, Volume 26, Issue 1, pp 95–108 | Cite as

Vf scab resistance of Malus

Open Access


The apple production in temperate regions with spring rains, the Scab caused by the fungus Venturia inaequalis is the most important constraint. To produce spotless apples and avoid damage that develops during storage, growers apply fungicide on a regular or weather-determined basis. All major apple cultivars are highly susceptible to this disease. To limit the need for fungicide applications, apple breeders are currently introgressing disease resistance from wild Malus accessions into commercial lines. The first attempts to do this were made 100 years ago. As apples are self-incompatible, pseudo-backcrossing is used to eliminate unwanted traits from wild Malus and select new cultivars that are attractive to both producers and consumers. This process, from the first cross of a commercial cultivar with a wild, disease-resistant Malus, is extremely long due to apple’s long juvenile phase, the need for more than seven backcross steps and the high heterozygosity of this genus. Therefore, most of today’s scab-resistant cultivars rely on a single introduction of scab resistance from Malus floribunda 821, referred to as Vf. In this paper, we trace the history of Vf from its initial identification through its use in breeding and commercial production. We sum up the literature describing how and where Vf resistance has been overcome by new pathotypes of V. inaequalis. Finally, we describe the current knowledge of the genes behind Vf resistance, its mode of action and the use of Vf genes in gene technology.


Apple Biotechnology Resistance breeding Venturia inaequalis 


Apple is one of the major fruit crops of temperate regions. Early on, humans learned to graft wood or buds from a particular apple tree onto a rootstock, to maintain the desirable traits that are overwhelmingly lost when apple is propagated through seeds. This approach eventually led to the high genetic uniformity (few cultivars) of today’s apple orchards. The causal agent of apple scab (Venturia inaequalis) was favored by this system and apple scab became a disease requiring intense chemical control programs (MacHardy et al. 2001), which are costly, cumbersome and pollute the environment. Scientists recognized the importance of breeding for resistance early on and some apple breeders recognized the potential benefit of introgressing resistance from wild Malus species (Hough et al. 1953; Dayton and Mowry 1970; Lespinasse et al. 1976; Kellerhals and Furrer 1994). However, they also were, and are aware that it takes many double pseudo-backcrosses, each involving a different cultivar as the donor of high-quality traits, to eliminate undesirable “wild” traits. In addition, for each pseudo-backcrossing step, a large number of descendants have to be analyzed. The result was that each breeder continued the work of his predecessor using the most advanced selections for his own crosses, with the final result that a single source of resistance was used almost exclusively. In the breeding of scab resistance into apple populations, the Vf resistance that originated from a single tree referred to as Malus floribunda 821 was used in this way. This review traces the story of Vf.1 Many details have been presented in previous review articles on apple scab (Boone 1971; MacHardy 1996), as Vf resistance has always played a major role in any applied or fundamental research on V. inaequalis (Gessler et al. 2006). However, this review honors all researchers who dedicated their effort in using and understanding this resistance, fundamental for the current apple breeding and apple production with reduced fungicide input either organic or conventional. About 400 research papers deal with the Vf resistance of which three-fourth have focused on the breeding of resistant cultivars (CAB data base 1910 until Feb 2011). We will cite publications which we judge to contribute to our purpose, and leave out the breeding and testing of Vf cultivars. We request all authors to excuse us for whose work we do not acknowledge appropriately.

Identification of Vf resistance and its use in breeding

At the University of Illinois, Crandall (1926) crossed a high number of crab apples with commercial cultivars. In 1914 and 1915 he used the apple cultivar “Rome Beauty” and Malus floribunda accession No. 821 and produced around 450 seedlings which were planted and further crossed. Some of this material survived and 20 years later two siblings (F226829-2-2 and F226830-2) recognized to be scab resistant (Hough 1944) were used for further crosses and the inheritance of scab resistance analyzed (Hough et al. 1953), and named Vf [Venturia floribunda; (Williams et al. 1966). These two scab-resistant plants were the starting material for the PRI Cooperation Program (Purdue University (IN), Rutgers University (NJ) and the University of Illinois]. F226829-2-2 was crossed with Golden Delicious or Jonathan and some of the resistant offspring were then crossed with other commercial cultivars. “Prima” was the first of a long series of PRI cultivars with an acceptable fruit size and quality (Dayton and Mowry 1970). All are heterozygous for the dominant genetic factor Vf. Some have additional disease resistance, so Prima under field conditions, it is also resistant to Erwinia amylovora and Phyllosticta solitaria. Most of the PRI cultivars ripen early; Prima ripens about 1 month before “Red Delicious” and has a short shelf-life (Williams et al. 1972a, b).

By analyzing the segregation of scab resistance derived from selected genotypes of M. prunifolia, M. atrosanguinea, M. baccata, M. prunifolia microcarpa and some Malus accessions (MA4, MA8, MA16 and MA 1255), Williams et al. (1966) concluded that the genes involved in this resistance to V. inaequalis are the same or allelic to those involved in the Vf resistance of M. floribunda 821 (see review in Gessler et al. 2006). During 1970 s and 1980 s, there were intensive efforts to breed scab resistance around the world. Most of these programs involved the advanced selections of the PRI program (Janick 2002). In some cases, breeders attempted to diversify the sources of resistance and accumulate various functionally different resistances against scab (Boldyzheva et al. 1985; Braniste, 1981; Denardi et al. 1988; Fomina 1980; Korban et al. 1988, 1990; Krasova 1981; Lespinasse et al. 1976; Mehlenbacher et al. 1988; Sedov and Zhdanov 1981; Zhdanov and Fomina 1981).

In 1992, Crosby et al. (1992a, 1992b) reported that over 17 breeding programs were using mainly Vf resistance and that those efforts had yielded 48 named varieties. Currently, we estimate that the number of released and named cultivars is above 80. In some cases (i.e. “Nova Easygro”), even if the breeder attempted to use a different resistance gene (Vr) (Lespinasse and Olivier 1981), the use of molecular markers later revealed that the introduced resistance was actually the same classic Vf resistance (Gianfranceschi et al. 1996). The major obstacle to stacking different resistance genes has been the lack of a fast and cheap system for recognizing individual daughter plants that have inherited both parental resistance genes, since different types of resistance can usually not be phenotypically distinguished. Therefore, only an analysis of the segregation pattern among the F2 progeny of the resistant (heterozygous) and a susceptible selection (Williams et al. 1966; Ishchenko et al. 1981) will reveal the presence of two resistant genes. A 3:1 (resistant:susceptible) segregation ratio indicates the presence of two types of resistance; whereas a 1:1 ratio indicates the presence of only one in a heterozygous (r/s) allelic state. There may also be special cases in which races that specifically overcome a single type of resistance might be used and/or specific resistance reaction symptoms might be induced (e.g. rapidly forming pin-point pits, such as those induced by the presence of Vm resistance) (Williams and Kuc 1969).

Currently, in almost all scab-resistant cultivars, the resistance is solely due to Vf-genes. All major Western breeding programs currently view the selection of disease-resistant cultivars as a priority. Scab resistance still primarily relies on Vf, but efforts to combine it with resistances from other sources are underway (Kellerhals et al. 2006; Kozlovskaya et al. 2000; Lefrancq et al. 2004; Sansavini et al. 2002; Soufflet-Freslon et al. 2008). The development of DNA-based markers linked to other resistances than Vf was the key for Marker-assisted selection of individuals carrying several heterozygous resistances (Baniulis et al. 2008; Kellerhals et al. 2009; Sansavini et al. 2005). While several high-quality and competitive scab-resistant cultivars have been released in recent years, their market share has been negligible. In organic production, however, scab-resistant cultivars find acceptance. For example, scab-resistant cultivars account for 40% of organic apple production in Switzerland. Meanwhile, scab-resistant cultivars account for only a minor share of the 12 million tons of apples produced in the conventional or integrated apple production systems of Europe each year. In the statistics, scab-resistant cultivars accounts for about 0.5% of Europe’s (EU27, 2007) annual apple production surface (Topaz 0.24%, Prima 0.1%), as compared to “Golden Delicious” (13%), Jonagold (6.6%) or “Gala” (6%). (

Vf plant reaction against scab

Vf resistance does not give uniform reaction to scab inoculation. M. floribunda 821 and some of its resistant descendants react to scab inoculation by forming pin-point pits. The reactions of selections F226829-2-2 and F226830-2 (obtained from sibling F1’) and all of the resistant cultivars derived from them range from no macroscopic visible reaction to the formation of chlorotic and necrotic lesions up to the formation of a few restricted necrotic lesions with sparse sporulation (class 3; (Lespinasse 1989; Parisi and Lespinasse 1996). Williams and Kuc (1969) suggested that “the original Vf resistance was not due to a single qualitative gene, but either to a group of rather closely linked quantitative genes or to a class 3 reaction qualitative gene,2 closely linked with one or more quantitative genes.”

However, Williams and Kuc (1969) could not explain the absence of the pin-point pit reaction in certain descendants of M. floribunda 821. With the identification of pathotype 6, which overcomes the resistance of cultivars possessing Vf resistance (without any pin-point pit reaction) and not that of the original M. floribunda 821, and pathotype 7, which overcomes the original M. floribunda 821 resistance it became possible to undertake a genetic analysis of host-pathogen interactions. Parisi and Lespinasse (1999); Bénaouf and Parisi (2000) demonstrated the existence of a second dominant gene in M. floribunda 821 which was inherited to F2 26830-2. This gene, which is different from Vf, but linked3 to it, was named Vfh because it seemed to induce a hypersensitive reaction. Vfh resistance was not inherited to F2 26829-2-2 so all descendent from this siblings can not carry Vfh. Still, the fact that Vf resistance, as found in advanced selections and varieties, did not yield a uniform reaction required some explanation. Rousselle et al. (1974) suggested that the cumulative effect of the minor genes inherited from both the susceptible and the resistant parent modify the level of resistance conferred by Vf. As different numbers of such minor genes will be inherited by each individual daughter plant, the degree of resistance will also vary. Some of these minor genes are lost in subsequent backcrosses (Rousselle et al. 1974), which explains why a cultivar exhibiting a class 3b reaction can still be classified as resistant and carrying the Vf gene (Tartarini et al. 2000).

