Advertisement

The Elms pp 61-72 | Cite as

Intercontinental Spread and Continuing Evolution of the Dutch Elm Disease Pathogens

  • Clive M. Brasier

Abstract

The two enormously destructive pandemics of Dutch elm disease (DED) that have spread across Europe and North America this century have been caused by two very different fungal pathogens. First to appear, in the early 1900s, was Ophiostoma ulmi. Second to appear, around the 1940s, was the much more aggressive O. novo-ulmi which exists as distinct Eurasian (EAN) and North American (NAN) forms, equivalent to subspecies. Current knowledge of the origins and spread of these DED fungi across the Northern Hemisphere is presented. O. novo-ulmi has been rapidly replacing O. ulmi across most of Europe and North America. It may well have picked up “useful” genes from O. ulmi in the process. In addition, where the EAN and NAN forms of O. novo-ulmi are now geographically overlapping, they are freely hybridizing. As a result, a new form of O. novo-ulmi may emerge in the future. In 1993 yet another aggressive DED pathogen was discovered in the Himalaya; this was named O. himal-ulmi. Rather than causing epidemic disease, O. himal-ulmi appears to be in natural balance with Himalayan elms and elm bark beetles.

Keywords

North America Bark Beetle Mycological Research Proceeding Ofthe National Academy Bluestain Fungus 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abdelali E, Brasier CM, Bernier L. 1999. Localization of a pathogenicity gene in Ophiostoma novo-ulmi and evidence that it may be introgressed from O. ulmi. Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions 12: 6–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bates MR, Buck KW, Brasier CM. 1993. Molecular relationships of the mitochondrial DNA of Ophiostoma ulmi and the NAN and EAN races of O. novo-ulmi determined by restriction fragment length polymorphisms. Mycological Research 97: 1093–1100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brasier CM. 1977. Inheritance of pathogenicity and cultural characters in C. ulmi. Hybridisation of protoperithecial and non-aggressive strains. Transactions of the British Mycological Society 68: 45–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brasier CM. 1979. Dual origin of recent Dutch elm disease outbreaks in Europe. Nature 281: 78–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brasier CM. 1983. The future of Dutch elm disease in Europe. Pages 96–104 in: Research on Dutch Elm Disease in Europe, DA Burdekin, ed. Forestry Commission Bulletin 60. HMSO, London.Google Scholar
  6. Brasier CM. 1986. The population biology of Dutch elm disease: its principal features and some implications for other host-pathogen systems. Pages 55–118 in: Advances in Plant Pathology, Volume 5, DS Ingram, PH Williams, eds. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
  7. Brasier CM. 1990. China and the origins of Dutch elm disease: an appraisal. Plant Pathology 39: 5–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brasier CM. 1991. Ophiostoma novo-ulmi sp. nov., causative agent of the current Dutch elm disease pandemics. Mycopathologia 115: 151–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brasier CM. 1995. Episodic selection as a force in fungal microevolution with special reference to clonal speciation and hybrid introgression. Canadian Journal of Botany 73: 1213–1221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brasier CM. 1996. New horizons in Dutch elm disease control. Pages 20–28 in: Report on Forest Research, 1996. HMSO, London.Google Scholar
  11. Brasier CM. 1997. Fungal species in practice: Identifying species units in fungi. Pages 135–170 in: Species: The Units of Biodiversity, MF Claridge, HA Dahwah, MR Wilson, eds. Chapman & Hall, London.Google Scholar
  12. Brasier CM, Cooke D, Duncan JM. 1999. Origin of a new Phytophthora pathogen through interspecific hybridization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 96: 5878–5883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brasier CM, Kirk SA. 1993. Sibling species within Ophiostoma piceae. Mycological Research 97:811–816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Brasier CM, Kirk SA, Pipe N, Buck KW. 1998. Rare hybrids in natural populations of the Dutch elm disease pathogens Ophiostoma ulmi and O. novo-ulmi. Mycological Research 102: 45–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Brasier CM, Mehrotra MD. 1995. Ophiostoma himal-ulmi sp. nov., a new species of Dutch elm disease fungus endemic to the Himalayas. Mycological Research 99: 205–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kile GA, Brasier CM. 1990. Inheritance and inter-relationship of fitness characters in progeny of an aggressive x non-aggressive cross of Ophiostoma ulmi. Mycological Research 94: 514–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mitchell AG. 1988. Population structure and interaction between the aggressive and nonaggressive subgroups of Ophiostoma ulmi. PhD. Thesis. University of Bath, UK.Google Scholar
  18. Peace T. 1960. The status and development of elm disease in Britain. Forest Commission Bulletin 33: 1–44.Google Scholar
  19. Pipe N, Buck KW, Brasier CM. 1997. Comparison of cerato-ulmin (cu) gene sequences of the recently identified Himalayan Dutch elm disease fungus Ophiostoma himal-ulmi with those of O. ulmi and O. novo-ulmi suggests the cu gene of O. novo-ulmi is unlikely to have been acquired recently from O. himal-ulmi. Mycological Research 101: 415–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Clive M. Brasier

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations