Sugar Tech

, Volume 19, Issue 3, pp 293–299 | Cite as

Pathogen Virulence in Sugarcane Red Rot Pathogen Versus Varieties in Cultivation: Classical Case of Loss in Virulence in the Pathotype CF06 (Cf671)

  • R. ViswanathanEmail author
Original Article


In India, red rot caused by Colletotrichum falcatum exhibits enormous variation in pathogenicity on sugarcane. The new cultivars released for commercial cultivation succumb to new pathotypes of the pathogen after some years in disease endemic regions. Due to the variability in C. falcatum, screening for red rot resistance in sugarcane progenies is being taken up with designated pathotype(s) separately for each agroclimatic regions in the country. The predominant C. falcatum pathotype of tropical India Cf671 (CF06) isolated from the then ruling cultivar CoC 671 is being used in tropical regions for disease screening. However, recently the pathotype has exhibited a reduced virulence on new cultivars and that has resulted in inconsistencies in disease reaction between artificial testing and field reaction under natural conditions. Hence, a detailed study was conducted during the past seven seasons on its pathogenicity on a set of 32 cultivars varying in red rot resistance in comparison with a new pathotype Cf94012 isolated from the cultivar Co 94012. The resistant cultivars such as BO 91, CoS 8436 and Co 98010 exhibited resistance reaction to both the pathotypes. However, other resistant cultivars such as Co 94008, Co 99006, Co 2001-15, Co 0238 and CoV 92102 showed a shift in their reaction to the new pathotype Cf94012 as moderately susceptible (MS) or susceptible (S) from resistant (R)/moderately resistant (MR) reactions in case of Cf671. Further, disease reaction on eight cultivars with MS behaviour and 11 susceptible cultivars clearly revealed a higher virulence of Cf94012 as compared to Cf671. Overall, the pathogenic behaviour of the two pathotypes during seven seasons revealed a higher virulence of Cf94012 as compared to Cf671 on resistant, moderately susceptible and susceptible cultivars. Although the pathotype Cf671 remained virulent on its host cultivar CoC 671, it could not exhibit such virulence on the cultivars developed in the recent years. Further, the study revealed that once a popular cultivar is removed from cultivation as in the case of CoC 671, the pathotype adapted to it no longer maintains its virulence, whereas the recently originated pathotype exhibits a higher virulence on the new cultivars of the host. This study also suggests adaptation of C. falcatum to the host cultivars.


Colletotrichum falcatum Pathogenic variation Virulence Host adaptation 



The author is thankful to the Directors of the Institute for providing facilities and Technical Staffs of Plant Pathology for their assistance in conducting field experiments, data collection and culture maintenance.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The author has no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

12355_2016_458_MOESM1_ESM.docx (13 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 12 kb)


  1. Abbott, E.V. 1933. Physiologic forms of Colletotrichum falcatum Went. Phytopathology 23: 557–559.Google Scholar
  2. Beniwal, M.S., Satyavir, and K.S. Virk. 1989. Pathogenic variability in Colletotrichum falcatum incitant of red rot of sugarcane. Indian Phytopathology 42: 95–98.Google Scholar
  3. Chona, B.L., and W.G. Padwick. 1942. More light on the red rot of epidemic. Indian Farming 3: 70–73.Google Scholar
  4. Chona, B.L., and D.N. Srivastava. 1960. Variation in Colletotrichum falcatum Went the causal organism of red rot of sugarcane. Indian Phytopathology 13: 158–160.Google Scholar
  5. De Carvalho, P.C.T. 1968. Heterokaryosis in Colletotrichum falcatum. Proceedings of International Society of Sugar Cane Technologists 13: 1251–1261.Google Scholar
  6. Malathi, P., and R. Viswanathan. 2012a. Variation in Colletotrichum falcatum-red rot pathogen of sugarcane in relation to host resistance. Sugar Tech 14: 181–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Malathi, P., and R. Viswanathan. 2012b. Identification of pathogenicity determinants in Colletotrichum falcatum using wild and mutant cultures. Sugar Tech 14: 383–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Malathi, P., R. Viswanathan, and R. Jothi. 2006. Specific adaptation of Colletotrichum falcatum pathotypes to sugarcane cultivars. Sugar Tech 8(1): 54–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Padmanaban, P., D. Mohanraj, R. Viswanathan, M.M. Rao, N. Prakasam, R. Jothi, and K.C. Alexander. 1996. Differential interaction of sugarcane clones to pathotypes of Colletotrichum falcatum Went. Sugar Cane 4: 16–20.Google Scholar
  10. Rafay, S.A., and V.B. Singh. 1957. A new strain of Glomerella tucumanensis. Current Science 26: 19–20.Google Scholar
  11. Singh, P., and M.M. Payak. 1968. Observations on karyology, hyphal fusions and production of a new isolate in Colletotrichum falcatum. Acta Phytopathologica Academia Sciences (Hungary) 3: 143–155.Google Scholar
  12. Srinivasan, K.V. 1962. Some observations on variation in the red rot pathogen, Glomerella tucumanensis (Speg.) Arx and Muller. Proceedings of International Society Sugar Cane Technologists 11: 795–802.Google Scholar
  13. Srinivasan, K.V., and N.R. Bhat. 1961. Red rot of sugarcane—criteria for grading resistance. Journal of Indian Botanical Society 40: 566–577.Google Scholar
  14. Sundara, B. 1998. Sugarcane cultivation, 292. New Delhi: Vikas Publications.Google Scholar
  15. Viswanathan, R. 2010. Plant disease: Red rot of sugarcane, 301. New Delhi: Anmol Publications Pvt Ltd.Google Scholar
  16. Viswanathan, R., P. Malathi, and P. Padmanaban. 2003. Variation in sugarcane red rot pathogen Colletotrichum falcatum Went. In Frontiers of fungal diversity in India, ed. G.P. Rao, C. Manoharachari, D.J. Bhat, R.C. Rajak, and T.N. Lakhanpal, 639–667. International Book Distributing Co: Lucknow.Google Scholar
  17. Viswanathan, R., P. Padmanaban, and D. Mohanraj. 1997. Growing virulence of red rot pathogen of sugarcane in Tamil Nadu. Indian Sugar 47: 23–30.Google Scholar
  18. Viswanathan, R., and G.P. Rao. 2011. Disease scenario and management of major sugarcane diseases in India. Sugar Tech 13: 336–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Viswanathan, R., and R. Samiyappan. 2000. Red rot disease in sugarcane: Challenges and prospects. Madras Agricultural Journal 87: 549–559.Google Scholar
  20. Viswanathan, R., A. Ramesh Sundar, P. Padmanaban, and D. Mohanraj. 2002. Red rot disease of sugarcane and its management. In IPM systems in agriculture vol. 8 key pathogens and diseases, ed. R.K. Upadhyay, K.G. Mukherji, and O.P. Dubey, 277–301. New Delhi: Aditya Books.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Sugar Research & Promotion 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Plant Pathology Section, Division of Crop ProtectionICAR-Sugarcane Breeding InstituteCoimbatoreIndia

Personalised recommendations