The results of an analysis of older segregation data (Gessler 1989) and a microscopic analysis point in the same direction (Gessler 1992). Loci of postulated genes that modify Vf resistance were later identified by mapping in a A679-2 (Vf carrier) × “Iduna” cross and an analysis of quantitative resistance loci (background resistance) was performed based on field data (Seglias-Hodel 1997). Seglias defined loci that contribute quantitatively to the resistance only in the Vf carriers as “modifier loci” and loci that always contribute to resistance or contribute only in the non-carriers of Vf as “background resistance loci”. The Vf resistance on one hand, corresponds to the definition of a qualitative resistance (yes/no) governed by a single gene (allele) in a gene for gene reaction (see below). On the other hand, the Vf resistance reaction not being uniform, but depending on the genetic environment in which it is embedded, has attributes of a quantitative resistance (more/less). Moreover, homozygote Vf individuals appear to express a stronger resistance than the heterozygous in populations derived from a cross of two heterozygous Vf parents (Gessler et al. 1997; Gianfranceschi et al. 1999; Tartarini et al. 2000).

The breakdown of Vf resistance

Several breeders have warned that the widespread use of Vf may increase the risk of selecting for pathogen genotypes that are able to overcome this resistance (Lespinasse 1989; Lespinasse and Olivier 1981). In the collection of scab-resistant Malus in Ahrensburg, Germany, scab symptoms have been observed on “Prima” seedlings in the field since 1984. In 1988, small, sporulating scab lesions were found on some other Vf selections in the same collection. Detailed inoculation studies carried out at INRA Angers in France (Parisi et al. 1993) showed that the inoculum from Ahrensburg was able to infect and sporulate on all the tested Vf cultivars or selections, while M. floribunda 821 itself and the ornamental crabapple (Malus × Perpetu) “Evereste” were still resistant. The progeny from a cross between a resistant (Vf) cv (Prima) and a susceptible cv (Fiesta) were completely susceptible to the inoculum from Ahrensburg (Durel et al. 2000; Durel et al. 2003). However, in response to inoculation with local inoculum, the resistance of this same set of progeny segregated at a resistant:susceptible ratio of 1:1. Another relevant fact was the clear distinction between the resistance of M. floribunda 821 and that of the Vf cultivars and selections.4 The Ahrensburg V. inaequalis pathotype was named “race 6”. Further studies confirmed that M. floribunda 821 has an additional resistance, which was lost during the breeding process (Bénaouf et al. 1997; Parisi and Lespinasse 1996). Roberts and Crute (1994) reported that a spore mixture derived from the naturally infested leaves of a M. floribunda tree in a local garden near East Malling GB elicited the formation of sporulating lesions on the original M. floribunda 821, as well as the Vf cultivars “Jonafree”, “Liberty”, “Macfree”, “Redfree”, “Novamac” and “Priscilla”, but not on “Florina”, “Priam”, “Prima” or “Sir Prize”. This mixture was also able to sporulate on “Golden Delicious” and “Nova Easygro”. Single-spore isolates were used to assess the host spectrum of this pathotype, but did not confirm completely the results obtained with mass-spore inoculum by Roberts and Crute (1994); the pathotype named “race 7” after single-spore tests was avirulent to cv Golden Delicious (Bénaouf and Parisi 1997).

The susceptibility of “Nova Easygro” (Crosby et al. 1992a; Lespinasse and Olivier 1981) is not surprising, as we know that it owes its resistance to the Vf system and not to Vr [resistance originating a Russian apple seedling from the Caucasus Mountains (R12740-7A)] (Gianfranceschi et al. 1996; Parisi and Lespinasse 1996). However, the resistance of “Florina”, “Priam”, “Prima” and “Sir Prize” to pathotype5 7 can be only explained by the assumption that they inherited an unknown ephemeral resistance (MacHardy et al. 2001) from one of their scab-susceptible ancestors that is still functioning against that particular V. inaequalis population. Since Golden Delicious posses the identified ephemeral resistance gene Vg (Bénaouf and Parisi 2000), this gene explains the resistance to race 7 of this cv, and also the resistance of some Vf cultivars to race 7; the cv Golden Delicious has been widely used in breeding programs and is present in the pedigree of many Vf resistant cultivars. It is the case for example for Florina (Bénaouf and Parisi 2000). However, we can also assume that some Vf selections possess other resistance factors not overcome by the original pathotype 7.

The identification of pathotypes 6 and 7 demonstrated the vulnerability of all Vf orchards to V. inaequalis. We can draw some conclusions from the fact that pathotype 6 was found in a Malus collection and pathotype 7 on an ornamental tree near an institution that is home to such a collection, and not in a “trap orchard” that includes cultivars and selections with specific resistances generally used to determine pathotypes (Lespinasse 1989). Trap orchards cannot be regarded as a reliable early-warning device for detecting new pathotypes, as the distribution and frequency of pathotypes breaking a functioning resistance may be too localized and low-level to be noticeably present at any specific site. The sites for the first sightings of the Vf-virulent pathotypes suggest an introduction with a specific host plant; mutation from avir to virVf appears to be extremely rare or nonexistent as the first appearance of this phenomenon was not in one of the abundant Vf orchards. In the case of Ahrensburg, we may hypothesize that pathotype 6 was introduced with breeding material. This hypothesis is supported by the fact that the original strain lacked most of the genes that would enable it to grow on commercial cultivars and only through several steps of recombination (years) did it acquire a level of fitness that allowed it to spread to commercial cultivars.

The data furnished by Bengtsson et al. (2000) can be interpreted similarly. In that case, the first vir-Vf pathotype was found in the researchers’ own collection orchard. They reported that, in August 1998, M. floribunda 821 had an average leaf scab incidence of 94% and an average severity of 7.8 on a scale from 1 to 9 (similar to “Golden Delicious”); whereas no scab was observed on “Florina” and the incidence of leaf scab on “Prima” was 5.9%, with a severity of 1.7. However, in that study, the true identity of M. floribunda 821 was not confirmed. In later years, scab developed on additional cultivars present at that location with increasing severity.

In several commercial orchards, farmers have experimented with Vf-cultivars and there have been anecdotal reports of scab lesions on “Prima”. However, these observations have not been consistent over the years. We may assume that, under conditions that are extremely favorable for the development of disease, the resistance of “Prima” is insufficient to prevent the development of scab and not that pathotype 6 was present.

In 1994, for the first time, a Vf scab-resistant cultivar in a commercial orchard was found to be infected with a “Vf-breaking” pathotype (The Netherlands; Schouten and Schenk 1997). In Normandy in 1995, the cider apple “Judeline” was heavily infected while its half-sib “Judaine” remained scab-free. Both cultivars carry Vf inherited from the scab-resistant parent “Priam”. Since “Judaine” remained uninfected while “Judeline” did not, we can assume that “Judaine” must carry some sort of additional resistance. In a study involving various pathotypes, Parisi et al. (2000) were able to determine that Vf was overcome in this case. The resistance observed in Judaine was attributed to the ephemeral resistance Vg, which is present in “Golden Delicious” and “Priam” and is assumed to have been passed down from “Priam” to “Judaine”, but not to “Judeline”. This pathotype was identified as race 7.

This observation was followed, in 1997, by a similar observation of race 7 on “Judeline” in Aubel, Belgium, followed by a similar observation in 2000 in a nearby trap orchard of fully scabbed M.floribunda 821 (Lateur et al. 2002). In 1997, scab was also found on a M. floribunda 821 tree near Wagenigen in the Netherlands and at 150 km in an unsprayed experimental orchard at the Wilheminadorp NL research station. In this orchard, heavy scab infections were detected on the Vf cv “Otava” and low to moderate levels of scab were observed on “Santana” and “Ecolette”. The rapid scab build-up is astonishing; as of 1996, no scab had been seen on any of these cultivars. An inoculation test with conidia collected from lesions on “Otava” and vigorously sporulating lesions on M. floribunda 821 revealed the presence of pathotype 7 (Schouten and Schenk 1997).

In 2004, the geographical distribution of Vf-virulent strains was assessed as part of the EU-DARE project (Parisi et al. 2004). This study found that pathotypes 6 and 7 are present in northern Europe (mainly in northern France, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, southern Sweden and northern Germany), but no quantitative information can be obtained from these data. Pathotype 7 was once found as clone on a single M. floribunda 821 tree in Switzerland, but it was eradicated and no other evidence of pathotypes 6 or 7 is currently present in that country (A. Patocchi, personal communication). Recently, the Czech Republic was added to the list of regions with extensive Vf breakthrough (Vavra and Bocek 2009).

In the USA, there have not been any reports of Vf resistance being overcome in a commercial orchard or on any Vf apple cultivar. At the Secrest Arboretum, Ohio state University a large number of crab apples were observed for scab symptoms since 1972. Among the scab free accession was also a M. floribunda tree until 1997, when the first signs of weak scab infection were noted on this tree. In 2003 and 2005, Beckerman et al. (2009) detected heavy scab infection on this M. floribunda tree, suggesting the presence of pathotype 7 in North America for the first time. However, as the M. floribunda tree in question was not unequivocally identified as being the accession 821 (Beckerman et al. 2009), further confirmation is necessary. In light of the above data, we may ask about the present and future role of crabapple-collections in introducing pathotype 7 into a geographical region, as well as the origin of pathotype 7 (e.g. imported from the Far East or the result of a spontaneous mutation at the site of discovery).

