Disease Lesion Mimic Mutations

  • Virginia Walbot
  • David A. Hoisington
  • M. G. Neuffer
Part of the Basic Life Sciences book series (BLSC, volume 26)


Local lesion formation on plant leaves can result from physiological stress, wounding or disease. The lesions are often diagnostic for the factor which promoted lesion formation. For example, the lesion size, shape and pattern of spread on particular genotypes are used as identification criteria for many plant diseases. In this paper we will discuss a class of mutations of maize called disease lesion mimics. These mutations promote the production of discrete leaf lesions in the absence of obvious stress, wounding or disease on the plant. As found in authentic disease and stress responses, lesion mimic expression depends on the plant genotype and environmental conditions. We propose that the disease lesion mimic mutations of maize provide a simplified system for the study of plant response to disease and stress. Using the disease lesion mimics it is possible to study the plant response and lesion formation without the causative agent present.


Plant Response Suppression System Lesion Formation Physical Disruption Toxic Molecule 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bell, A.A. 1981. Biochemical mechanisms of disease resistance. Ann. Rev. Plant Physiol. 32: 21–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barnett, T., M. Altschuler, C.N. McDaniel, and J.P. Mascarenhas. 1980. Heat shock induced proteins in plant cells. Dev. Genet. 1: 331–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sachs, M.M., M. Freeling and R. Okomoto. 1980. The anaerobic proteins of maize. Cell 20: 761–767.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Key, J.L., C.Y. Lin, and Y.M. Chen. 1981. Heat shock proteins of higher plants. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 78: 3526–3530.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Coe, Jr., E.H., and M.G. Neuffer. 1977. Genetics of corn. In Corn and Corn Improvement. G.F. Sprague, ed. Amer. Soc. Agronomy, Madison, Wisconsin.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Neuffer, M.G. 1982. Genetics (in preparation).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hadwinger, L.A., C. Sander, J. Eddyvean, and J. Ralston. 1976. Sodium azide-induced mutants of peas that accumulate pisatin. Phytopathology. 66: 229–230.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sheen, S.F., and R.A. Anderson. 1974. Comparison of poly-phenols and related enzymes in the capsule and nodal tumor of Nicotiana plants. Can. J. Bot. 52: 1379–1385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mace, M.E., and A.A. Bell. 1981. Flavanol and terpenoid aldehyde synthesis in tumors associated with genetic incompatibility in a Gossypium hirsutum X G. gosspiodes hybrid. Can J. Bot. 59: 951–955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Neuffer, M.G., and O.H. Calvert. 1975. Dominant disease lesion mimics in maize. J. Hered. 66: 265–270.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hoisington, D.A., M.G. Neuffer, and V. Walbot. 1982. Disease lesion mimics in maize. I. Effect of genetic background, temperature, developmental age, and wounding on necrotic spot formation with Lesl, in press. Dev. Biol.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Neuffer, M.G., and W.F. Sheridan. 1980. Defective kernel mutants of maize. I. Genetic and lethality studies. Genetics. 95: 929–944.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Day, P.R. 1974. Genetics of Host-Parasite Interaction. W.H. Freeman and Co., San Francisco.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lobenstein, G. 1972. Localization and induced resistance in virus-infected plants. Ann. Rev. Phytopathol. 10: 177–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Johnson, R. 1978. Induced resistance to fungal diseases with special reference to yellow rust of wheat. Ann. Appl. Biol. 89: 107–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kuc, J., and R. Hammerschmidt. 1978. Acquired resistance to bacterial and fungal infection. Ann. Appl. Biol. 89: 313–317.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Langford, A.N. 1948. Autogenous necrosis in tomatoes immune from Cladosporium fulvum Cooke. Can. J. Res. 26: 35–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ullstrup, A.J., and A.F. Troyer. 1967. A lethal leaf spot of maize. Phytopathology. 57: 1282–1283.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Emerson, R.A. 1923. The inheritance of blotch leaf in maize. Cornell Univ. Memoir. 70: 3–16.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ghidoni, A. 1974. Un gene dominante the produce lesioni necrotiche nel mais, associato al chromosoma 9e con effetto di letalita allo stato omozigote. Genet. Agar. 28: 162–169.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gardner, C.O. 1971. Induced “necrotic leaf spot” mutation allelic to zebra necrosis (znl). Maize Genet. Coop. News Letter. 45: 150.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wright, J.E., and D. Foley. 1954. Inheritance of target spot. Maize Genet. Coop. News Letter 28: 29.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mortimore, C.G., and L.F. Gates. 1979. A genetically controlled necrotic spotting of corn leaves. Can. J. Plant Sci. 59: 147–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Neuffer, M.G., and S.E. Pawar. 1980. Dominant disease lesion mutants. Maize Genet. Coop. News Letter. 54: 34–36.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • Virginia Walbot
    • 1
  • David A. Hoisington
    • 2
  • M. G. Neuffer
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Biological SciencesStanford UniversityStanfordUSA
  2. 2.Department of AgronomyUniversity of MissouriColumbiaUSA

Personalised recommendations