA (1998) Molecular and virulence diversity and linkage disequilibria in asexual and sexual populations of the wheat leaf rust fungus, Puccinia recondita. Genome 41:832–840Google Scholar
  29. Majer D, Mithen R, Lewis BG, Vos P, Oliver RP (1996) The use of AFLP fingerprinting for the detection of variation in fungi. Mycol Res 100:1107–1111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McDonald BA, McDermott JM, Goodwin SB, Allard RW (1989) The population biology of host-pathogen interactions. Annu Rev Phytopathol 27:77–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Meldrum SI, Ogle HJ, Platz GJ (2004) Pathotypes of Cochliobolus sativus on barley in Australia. Australas Plant Pathol 33:109–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Michelmore RW, Hulbert SH (1987) Molecular markers for genetic analyses of phytopathogenic fungi. Annu Rev Phytopathol 25:383–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mironenko NV, Bulat SA (2001) Genetic structure of Cochliobolus sativus (Bipolaris sorokiniana) populations isolated from different hosts as revealed by UP-PCR (RAPD-like) technique. J Russ Phytopathol Soc 2:25–30Google Scholar
  34. Nei M (1973) Analysis of gene diversity in subdivided populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 70:3321–3323PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nei M, Li WH (1979) Mathematical model for studying genetic variation in terms of restriction endonucleases. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 76:5269–5273PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pongam P, Osborn CT, Williams PH (1999) Assessment of genetic variation among Leptosphaeria maculans isolates using pathogenicity data and AFLP analysis. Plant Dis 83:149–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Posada D, Crandall KA, Holmes EC (2002) Recombination in evolutionary genomics. Annu Rev Genet 36:75–97PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Powell W, Morgante M, Andre C, Hanafey M, Vogel J, Tingey S, Rafalski A (1996) The comparison of RFLP, RAPD, AFLP and SSR (microsatellite) markers for germplasm analysis. Mol Breed 2:225–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Raemaekers RH (1988) Helminthosporium sativum: disease complex on wheat and sources of resistance in Zambia. In: Klatt AR (ed) Wheat production constraints in tropical environments. CIMMYT, Mexico, DF, Mexico, pp 175–185Google Scholar
  40. Rau D, Brown AHD, Brubaker CL, Attene G, Balmas V, Saba E, Papa R (2003) Population genetic structure of Pyrenophora teres Drechs. the causal agent of net blotch in Sardinian landraces of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.). Theor Appl Genet 106:947–959PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Saitou N, Nei M (1987) The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol Biol Evol 4:406–425PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Shoemaker RA (1955) Biology, cytology and taxonomy of Cochliobolus sativus. Can J Bot 33:562–576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Simcox KD, Nickrent D, Pedersen WL (1992) Comparison of isozyme polymorphism in races of Cochliobolus carbonum. Phytopathology 82:621–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sneath PHA, Sokal RR (1973) Numerical taxonomy. Freeman, San Francisco, p 573Google Scholar
  45. Swofford DL (2002) PAUP* phylogenetic analysis using parsimony and other programs, version 4.0b10. Sinauer Associates, SunderlandGoogle Scholar
  46. Swofford DL, Olsen GJ, Waddell PJ, Hillis DM (1996) Phylogenetic inference. In: Hillis DM, Moritz C, Mable BK (eds) Molecular systematics, 2nd edn. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, pp 407–514Google Scholar
  47. Tekauz A. 2002. Spot blotch (Cochliobolus sativus) infection responses in selected North American barley cultivars at the seedling and adult-plant stages. In: Proc. 2nd Int. Workshop Barley Leaf Blights. ICARDA, Aleppo, Syria, pp. 428–435Google Scholar
  48. Terekhova VA, Rochev MV (1989) Comparative characterization of mycelial isozymes of Bipolaris sorokiniana Shoem. isolates of different origin. Moscow Univ Biol Sci Bull 44:77–81Google Scholar
  49. Tinline RD (1951) Studies of the perfect stage of Helminthosporium sativum. Can J Bot 29:467–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tinline RD (1961) Cochliobolus sativus. IV. Drug-resistant, color, and nutritionally exacting mutants. Can J Bot 39:1695–1704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Tinline RD (1962) Cochliobolus sativus. V. Heterokariosis and parasexuality. Can J Bot 40:425–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Tinline RD (1988) Cochliobolus sativus, a pathogen of wide host range. In: Ingram DS, Williams PH (eds) Advances in plant pathology, vol 6. Academic, London, pp 113–122Google Scholar
  53. Tinline RD, Dickson JG (1958) Cochliobolus sativus. I. Perithecial development and inheritance of spore color and mating type. Mycologia 50:697–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Valim-Labres ME, Porto MD, Matsumura ATS (1997) Effects of host resistance on the isozymatic patterns of Bipolaris sorokiniana (Dematiaceae, Moniliales). Braz J Genet 20:541–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Valjavec-Gratian M, Steffenson BJ (1997) Pathotypes of Cochliobolus sativus on barley. Plant Dis 81:1275–1278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Vos P, Hogers R, Bleeker M, Reijans M, van de Lee T, Hornes M, Frijters A, Pot J, Peleman J, Kuiper M, Zabeau M (1995) AFLP: a new technique for DNA fingerprinting. Nucl Acid Res 23:4407–4414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Welz HG, Kohler W, Leonard KJ (1994) Isozyme variation within and among pathogenic races of Cochliobolus carbonum on corn in North Carolina. Phytopathology 84:31–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Yoder OC (1988) Cochliobolus heterostrophus, cause of southern corn leaf blight. In: Ingram DS, Williams PH (eds) Advances in plant pathology, vol 6. Academic, London, pp 93–112Google Scholar
  59. Zeigler RS, Cuoc LX, Scott RP, Bernardo MA, Chen DH, Valent B, Nelson RJ (1995) The relationship between lineage and virulence in Pyricularia grisea in the Philippines. Phytopathology 85:443–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Zhong S, Steffenson BJ (2001) Virulence and molecular diversity in Cochliobolus sativus. Phytopathology 91:469–476PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Zhong S, Steffenson BJ (2002) Identification and characterization of DNA markers associated with a locus conferring virulence on barley in the plant pathogenic fungus Cochliobolus sativus. Theor Appl Genet 104:1049–1054PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Zhong S, Steffenson BJ (2007) Molecular karyotyping and chromosome length polymorphism in Cochliobolus sativus. Mycol Res 111:78–86PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Australasian Plant Pathology Society Inc. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cereal Research CentreAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaWinnipegCanada
  2. 2.Cereal Research DepartmentSeed and Plant Improvement InstituteKarajIran

Personalised recommendations