Even in regions in which Vf resistance has been largely overcome, the phenomenon is restricted to particular organic orchards. Vf cultivars are mostly planted in organic orchards, often without any fungicide application. Complete loss of resistance appears to be associated with the absence of any control measures. In the Netherlands, orchards planted with the Vf cultivars “Collina”, “Santana” and “Topaz” have been affected by this problem (Trapman 2005). In Vf orchards in which some basic rules are followed [absence of susceptible cultivars or a minimal distance to these cultivars, spraying when there is a high risk of scab infection6 (Jamar et al. 2010a; MacHardy 2000; Triloff 2006), as indicated by percentage of ascospore maturation, temperature and leaf wetness duration and presence of young leaves; and sanitation measures to eliminate the ascosporic inoculum found on the leaves of susceptible cultivars], the Vf cultivars remain free of scab (Trapman 2005) or with a low disease level (Caffier et al. 2010). This demonstrates that, with appropriate management, the current Vf resistance can still be effective. Based on this experience, some advisory services recommend treating scab-resistant cultivars with a minimal program of two–three fungicide applications at the peak of ascospore maturation, when there is a high risk of scab infection (Höhn et al. 2010; Jamar et al. 2010b).

In conclusion, while Vf resistance has been overcome, these events appears to be rare and are probably due to particular V. inaequalis genotypes that originated outside of Europe or North America and have bred into local scab populations. The risk of the ability to overcome Vf resistance spreading in the local V. inaequalis population under the selection pressure of Vf cultivars is most acute in organic and cider-apple orchards.

Mechanism of action of Vf resistance

The mechanism of action of Vf resistance is still unknown. The resistance present in M. floribunda 821 was originally dissected into two types of symptomatology: Vfh and Vf. Vfh is characterized by the formation of “pin-point pits”, due to a rapid (develops within 40 h) classical hypersensitive response (Williams and Kuc 1969) that is characterized by the rapid death of the cells around the penetration peg (Chevalier and Lespinasse 1989; Chevalier et al. 1991). Vf is characterized by either the absence of symptoms or by visible chlorosis and/or necrosis, sometime with sparse sporulation depending on the genetic background in which this resistance is embedded. Separating the reactions due to Vfh from those due to Vf, Chevalier and colleagues described extensive histocytological modification of the upper epidermal layer with destruction in the necrotic zones, which may extend to the palisade parenchyma. In contrast, in a susceptible tissue where the fungus expands and latter sporulates, the cells are mostly similar to those of non-infected tissue (Chevalier 1988; Chevalier and Lespinasse 1989; Chevalier et al. 1991).

The cuticle is the first potential obstacle to infection by V. inaequalis. It appears that, even in the Vf cultivars, the fungus is able to penetrate the cuticle and form the primary stroma on the youngest leaf, similar as on older ontogenic resistant, however, still expanding leaves of susceptible cultivars. However, the difference between a Vf cultivar and susceptible cultivars lies in the number of appressoria under which such primary stroma can be observed and the extent to which this phenomenon is observed (Valsangiacomo and Gessler 1988). This phenomenon may be somehow analogous to the ontogenic resistance (increased resistance to scab with the age of the leaf) present in all cultivars (Gessler and Stumm 1984)

In a study of the interaction between V. inaequalis and apple, Maeda (1970) interpreted the ultra-structural changes in the plant’s cell wall below the fungal stroma as the degradation of pectic substances by the fungus. However, in an experiment involving the 14C-labelled cell walls of apple leaves, Valsangiacomo et al. (1992) were able to exclude any correlation between Vf resistance and the absence of cell wall degradation. Similarly, inhibitors of fungal cellulase and polygaracturonase that were extracted from “Florina” (Vf) or “Golden Delicious” inhibited the corresponding two enzymes of V. inaequalis to the same extent (Koller et al. 1992).

Treutter and Feucht (1990) found that the Vf cultivars had higher quantities of flavan-3-ols in their leaf tissue and fruit skins than susceptible cultivars; levels were 6.5-fold higher in leaves and 3-fold higher in fruit skins. In addition, the resistant group had approximately twice the number of different flavan-3-ols in its leaves and fruit skin than the susceptible group had. These flavan-3-ols accumulated after inoculation. However, the constitutive quantitative differences in the flavan-3-ol content of the Vf cultivars play no role in the observed resistance. In fact, in an analysis of two sets of progeny that both had “Florina” (Vf) as a parent, no correlation was detected between the level of scab resistance and the amount of flavan-3-ol in the leaves (Sierotzki and Gessler 1993).

Treatment with l-alpha-aminooxy-beta-phenylpropionic acid (AOPP), an inhibitor of phenylalanine ammonia-lyase, broke the resistance of “Sir Prize”, a Vf scab-resistant cultivar. In this experiment, the fungus sporulated and the defense reaction involving the synthesis of flavonols was not activated, leading to the hypothesis that the genes that confer resistance to apple scab also regulate phenol synthesis (Michalek et al. 1999). Vf cultivars generally have higher total phenol contents, as well as greater amounts of particular phenolic molecules, as compared with susceptible cultivars, even as these levels vary over the course of the season (Petkovsek et al. 2009) and are influenced by cultural practices (Petkovsek et al. 2010). We conclude that such quantitative differences between the phenolic contents of Vf-derived cultivars and the conventional non-Vf cv “Areto” should be attributed to genetic drag derived from the wild ancestors, rather than any direct association with Vf resistance.

The development of molecular markers associated with Vf resistance

The first molecular marker reported to be associated with the Vf resistance trait was Pgm-1, the gene responsible for variation in the most anodal isoenzyme of phosphoglucomutase in apple, which is located about 8 cM from Vf (Manganaris et al. 1994). In parallel to work involving isoenzymes, new types of markers based on PCR-amplified DNA segments were developed for use in apple. The first of these were random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) markers (Koller et al. 1993). In the highly heterozygous apple genome, the RAPD technique yields an extremely high number of polymorphisms with a dominant presence of a particular band on gels. By constructing bulk lots of individual susceptible and resistant offspring (bulk segregant analysis, BSA), we can ensure that only polymorphisms linked to the segregation trait are present or absent. BSA was used in combination with the RAPD technique to generate the first markers for Vf resistance.

Two RAPD markers were found with recombination frequencies7 of 10.6 and 19.7% relative to the Vf locus (Koller et al. 1994). Yang and Kruger (1994) identified a RAPD marker with a 20–25% recombination frequency. Tartarini (1996) identified five Vf-linked RAPD markers. A map of the Vf region was constructed that contained eight genetic markers spread over approximately 28 cM (Gardiner et al. 1996). With these studies, it was immediately clear that genetic markers are a faster, easier and more reliable alternative to classical selection methods based on phenotype and the tool of the future for the analysis of segregating progeny for the identification of the various types of resistance (Virscek-Marn et al. 1996; Yang and Korban 1996).

A further step was the evolution from RAPDs to sequence characterized amplified region SCARs (Tartarini et al. 1999; Yang and Korban 1996), which are easy to score as a single amplification product that is either present or absent. With the development of whole-genome maps (Maliepaard et al. 1999), maps of the Vf region became more and more saturated (Hemmat et al. 1998; King et al. 1999; Xu and Korban 2000). New types of markers were used, such as cleaved amplified polymorphic regions (CAP) and simple sequence repeats (SSRs); (Gianfranceschi et al. 1998; Vinatzer et al. 2004). The latters were an important step forward as, unlike all the others, they are highly polymorphic, codominant, multi-allelic and sufficiently reliable to be used across different labs.

However, as more and closer markers were added to the map of the Vf genome region, there was a major reshuffling of the map containing the Vf phenotype data. During the fine mapping of the Vf gene, Patocchi et al. (1999a) classified approximately 9% of the plants they surveyed as resistant individuals, but showed in the flanking markers the alleles in repulsion to Vf. The exclusion of the phenotype data collected from these plants was necessary for the correct mapping of the gene, as was later demonstrated with the map-based cloning of the Vf gene (Patocchi et al. 1999b). Incongruency between genotype and phenotype of particular individuals appears to be a major source of erroneous localization of resistance genes, especially when using single gene mapping procedures (Gygax et al. 2004).

The identification and characterization of the Vf gene

In efforts to identify the gene(s) responsible for Vf, Patocchi et al. (1999a, b) used a map-based cloning approach. He determined that the physical distance between two closest flanking markers was 870 kb (Patocchi et al. 1999a) and that, therefore, a chromosome walk could be performed using a bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) library constructed for the Vf cv “Florina” (Vinatzer et al. 1998). With this technique a BAC clone contig covering the genomic region between the Vf resistance flanking markers was obtained (Patocchi et al. 1999b). This same approach, involving a BAC library of M. floribunda 821, was used to identify three BAC contigs in the Vf region (Xu et al. 2001). In 2001 firstly Vinatzer et al. (2001) reported the identification of a cluster of four receptor-like genes with homology to the family of tomato genes associated with resistance to Cladosporium fulvum (Fulvia fulva). The deduced structure of the amino acid sequences coded by these genes contained an extracellular leucine-rich repeat (LLR) domain and a transmembrane domain with a high level of dissimilarity in the LLR region. They named these four genes HcrVf1,HcrVf2,HcrVf3 and HcrVf4. The transcription of three members of the cluster is constitutive and complete, while the HcrVf3 is not functional being its sequence truncated. These same genes have also been identified in the resistance region of M. floribunda 821 (Xu and Korban 2002), where they are referred to as Vf1 through Vf4.

Differential expression profiles were observed among the four paralogs during leaf development. Vfa1, Vfa2 and Vfa3 were active in immature leaves, but were expressed at very low levels in mature leaves. In contrast, Vfa4 was active in immature leaves and was highly expressed in mature leaves. Using Agrobacterium-based transformation techniques and the binary vector pCAMBIA2301, HcrVf2 was introduced into the scab-susceptible cv ‘Gala’ under the control of the CaMV35S promoter (Sansavini et al. 2003). V. inaequalis was unable to form extensive stroma or sporulate on these regenerated transgenic plantlets (Barbieri et al. 2003; Belfanti et al. 2004a). Under greenhouse conditions, no scab symptoms were present on transgenic plants inoculated with V. inaequalis (Belfanti et al. 2004b). The HcrVf2 gene regulatory sequences were identified (Silfverberg-Dilworth et al. 2005) and used (Joshi 2010; Szankowski et al. 2009) in transformation experiments involving “Gala” and “Elstar”. In most cases, the transformants were resistant to scab and the quantitative expression of the target gene was clearly more similar to the expression observed in classical Vf-resistant cultivars (“Florina”, “Santana”) than that observed in plants transformed using the 35S (up to 100-fold higher) or Rubisco promoters (50- to 150-fold higher).

Similar transformation experiments were performed by Malnoy et al. (2008) using Vfa1, Vfa2 and Vfa4. Both Vfa1 and Vfa2 incited resistance against scab once inserted into “Galaxy”8 and “McIntosh”, decreasing susceptibility to apple scab by 50 and 38%, respectively (measured as leaf area covered by sporulating lesions). However, contrary to the earlier data showing constitutive expression of Vfa1, Vfa2, and Vfa3 (Xu and Korban 2002) and data from HcrVf2, the relative expression of the Vfa1 and Vfa2 transgenes was identical to that observed in “Galaxy” respectively “McIntosh” prior to inoculation with V. inaequalis. As both “Galaxy” and “McIntosh” possess neither the Vfa1 nor the Vfa2 gene, we must assume that neither of these genes were expressed earlier in uninfected plants and the reference expression (Galaxy, respectively, McIntosh) is actually the background level. However, 24 h after inoculation, expression in the transgenic plants was 2- to 30-fold higher than that observed in the trans not inoculated controls (e.g. the levels observed in “Galaxy” and “McIntosh”) (Malnoy et al. 2008). The role of HcrVf1 (which corresponds to Vfa1) in resistance is, however, questionable, as Joshi (2010); Joshi et al. (2011), in a very detailed analysis, was not able to identify any change in susceptibility, even in transformants expressing the gene at levels several hundred-fold higher than the Vf control (“Santana”).

‘In summary, it is clear that of the four originally identified HcrVf genes, HcrVf3 is not functional, HcrVf1 and 4 play no role in scab resistance while in all published reports HcrVf2 has been shown to provide a variable degree of resistance, and this resistance is generally similar to the resistance symptom spectrum found in a set of progeny (ranging from no symptoms to necrosis and slight sporulation). HcrVf2 is also expressed constitutively in transgenic plants under the control of its own promoter and terminator sequences, similarly to the classical bred Vf cultivars. HcrVf2-transformed plants recognize all scab genotypes, except pathotypes 7 (Silfverberg 2004) and 6 (Joshi 2010). Strains of these two pathotypes9 sporulate on the HcrVf2 transformants just as they do on the original “Gala” (Silfverberg et al. 2005). We can, therefore, conclude that HcrVf2 functions in the transformants just as it does in the classically bred Vf cultivars and that the defense cascade induced by the mechanism of Vf resistance present in the Vf cultivars is also present, intact and functional in the susceptible cultivars. For the time being, the mechanism of Vf resistance is still not understood, as no element of the defense pathway has yet been identified nor have we any explanation of the genes that modify Vf resistance.

Recognition of the pathogen by Vf and the defense mechanism

‘The sequences and functional domains of the HcrVfs proteins are similar that of the Cf-9 proteins of tomato, which protects tomato against Cladosporium fulvum (Vinatzer et al. 2001). The predicted protein includes a signal peptide (domain A), the NH2 terminus of the mature protein (B), a leucine-rich repeat region (C), a domain with an unknown function (D), an acidic domain (E) and a hydrophobic transmembrane domain (F) with a basic C-terminus (G) (Vinatzer et al. 2001). The structural similarities between apple and tomato for the HcrVf and Cf-9 genes suggest the presence of similar resistance mechanisms between the two systems. The Cf-9 gene product recognizes the pathogen Avr9 gene product and induces a rapid hypersensitive cell-death response in tomato and in transgenic tobacco and potato plants carrying the Cf-9 gene (Hammond-Kosack et al. 1998). In transgenic Cf-9 tobacco, two mitogen-activated protein (MAP) kinases are transiently activated after injection of the avir9 protein. These kinases have been identified as WIPK (wounding-induced protein kinase) and SIPK (salicylic-acid induced kinase) (Romeis et al. 2000). Different types of kinases were found to be differentially expressed in plants carrying the Vf gene after pathogen challenge (Paris et al. 2009). Cova et al. (2010) described four putative leucine-rich repeat receptor-like protein kinases (LRPKm) in “Golden Delicious”, “Gala” and “Florina”. Two appear to be transiently up-regulated 24 h after V. inaequalis inoculation in ‘Florina’ and in the transgenic Vf “Gala”, but not in the untransformed, susceptible “Gala” or “Golden Delicious”. At the cytological level, the LRPKm proteins were localized in the plasma membranes of epidermal cells in resistant genotypes following pathogen challenge. These genes have been mapped on linkage group (LG) 5 and 10 and are not associated with Vf, which maps on LG 1 in ‘Florina’ (Cova et al. 2010).

It can be speculated that the two LRPKinases may play roles in the signal transduction pathways after pathogen recognition by the HcrVf2 protein. However, we currently have no clue as to the defense mechanism, except that, in apple, we did not observe any rapid (within 48 h) hypersensitive response, as has been observed in the tomato system. The recognition of an unknown avirVf product of the pathogen by the HcrVf2-protein induces a host reaction which in some cases is not macroscopically visible but stops highly efficaciously the pathogen, in others it leads to the formation of macroscopically visible chlorosis and necroses. But, this process takes at least 1 week (see also above) in transgenic HcrVf2 “Gala”/“Elstar”. The expression of the HcrVf2 gene is similar to the classical bred Vf cv Florina only when an upstream sequence of the HcrVf2 of 115 bp is used as promoter. In all the other cases (288 and 779 bp, 35S, rubisco) the level of transcription is much higher than in Vf cv Florina. (Szankowski et al. 2009; Joshi 2010). The range and type of reaction in those transgenic “Gala” plants is identical to that observed in the classically bred Vf genotypes. The difference between a Vf scab resistant individual and a susceptible is the lack of the HcrVf2 gene or rather the correct allele and its product, the recognition protein. This product should recognize a pathogen molecule (avrRvi6) that is still unknown, and then activate the defense cascade. Paris et al. (2009) used a PCR-based suppression subtractive hybridization between cDNA from challenged leaves of HcrVf2-resistant transgenic Gala and susceptible cv. Gala plants to identify apple genes that are differentially expressed after V. inaequalis inoculation. They identified 523 differentially expressed unigenes and characterized them by assigning a putative function via comparison with public databases. This set of pathogen-modulated apple genes includes many defense-related genes. Degenhardt et al. (2005) compared the Vf cv. Remo to the susceptible cv Elstar and describe the upregulation of transcripts encoding a number of proteins related to plant defense (such as beta -1,3-glucanase, ribonuclease-like PR10, cysteine protease inhibitor, endochitinase, ferrochelatase, and ADP-ribosylation factor) or detoxification of reactive oxygen species (such as superoxide dismutase). A large number of EST clones derived from mRNAs for metallothioneins of type 3 (91 out of 262) were found in Remo. The corresponding transcripts were only present in small amounts in young uninfected leaves of the cv. Elstar, but were up-regulated in the susceptible cultivar after inoculation with V. inaequalis. The authors indicate that constitutively high-level expression of PR proteins may protect cv. Remo from infection by different plant pathogens. However, which of those genes finally are responsible for inhibiting the pathogen growth still escapes our knowledge. On the pathogen side attempts to identify the avirulence gene are currently undertaken (Broggini et al. 2007; Broggini et al. 2009a; Broggini et al. 2011).

The HcrVf2 gene is not unique in the apple genome. As discussed above, two other similar genes are present in the Vf-resistance genomic region (HcrVf1 and HcrVf4) and six constitutively expressed genes with structures similar to that of HcrVf2 (paralogs) have been identified and mapped in “Florina”, but they did not map near any genomic site known to carry functional resistance genes (Broggini et al. 2009b). It is possible that they might be scab resistance-recognition genes that are overcome by the overwhelming majority of V. inaequalis genotypes present in the worldwide population (ephemeral resistance genes (MacHardy et al. 2001)).

Vf and recombinant DNA technology

The use of recombinant DNA technology to transform a scab-susceptible cultivar into a scab-resistant cultivar is an appealing idea, as all of a cultivar’s characteristics remain preserved in this type of genetic manipulation, unlike the case in classical breeding. Foreign genes of very diverse origins have been used to transform and introduce resistance into popular susceptible cultivars (review in Gessler and Patocchi 2007) and some of these efforts have even reached the stage of field trials (Borejsza-Wysocka et al. 2010). Since the use of apple’s own genes (as opposed to genes of other species)10 might be more acceptable to producers and consumers (Gaskell et al. 2010;, there is significant interest in using HcrVf2 to introduce resistance into susceptible cultivars; id est. as such cg Gala lines can be used to demonstrate feasibility and benefit, however, for commercial use additional Malus scab resistance genes need to be added so to render the resistance durable. True cisgenic have been created using as promoter a relatively short upstream sequence of 242 bp lines (Vanblaere et al. 2011). Trees of selected cg-Gala lines grown in glasshouses have HcrVf2 expression several fold below theat of Florina. They show a strong chlorotic reaction with leaf deformation up to necroses upon inoculation with V. inaequalis conidia. In some cases also sporulation is evident (Vanblaere 2011).


The interaction Malus and V. inaequalis is under natural conditions regulated by many specific resistances of which an unknown number has been overcome by specific pathotypes present to a variable proportion in the local V. inaequalis population. This proportion is in relation to the frequency of the resistance in the apple population (MacHardy et al. 2001). The Vf resistance was introduced relatively recently and to a small proportion, still race 6 and/or 7 currently present in many areas where Vf cvs are grown, probably spread over longer distance by man activity and then bred into the local V. inaequalis population favored by monoculture. Appropriate preventive V. inaequalis control measures can retard this development. We have to assume that any resistance governed by a single gene will follow the same fate. The sole use of Vf in scab-resistance breeding programs and in GM-plants is not advisable. Probably only a high diversity of resistances as present in natural conditions (MacHardy et al. 2001) in and between orchards can reduce V. inaequalis populations permanently. Pyramiding various resistances into commercial cultivars comes closest to such a functional diversity. Currently several excellent cultivars and breeders’ selections with Vf are available, so Vf can serve as a first source of resistance (still effective in many areas), to which others should be added to gain momentarily in this arm race between the pathogen and host. As breeders are receiving more and better tools new cultivars with several effective resistances can be released in shorter intervals. Currently sufficient resistances with closely associated molecular markers are available, so to pyramid resistances with “marker assisted selection” (Kellerhals et al. 2009; Patocchi et al. 2009). Faster generation cycles will also help, recently inserting a gene from silver birch into Pinova, Flachowsky et al. (2011) were able to reduce the juvenility phase drastically to a generation turn over of 1 year. Genetic engineering may contribute rendering a popular cv disease resistant by creating functional resistance diversity in an otherwise homogeneous genetic cultivar. Once better technologies are available, such as replacing non-functional resistance alleles with still effective resistance alleles such GM-cvs may become more acceptable. The main constraint is currently the lack of cloned resistance genes, being HcrVf2 cloned in 2004 (Belfanti et al. 2004b) the only one available. In a longer time span new approaches could derive from the identification and sequencing of avirulence genes of V. inaequalis, for example, the product of the avir Vf which is recognized by HcrVf2, as well as the mutated gene whose product is no longer recognized, rendering the host susceptible once again. Once we understand the binding patterns and changes that lead to non-recognition, it may be possible to create artificial resistance alleles by making small changes in the recognition zone (LRR) and selecting artificial mutations of the HcrVf2 so that the pathogen product may once again be recognized.

For the current orchards planted with Vf cvs the advice to growers is to protect Vf cvs against scab during periods of high risk of scab infection and that Vf scab resistant trees should never be kept in the vicinity of scab susceptible and infected trees.


  1. 1.

    As the naming of resistances after their origin and the various pathotype of V. inaequalis able to overcome these resistances with numbers may lead to confusions Bus et al. (2009) renamed all resistances and corresponding pathotypes, so that in future the Vf resistance will change to Rvi6, all pathotypes of V. inaequalis unable to infect a Rvi6, will be named race AvrRvi6 and those able to infect a Rvi6, virRvi6.

  2. 2.

    Reaction to V. inaequalis inoculation or natural infection was scored in classes as follows: 0, signifying no macroscopic evidence of infection; 1, pin-point pits and no sporulation; 2, irregular chlorotic or necrotic lesions and no sporulation; 3, a few restricted, sporulating lesions; and 4, extensive, abundantly sporulating lesions. Since the original reaction classes were described, another (class M) has been added. This class is described as a mixture of necrotic, non-sporulating and sparsely sporulating lesions. This same method of scoring plants is used in the PRI program, in which only class 4 is considered to be field-susceptible. The class 1 or pin-point reaction is considered to be a hypersensitive response. The host epidermal cells below the infection peg collapse within 40–72 h and, shortly thereafter, the fungus is killed. In contrast, the other reaction types are not expressed until 3–12 days after inoculation and the fungus remains viable for as long as 21 days. This scheme of classification was later adopted and described microscopically by Chevalier et al. (1991), however class 3 was named class 3a and class M, class 3b.

  3. 3.

    We have to assume that Vf and Vfh are linked and in a heterozygous state r/s as the segregation of resistance in progenies from the F2 26830.2 is 1:1. If the two resistances would be independent Hough et al. (1953) would have noted a segregation of 3:1 instead of 1:1.

  4. 4.

    We consider a cultivar (= cultivated variety) to be any apple genotype to which a name has been given. Cultivars have usually been described and officially released for marketing from a breeding program (e.g. ‘Florina’, ‘Gala’) or may be older genotypes that have been named and described (e.g. ‘Golden Delicious’, ‘Elstar’). A selection (breeder's selection) is any apple genotype which is used in a breeder's program for further crosses or is already being tested for future marketing. We define as an accession any apple genotype present in a collection that is neither a cultivar nor a selection. Accessions and selections are usually identified by specific codes.

  5. 5.

    Pathotype is used here to identify all genotypes with the ability to infect the corresponding host; race is often used as synonym. However, a race is defined by the resistance genes of the host which it can overcome. As V. inaequalis recombines its virulences each winter, a particular pathotype may be found to be composed of many different races if the analysis is extended to more differential hosts (Gessler et al. 2006).

  6. 6.

    Mills (1947), Mills and LaPlante (1951) determined that the risk of scab infection is a function of the duration of leaf wetness and the temperature during this period. Gadoury and MacHardy (1986), MacHardy and Gadoury (1985) added the amount of ascospores present (potential ascospore dose, PAD) and the amount of mature ascospores to be released with the onset of rain during darkness to these physical parameters. The current, most advanced and most widely used scab prognosis and warning program RIMPro (Vittone et al. 2007) integrates all of these factors.

  7. 7.

    Recombination frequency is a measure of genetic distance given in centiMorgans cM.

  8. 8.

    ‘Galaxy’ is one of the many sports (selected mutants) of the original ‘Gala’.

  9. 9.

    Using the new nomenclature (Bus et al. 2009) we would refer to the two pathotypes as race virRvi6.

  10. 10.

    Genetic modified plants containing only genes and regulatory sequences derived from a crossable donor are defined as cisgenic (Schouten et al. 2006).



The authors wish to acknowledge the financial support by the Swiss Cost Action project C06.0070, Swiss National Science Foundation NRP59 and COST Action 864 “Pome Fruit Health”. A special thanks goes to the leaders of the cost action 864 for stimulating us to write this review and to two anonymous reviewers who suggested many relevant corrections and additions.


  1. Baniulis D, Gelvonauskiene D, Gelvonauskis B, Rugienius R, Bendokas V, Stanys V (2008) Genetic studies of apple scab resistance and application of molecular biology methods in apple tree breeding. Sodininkyste ir Darzininkyste 27:61–75Google Scholar
  2. Barbieri M, Belfanti E, Tartarini S, Vinatzer BA, Sansavini S, Silfverberg-Dilworth E, Gianfranceschi L, Hermann D, Patocchi A, Gessler C (2003) Progress of map-based cloning of the Vf-resistance gene and functional verification: preliminary results from expression studies in transformed apple. HortScience 38(3):329–331Google Scholar
  3. Beckerman J, Chatfield J, Draper E (2009) A 33 year evaluation of resistance and pathogenicity in the apple scab-crabapples pathosystem. HortScience 44:599–608Google Scholar
  4. Belfanti E, Barbieri M, Tartarini S, Vinatzer B, Gennari F, Paris R, Sansavini S, Silfverberg-Dilworth E, Patocchi A, Hermann D, Gianfranceschi L, Gessler C (2004a) Gala apple transformed with the putative scab resistance gene HcrVf2. Acta Hortic 663(1):453–456Google Scholar
  5. Belfanti E, Silfverberg-Dilworth E, Tartarini S, Patocchi A, Barbieri M, Zhu J, Vinatzer BA, Gianfranceschi L, Gessler C, Sansavini S (2004b) The HcrVf2 gene from a wild apple confers scab resistance to a transgenic cultivated variety. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101:886–890PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bénaouf G, Parisi L (1997) Pathogenicity of Venturia inaequalis strains from Malus floribunda 821: comparaison with race 6 on apple clones. IOBC/WPRS Bull 20(9):8–11Google Scholar
  7. Bénaouf G, Parisi L (2000) Genetics of host-pathogen relationships between Venturia inaequalis races 6 and 7 and Malus species. Phytopathology 90:236–242PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Bénaouf G, Parisi L, Laurens F (1997) Inheritance of Malus floribunda clone 821 resistance to Venturia inaequalis. IOBC/WPRS Bull 20(9):1–7Google Scholar
  9. Bengtsson M, Lindhard H, Grauslund J (2000) Occurence of races of Venturia inaequalis in an apple scab race screening orchard in Denmark. IOBC/WPRS Bull 23:225–229Google Scholar
  10. Boldyzheva LD, Kichina VV, Ishchenko LA (1985) Breeding evaluation of apple hybrids, involving donors of immunity to scab, under artificial infection. Agrotekhn. i sortoizuch. plod. kul’tur. 163–169. [Secondary Journal: (Referativnyi Zhurnal (1986) 7.65.339]Google Scholar
  11. Boone DM (1971) Genetics of Venturia inaequalis. Ann Rev Phytopathol 9:297–318Google Scholar
  12. Borejsza-Wysocka E, Norelli JL, Aldwinckle H, Malnoy M (2010) Stable expression and phenotypic impact of attacin E transgene in orchard grown apple trees over a 12 year period. BMC Biotechnol 10:41–50PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Braniste N (1981) Achievements in obtaining new apple and pear varieties resistant to scab and powdery mildew. Productia Vegetala Horticultura 30:20–22Google Scholar
  14. Broggini GAL, Le Cam B, Parisi L, Wu C, Zhang HB, Gessler C, Patocchi A (2007) Construction of a contig of BAC clones spanning the region of the apple scab avirulence gene AvrVg. Fungal Genet Biol 44:44–51PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Broggini GAL, DiGennaro F, Le Cam B, Parisi L, Gessler C, Patocchi A (2009a) Expression of candidates AvrVg genes during apple scab infection. Acta Hortic 814(2):777–780Google Scholar
  16. Broggini GAL, Galli P, Parravicini G, Gianfranceschi L, Gessler C, Patocchi A (2009b) HcrVf paralogs are present on linkage groups 1 and 6 of Malus. Genome 52:129–138PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Broggini GAL, Bus VGM, Parravicini G, Satish K, Groenwold R, Gessler C (2011) Genetic mapping of 14 avirulence genes in an EU-B04x1639 progeny of Venturia inaequalis. Fungal Genet Biol 48:166–176PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Bus VGM, Rikkerink E, Aldwinckle HS, Caffier V, Durel CE, Gardiner S, Gessler C, Groenwold R, Laurens F, Le Cam B, Luby J, Meulenbroek B, Kellerhals M, Parisi L, Patocchi A, Plummer K, Schouten HJ, Tartarini S, van de Weg WE (2009) A proposal for the nomenclature of Venturia inaequalis races. Acta Hortic 814(2):739–746Google Scholar
  19. Caffier V, Didelot F, Orain G, Lemarquand A, Parisi L (2010) Efficiency of association of scab control methods on resistance durability on apple: the case study of cv Ariane. IOBC/WPRS Bull 54:327–330Google Scholar
  20. Chevalier M (1988) Contribution a l’étude des rélations hote-parasite dans le cas du couple Malus x domesticaVenturia inaequalis: étude histologique et cytologique de deux cas de résistance dependent des genes Vf et Vm. These Universite de Nantes 1 e 2: 288, 100Google Scholar
  21. Chevalier M, Lespinasse Y (1989) Apple scab: studies of sensitivity and resistance using scanning electron microscopy. Phytoma 408:47–49Google Scholar
  22. Chevalier M, Lespinasse Y, Renaudin S (1991) A microscopic study of the different classes of symptoms coded by the Vf gene in apple for resistance to scab (Venturia inaequalis). Plant Pathol 40:249–256Google Scholar
  23. Cova V, Paris R, Passerotti S, Zini E, Gessler C, Pertot I, Loi N, Musetti R, Komjanc M (2010) Mapping and functional analysis of four apple receptor-like protein kinases related to LRPKm1 in HcrVf2 -transgenic and wild-type apple plants. Tree Genet Genomes 6:389–403Google Scholar
  24. Crandall CS (1926) Apple breeding at the university of Illinois. Illinois Agric Exp Stn Bull 275:341–600Google Scholar
  25. Crosby JA, Janick J, Pecknold PC, Korban SS, O’Connor PA, Ries SM, Goffreda J, Voordeckers A (1992a) Breeding apples for scab resistance: 1945–1990. Fruit Varieties J 46:145–166Google Scholar
  26. Crosby JA, Janick J, Pecknold PC, Korban SS, O’Connor PA, Ries SM, Goffreda S, Voordeckers A (1992b) Breeding apples for scab resistance: 1945–1990. Acta Hortic 317:43–70Google Scholar
  27. Dayton DF, Mowry JB (1970) Prima-the first commercial scab-resistant apple variety. Fruit Var Hortic Dig 12:7Google Scholar
  28. Degenhardt J, Al-Masri AN, Kurkcuoglu S, Szankowski I, Gau AE (2005) Characterization by suppression subtractive hybridization of transcripts that are differentially expressed in leaves of apple scab-resistant and susceptible cultivars of Malus domestica. Mol Gen Genomics 273(4):326–335Google Scholar
  29. Denardi F, Hough LF, Camilo AP (1988) ‘Primicia’ apple. HortScience 23:632Google Scholar
  30. Durel CE, Parisi L, Laurens F, Venisse JS, Jourjon MF (2000) Does the Vf gene maintain a residual resistance to apple scab despite its breakdown by Venturia inaequalis race 6 strains? Acta Hortic 538(2):575–580Google Scholar
  31. Durel CE, Parisi L, Laurens F, van de Weg WE, Liebhard R, Jourjon MF (2003) Genetic dissection of partial resistance to race 6 of Venturia inaequalis in apple. Genome 46:224–234PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Flachowsky H, Le Roux PM, Peil A, Patocchi A, Richter K, Hanke MV (2011) Application of a high-speed breeding technology to apple (Malus domestica) based on transgenic early flowering plants and marker-assisted selection. New Phytologist doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2011.03813.x
  33. Fomina EN (1980) Complex apple-breeding programme. Sadovodstvo 12:42–43Google Scholar
  34. Gadoury DM, MacHardy WE (1986) Forecasting ascospore dose of Venturia inaequalis in commercial apple orchards. Phytopathology 76:112–118Google Scholar
  35. Gardiner SE, Bassett HCM, Noiton DAM, Bus VGM, Hofstee ME, White AG, Ball RD, Forster RLS, Rikkerink EHA (1996) A detailed linkage map around an apple scab resistance gene demonstrates that two disease resistance classes both carry the Vf gene. Theor Appl Genet 93:485–493Google Scholar
  36. Gaskell G, Stares S, Allansdottir A, Allum N, Castro P, Esmer Y, Fischler C, Jackson J, Kronberger N, Hampel J, Mejlgaard N, Quintanilha A, Rammer A, Revuelta G, Stoneman P, Torgersen H, Wagner W (2010) A report to the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Research EUR 24537—Europeans and Biotechnology in 2010. Winds of change? Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union p.72Google Scholar
  37. Gessler C (1989) Genetics of the interaction Venturia inaequalis-Malus. IOBC Bull XII: 168–190Google Scholar
  38. Gessler C (1992) Scab resistance in apple: the minor genes in the Vf-resistance. Acta Phytopathol et Entomologica Hungarica 27:257–263Google Scholar
  39. Gessler C, Patocchi A (2007) Recombinant DNA technology in apple. Adv Biochem Eng Biotechnol 107:113–132PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Gessler C, Stumm D (1984) Infection and stroma formation by Venturia inaequalis on apple leaves with different degrees of susceptibility to scab. Phytopathologische Zeitschrift 110:119–126Google Scholar
  41. Gessler C, Patocchi A, Kellerhals M, Gianfranceschi L (1997) Molecular markers applied to apple breeding and map-based cloning of resistance genes. IOBC/WPRS Bull 20(9):105–109Google Scholar
  42. Gessler C, Patocchi A, Sansavini S, Tartarini S, Gianfrancesci L (2006) Venturia inaequalis Resistance in Apple. Crit Rev Plant Sci 25:473–503Google Scholar
  43. Gianfranceschi L, Koller B, Seglias N, Kellerhals M, Gessler C (1996) Molecular selection in apple for resistance to scab caused by Venturia inaequalis. Theor Appl Genet 93:199–204Google Scholar
  44. Gianfranceschi L, Seglias N, Tarchini R, Komjanc M, Gessler C (1998) Simple sequence repeats for the genetic analysis of apple. Theor Appl Genet 96:1069–1076Google Scholar
  45. Gianfranceschi L, Seglias N, Kellerhals M, Gessler C (1999) Molecular markers applied to apple breeding: analysis of oligogenic and single gene resistances. Acta Hortic 484:417–428Google Scholar
  46. Gygax M, Gianfranceschi L, Liebhard R, Kellerhals M, Gessler C, Patocchi A (2004) Molecular markers linked to the apple scab resistance gene Vbj derived from Malus baccata jackii. Theor appl Genetic 109:1702–1709Google Scholar
  47. Hammond-Kosack KE, Tang S, Harrison K, Jones JDG (1998) The tomato Cf-9 disease resistance gene functions in tobacco and potato to confer responsiveness to the fungal avirulence gene product Avr9. Plant Cell 10:1251–1266PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Hemmat M, Weeden NF, Aldwinckle HS, Brown SK (1998) Molecular markers for the scab resistance (Vf) region in apple. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 123:992–996Google Scholar
  49. Höhn H, Naef A, Holliger E, Widmer A, Gölles M, Linder C, Dubuis P, Kehrli P, Wirth J (2010) Pflanzenschutzempfehlungen für den Erwerbsobstbau. Flugschrift Agroscope 11Google Scholar
  50. Hough LF (1944) A survey of the scab reistancew of the foliage on seedlings in selected apple progenies. Proc amer Soc Hort Sci 44:260–272Google Scholar
  51. Hough LF, Shay JR, Dayton DF (1953) Apple scab resistance from Malus floribunda Sieb. Proc Am Soc Hort Sci 62:341–347Google Scholar
  52. Ishchenko LA, Akhvlediani SN, Indenko IF, Kotov LA, Ponomarenko VV (1981) Inheritance of resistance to Venturia inaequalis in different forms of apple under artificial infection. Selektsiya yabloni v SSSR.. 1981, rec’d 1985. 82–88Google Scholar
  53. Jamar L, Cavelier M, Lateur M (2010a) Primary scab control using a “during-infection” spray timing and the effect on fruit quality and yield in organic apple production. Biotechnologie, Agronomie, Société et Environnement 14:423–439Google Scholar
  54. Jamar L, Pahaut B, Lateur M (2010b) A low input strategy for scab control in organic apple production. Acta Hortic 873:75–84Google Scholar
  55. Janick J (2002) History of the PRI apple breeding program. Acta Hortic 595:55–60Google Scholar
  56. Joshi SG (2010) Toward durable resistance to apple scab using cisgenes. Ph.D thesis, Wagenigen University NLGoogle Scholar
  57. Joshi SG, Schaart JG, Groenwold R, Jacobsen E, Schouten HJ, Krens FA (2011) Functional analysis and expression profiling of HcrVf1 and HcrVf2 for development of scab resistant cisgenic and intragenic apples. Plant Mol Biol 75:579–591PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Kellerhals M, Furrer B (1994) Approaches for breeding apples with durable disease resistance. Euphytica 77:31–35Google Scholar
  59. Kellerhals M, Sauer C, Hohn E, Guggenbuhl B, Frey J, Liebhard R, Gessler C (2006) Durable disease resistance and high fruit quality, a challenge for apple breeding. Bulletin OILB/SROP 29:43–48Google Scholar
  60. Kellerhals M, Szekely T, Sauer C, Frey JE, Patocchi A (2009) Pyramidisieren von Schorfresistenzen in der Apfelzüchtung. Erwerbsobstbau 51:21–28Google Scholar
  61. King GJ, Tartarini S, Brown L, Gennari F, Sansavini S (1999) Introgression of the Vf source of scab resistance and distribution of linked marker alleles within the Malus gene pool. Theor Appl Genet 99:1039–1046Google Scholar
  62. Koller B, Müller M, Valsangiacomo C, Gessler C (1992) Cell wall degrading enzymes and inhibitors involved in the interaction between Venturia inaequalis and Malus domestica. Acta Phytopathologica et Entomologica Hungarica 27:353–359Google Scholar
  63. Koller B, Lehmann A, McDermott JM, Gessler C (1993) Identification of apple cultivars using RAPD markers. Theor Appl Genet 85:901–904Google Scholar
  64. Koller B, Gianfranceschi L, Seglias N, McDermott J, Gessler C (1994) DNA markers linked to Malus floribunda 821 scab resistance. Plant Mol Biol 26:597–602PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Korban SS, Janick J, Williams EB, Emerson FH (1988) “Dayton” apple. HortScience 23:927–928Google Scholar
  66. Korban SS, O’Connor PA, Ries SM, Janick J, Crosby JA, Pecknold PC (1990) Co-op 27, 28, 29, 30, and 31; five disease-resistant apple selections released for advanced testing. Bulletin Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, p 4Google Scholar
  67. Kozlovskaya ZA, Marudo GM, Ryabtsev AS (2000) Some results of the apple breeding programme in Belarus. Acta Hortic 538(1):219–223Google Scholar
  68. Krasova NG (1981) Varieties and forms of apple useful for breeding. Selektsiya yabloni v SSSR. 1981, rec’d 1985. 28–33Google Scholar
  69. Lateur M, Lefrancq B, Parisi L (2002) First evidence of the breakdown in Belgium of the scab resistance conferred by the Vf gene. Meded Rijksuniv Gent Fak Landbouwkd Toegep Biol Wet. 67:135–143PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Lefrancq B, Lateur M, Rondia A (2004) Screening method for polygenic scab resistance within an apple breeding programme: relationship between early greenhouse screening test on young seedlings and their scab susceptibility in natural field conditions. Acta Hortic 663(2):793–797Google Scholar
  71. Lespinasse Y (1989) Breeding pome fruits with stable resistance to dieases. IOBC Bulletin XII: 100–115Google Scholar
  72. Lespinasse Y, Olivier JM (1981) Evolution des recherches sur la résistance du pommier a la tavelure. I. Sources de résistance et programme d’amélioration génétique. First colloquium on fruit research, 23–24 April, 1981, Bordeaux. 1981:135–144Google Scholar
  73. Lespinasse Y, Milaire HG, Decourtye L (1976) L’amélioration du pommier pour la resistance aux champignons parasites et aux arthropodes nuisibles. Bulletin Technique d’Information 306; 307:17–34; 56Google Scholar
  74. MacHardy WE (1996) Apple scab: biology, epidemiology, and management. American Phytopathological Society (APS Press), St. Paul, Minnesota, p 545Google Scholar
  75. MacHardy WE (2000) Action thresholds for managing apple scab with fungicides and sanitation. Acta Hortic 525:123–131Google Scholar
  76. MacHardy WE, Gadoury DM (1985) Forecasting the seasonal maturation of ascospores of Venturia inaequalis. Phytopathology 75:381–385Google Scholar
  77. MacHardy WE, Gadoury DM, Gessler C (2001) Parasitic and biological fitness of Venturia inaequalis : relationship to disease management strategies. Plant Dis 85:1036–1051Google Scholar
  78. Maeda KM (1970) An ultrastructural study of Venturia inaequalis infection of Malus hosts. Master Thesis Purdue University: 112 ppGoogle Scholar
  79. Maliepaard C, Alston F, Arkel Gv, Brown L, Chevreau E, Dunemann F, Evans K, Gardiner S, Guilford P, Heusden Sv, Janse J, Laurens F, Lynn J, Manganaris S, Nijs Td, Periam N, Rikkerink E, Roche P, Ryder C, Sansavini S, Schmidt H, Tartarini S, Verhaegh J, Vrielink R, King G (1999) The European apple map. Acta Hortic 484:325–330Google Scholar
  80. Malnoy M, Xu ML, Borejsza-Wysocka E, Korban SS, Aldwinckle HS (2008) Two receptor-like genes, Vfa1 and Vfa2, confer resistance to the fungal pathogen Venturia inaequalis inciting apple scab disease. Mol Plant Microbe Interact 21:448–458PubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. Manganaris AG, Alston FH, Weeden NF, Aldwinckle HS, Gustafson HL, Brown SK (1994) Isozyme locus Pgm-1 is tightly linked to a gene (Vf) for scab resistance in apple. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 119:1286–1288Google Scholar
  82. Mehlenbacher SA, Thompson MM, Janick J, Williams EB, Emerson FH, Korban SS, Dayton DF, Hough LF (1988) “McShay” apple. HortScience 23:1091–1092Google Scholar
  83. Michalek S, Mayr U, Treutter D, Lux-Endrich A, Gutmann M, Feucht W, Geibel M (1999) Role of flavan-3-ols in resistance of apple trees to Venturia inaequalis. Acta Hortic 484:535–539Google Scholar
  84. Mills WD (1947) Effects of sprays of lime sulphur and of elemental sulphur on Apple in relation to yield. Memoirs. Cornell Agric Exp Station, p 38Google Scholar
  85. Mills WD, LaPlante AA (1951) Diseases and insects in the orchard. Bulletin. Cornell Agric Exp Station 100Google Scholar
  86. Paris R, Cova V, Pagliarani G, Tartarini S, Komjanc M, Sansavini S (2009) Expression profiling in HcrVf2-transformed apple plants in response to Venturia inaequalis. Tree Genet Genomes. 5(1):81–91Google Scholar
  87. Parisi L, Lespinasse Y (1996) Pathogenicity of Venturia inaequalis strains of race 6 on apple clones (Malus sp.). Plant Dis 80:1179–1183Google Scholar
  88. Parisi L, Lespinasse Y (1999) Pathogenicity of a strain of Venturia inaequalis race 6 on apple clones (Malus spp). Acta Hortic 484:443–447Google Scholar
  89. Parisi L, Lespinasse Y, Guillaumes J, Kruger J (1993) A new race of Venturia inaequalis virulent to apples with resistance due to the Vf gene. Phytopathology 83:533–537Google Scholar
  90. Parisi L, Durel CE, Laurens F (2000) First report on the presence of Venturia inaequalis race 7 in French apple orchards. IOBC/WPRS Bull 23(12):99–104Google Scholar
  91. Parisi L, Fouillet V, Schouten HJ, Groenwold R, Laurens F, Didelot F, Evans K, Fischer C, Gennari F, Kemp H, Lateur M, Patocchi A, Thissen J, Tsipouridis C (2004) Variability of the pathogenicity of Venturia inaequalis in Europe. Acta Hortic 663(1):107–113Google Scholar
  92. Patocchi A, Gianfranceschi L, Gessler C (1999a) Towards the map-based cloning of Vf : fine and physical mapping of the Vf region. Theor Appl Genet 99:1012–1017Google Scholar
  93. Patocchi A, Vinatzer BA, Gianfranceschi L, Tartarini S, Zhang HB, Sansavini S, Gessler C (1999b) Construction of a 550 kb BAC contig spanning the genomic region containing the apple scab resistance gene Vf. Mol Gen Genet 262:884–891PubMedGoogle Scholar
  94. Patocchi A, Frei A, Frey JE, Kellerhals M (2009) Towards improvement of marker assisted selection of apple scab resistant cultivars: Venturia inaequalis virulence surveys and standardization of molecular marker alleles associated with resistance genes. Mol Breeding 24:337–347Google Scholar
  95. Petkovsek MM, Stampar F, Veberic R (2009) Seasonal changes in phenolic compounds in the leaves of scab-resistant and susceptible apple cultivars. Ca J Plant Sci 89:745–753Google Scholar
  96. Petkovsek MM, Slatnar A, Stampar F, Veberic R (2010) The influence of organic/integrated production on the content of phenolic compounds in apple leaves and fruits in four different varieties over a 2-year period. J Sci Food Agric 90:2366–2378Google Scholar
  97. Roberts AL, Crute IR (1994) Apple scab resistance from Malus floribunda 821 (Vf) is rendered ineffective by isolates of Venturia inaequalis from Malus floribunda. Norwegian J Agric Sci No 17:403–406Google Scholar
  98. Romeis T, Tang S, Hammond-Kosack K, Piedras P, Blatt M, Jones JDG (2000) Early signalling events in the Avr9/Cf-9 -dependent plant defence response. Mol Plant Pathol 1:3–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. Rousselle GL, Williams EB, Hough F (1974) Modification of the level of resistance to apple scab from the Vf gene. XIXth International Horticultural Congress Warszawa, 19–26Google Scholar
  100. Sansavini S, Tartarini S, Gennari F, Barbieri M (2002) Scab (Venturia inaequalis) resistance in apple: the Vf-gene and polygenic resistance in the breeding strategy at DCA–Bologna. Acta Hortic 595:29–32Google Scholar
  101. Sansavini S, Barbieri M, Belfanti E, Tartarini S, Vinatzer B, Gessler C, Silfverberg E, Gianfranceschi L, Hermann D, Patocchi A (2003) “Gala” apple transformed for scab resistance with cloned Vf gene region construct. Acta Hortic 622:113–118Google Scholar
  102. Sansavini S, Donati F, Costa F, Tartarini S (2005) Il miglioramento genetico del melo in Europa: tipologie di frutto, obiettivi e nuove varieta. Rivista di Frutticoltura e di Ortofloricoltura 67:14–27Google Scholar
  103. Schouten H, Schenk A (1997) Schurftresistentie op sommige plaatsen doorbroken. Fruitteelt (Den Haag) 87:14–15Google Scholar
  104. Schouten HJ, Krens FA, Jacobsen E (2006) Do cisgenic plants warrant less stringent oversight? Nat Biotechnol 24:753PubMedGoogle Scholar
  105. Sedov EN, Zhdanov VV (1981) Genes for immunity to scab (Venturia inaequalis) in apple. Genetika, USSR 17:1479–1485Google Scholar
  106. Seglias-Hodel N (1997) Genetische Kartierung quantitativer Merkmale beim Apfel. Ph.D Thesis no12204 Swiss Fed Inst Technol ETH-Zürich, p 75Google Scholar
  107. Sierotzki H, Gessler C (1993) Flavan-3-ol content and the resistance of Malus x domestica to Venturia inaequalis (Cke.) Wint. Physiol Mol Plant Pathol 42:291–297Google Scholar
  108. Silfverberg E (2004) Identification of HcrV2 as an apple scab resistance gene and characterisation of HcrVf control sequences. Ph.D Thesis ETH-Zürich: 109 ppGoogle Scholar
  109. Silfverberg E, Patocchi A, Belfanti S, Tartarini S, Sansavini S, Gessler C (2005) HcrVf2 introduced into Gala confers race-specific scab resistance. Proceedings of the plant and animal Genome XIII conference: 501Google Scholar
  110. Silfverberg-Dilworth E, Besse S, Paris R, Belfanti E, Tartarini S, Sansavini S, Patocchi A, Gessler C (2005) Identification of functional apple scab resistance gene promoters. TAG 110:1119–1126PubMedGoogle Scholar
  111. Soufflet-Freslon V, Gianfranceschi L, Patocchi A, Durel CE (2008) Inheritance studies of apple scab resistance and identification of Rvi14, a new major gene that acts together with other broad-spectrum QTL. Genome 51:657–667PubMedGoogle Scholar
  112. Szankowski I, Waidmann S, Degenhardt J, Patocchi A, Paris R, Silfverberg-Dilworth E, Broggini G, Gessler C (2009) Highly scab-resistant transgenic apple lines achieved by introgression of HcrVf2 controlled by different native promoter lengths. Tree Genet Genomes 5:349–358Google Scholar
  113. Tartarini S (1996) RAPD markers linked to the Vf gene for scab resistance in apple. Theor Appl Genet 92:803–810Google Scholar
  114. Tartarini S, Gianfranceschi L, Sansavini S, Gessler C (1999) Development of reliable PCR markers for the selection of the Vf gene conferring scab resistance in apple. Plant Breeding 118:183–186Google Scholar
  115. Tartarini S, Sansavini S, Vinatzer BA, Gennari F, Domizi C (2000) Efficiency of marker assisted selection (MAS) for the Vf scab resistance gene. Acta Hortic 538(2):549–552Google Scholar
  116. Trapman M (2005) Resistance management of Vf-resistent apple cultivars is necessary. Fruitteelt (Den Haag) 95:14–15Google Scholar
  117. Treutter D, Feucht W (1990) The pattern of flavan-3-ols in relation to scab resistance of apple cultivars. J Hort Sci 65:511–517Google Scholar
  118. Triloff P (2006) The simulation of ascospore release from apple scab: do we use suitable climatic data? IOBC/WPRS Bull 29:87–94Google Scholar
  119. Valsangiacomo C, Gessler C (1988) Role of the cuticular membrane in ontogenic and Vf-resistance of apple leaves against Venturia inaequalis. Phytopathology 78:1066–1069Google Scholar
  120. Valsangiacomo C, Ruckstuhl M, Gessler C (1992) In vitro degradation of cell walls of apple leaves by pectinolytic enzymes of the scab fungus, Venturia inaequalis, and by commercial pectinolytic and cellulolytic enzyme preparations. J Phytopathol 135:20–27Google Scholar
  121. Vanblaere T (2011) The development of a cisgenic scab resistant apple cv. “Gala”. Ph.D thesis no 19743, Swiss Federal Institute of technology ETHGoogle Scholar
  122. Vanblaere T, Szankowski I, Schaart J, Schouten H, Flachowsky H, Broggini GAL, Gessler C (2011) The development of a cisgenic apple. J Biotechnol 154:304–311PubMedGoogle Scholar
  123. Vavra R, Bocek S (2009) Symptoms of apple scab on cultivars and genotypes carrying different resistant genes. Vedecke Prace Ovocnarske 21:71–78Google Scholar
  124. Vinatzer BA, Zhang HB, Sansavini S (1998) Construction and characterization of a bacterial artificial chromosome library of apple. Theor Appl Genet 97(7):1183–1190Google Scholar
  125. Vinatzer BA, Patocchi A, Gianfranceschi L, Tartarini S, Zhang H, Gessler C, Sansavini S (2001) Apple contains receptor-like genes homologous to the Cladosporium fulvum resistance gene family of tomato with a cluster of genes cosegregating with Vf apple scab resistance. Mol Plant Microbe Interact 14:508–515PubMedGoogle Scholar
  126. Vinatzer BA, Patocchi A, Tartarini S, Gianfraneschi L, Sansavini S, Gessler C (2004) Isolation of two microsatellite markers from BAC clones of the Vf scab resistance region and molecular characterization of scab-resistant accessions in Malus germplasm. Plant Breeding 123(4):321–326Google Scholar
  127. Virscek-Marn M, Stampar F, Javornik B (1996) Screening for scab resistance by RAPD markers in cultivars of apple (Malus spp.). Plant Breeding 115:488–493Google Scholar
  128. Vittone G, Ballatore D, Cotroneo A, Spanna F, Varner M, Rossi V (2007) L’esperienza piemontese nel periodo 2001–2006: gestire la ticchiolatura con modelli previsionali. Informatore Agrario 63:35–39Google Scholar
  129. Williams EB, Kuc J (1969) Resistance in Malus to Venturia inaequalis. Ann Rev Phytopathol 7:223–246Google Scholar
  130. Williams EB, Dayton DF, Shay JR (1966) Allelic genes in Malus for resistance to Venturia inaequalis. Proc Am Soc Hort Sci 88:52–56Google Scholar
  131. Williams EB, Janick J, Emerson FH, Dayton DF, Mowry JB, Hough LF, Bailey C (1972a) “Priscilla”, a fall red apple with resistance to apple scab. Fruit Var Hortl Dig 26:34–35Google Scholar
  132. Williams EB, Janick J, Emerson FH, Dayton DF, Mowry JB, Hough LF, Bailey C (1972b) Six scab-resistant apple selections released for grower testing. Research Progress Report, Cooperating Agricultural Experiment Stations, Purdue University, University of Illinois and Rutgers University, 399, p 4Google Scholar
  133. Xu ML, Korban SS (2000) Saturation mapping of the apple scab resistance gene Vf using AFLP markers. Theor Appl Genet 101:844–851Google Scholar
  134. Xu ML, Korban SS (2002) A cluster of four receptor-like genes resides in the Vf locus that confers resistance to apple scab disease. Genetics 162:1995–2006PubMedGoogle Scholar
  135. Xu ML, Song J, Cheng Z, Jiang J, Korban SS (2001) A bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) library of Malus floribunda 821 and contig construction for positional cloning of the apple scab resistance gene Vf. Genome 44:1104–1113PubMedGoogle Scholar
  136. Yang H, Korban SS (1996) Screening apples for OPD20/600 using sequence-specific primers. Theor Appl Genet 92:263–266Google Scholar
  137. Yang H, Kruger J (1994) Identification of an RAPD marker linked to the Vf gene for scab resistance in apples. Plant Breeding 112:323–329Google Scholar
  138. Zhdanov VV, Fomina EN (1981) Intensification of apple breeding. Sadovodstvo 12:43Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Plant Pathology, Integrative Biology Zurich (IBZ)ETH ZurichZurichSwitzerland
  2. 2.Fondazione Edmund MachIASMA Research and Innovation CentreS. Michele all’AdigeItaly

Personalised recommendations