Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Factors affecting infection, disease development, and symptom expression of bacterial ring rot

  • Published:
American Potato Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Conclusions

It is clear from the foregoing that, although much is known about BRR, much more work needs to be done. While laboratory detection methods have improved significantly in recent years, it still remains for the seed inspector to find the infected plants in the field. This situation is not likely to change in the near future, and therefore, all of the factors affecting symptom expression must be known. Any procedure that could appreciably enhance the development of BRR symptoms would be of immeasurable value.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature Cited

  1. Akeley, R.V., F.S. Stevenson, P.T. Blood, E.S. Schultz, R. Bonde and K.F. Nielsen. 1955. Merrimack: A new variety of potato resistant to late blight and ring rot and adapted to New Hampshire. Am Potato J 32:93–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bishop, A.L. and S.A. Slack. 1982. Effect of temperature on development of ring rot in potato. Phytopathology 72:1382 (Abstr.).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bonde, Reiner, F.J. Stevenson, C.F. Clark and R.V. Akeley. 1942. Resistance of certain potato varieties and seedling progenies to ring rot. Phytopathology 32:813–819.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Dykstra, T.P. 1941. Results of experiments in control of bacterial ring rot of potatoes in 1940. Am Potato J 18:27–55.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Dykstra, T.P. 1942. Compilation of results in control of potato ring rot in 1941. Am Potato J 19:175–196.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Gudmestad, N.C. and G.A. Secor. 1984. Bacterial ring rot — The changing scene. Valley Potato Grower, March: 18–21.

  7. Lachance, R.O. and H. Genereux. 1963. Proc Can Phytopathol Soc 30:13 (Abstr.).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Logsdon, C.E. 1967. Effect of soil temperature on potato ring rot. Am Potato J 44:281–286.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Malenev, F.E.. 1956. Sborn Microelem. Agric Med Riga, Acad Sci Latv SSR, 429–436.

  10. Manzer, F. and H. Genereux. 1981. Ring Rot, pp. 32–33In Compendium of Potato Diseases. Am Phytopathol Soc Press. 125 pp.

  11. Manzer, F. 1981. Reaction of the potato variety BelRus to bacterial ring rot infections. Maine Agric Exp Stn Misc Rept No 256. 2 pp.

  12. Manzer, F. 1983. Reaction of the BelRus variety to bacterial ring rot infection — an update. Maine Agric Exp Stn Misc Rept No 283. 4 pp.

  13. Nelson, G.A. and G.C. Kozub. 1983. Effect of total light energy on symptoms and growth of ring rot infected Red Pontiac potato plants. Am Potato J 60 (6, part 2):461–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Nelson, G.A. 1982.Corynebacterium sepedonicum in potato: Effect of inoculum concentration of ring rot symptoms and latent infection. Can J Plant Pathol 4:129–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Paquin, R. and H. Genereux. 1976. Effet du climat sur la fletrissure bacterienne de la pomme de terre et relation avec le contenu en sucres des tiges. Can J Plant Sci 56:549–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Perkins, B.L. and G.H. Starr. 1949. The prevalence and distribution ofCorynebacterium sepedonicum in potato plants. Colo-Wyo Acad Sci 4:50 (Abstr.).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Riedl, W.A., F.J. Stevenson and R. Bonde. 1946. The Teton potato: A new variety resistant to ring rot. Am Potato J 23:379–389.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Rojalin, L.B. 1935. Inst Kartoff. Moskau 4:3–21.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Sletten, A. 1980. Observations on systemic infection of potato plants grown from stem cuttings inoculated withCorynebacterium sepedonicum. Potato Res 23:111–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Stevenson, F.J. 1956. Breeding varieties of potato resistant to diseases and insect injuries. Am Potato J 33:37–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Stevenson, F.J. and J.R. Livermore. 1949. The Saranac potato: A new variety promising in Australia. Am Potato J 26:45–46.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Sun, M.K.C. and G.D. Easton. 1983. Symptom expression ofCorynebacterium sepedonicum infected Russet Burbank potato plants in Montana. Am Potato J 60(10, parts 20:822. (Abstr.)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Tarn, T.R. 1984. Minutes of the breeding and genetics section. Potato Association of America. Am Potato J 61:635–636.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Plant Pathology, University of Maine, 04469, Orono, ME

    F. E. Manzer (Professor)

  2. Department of Plant Pathology, North Dakota State University, 58105, Fargo, ND

    N. C. Gudmestad (Assistant Professor)

  3. Agriculture Canada, T1J4B1, Lethbridge, Canada

    G. A. Nelson (Research Scientist)

Authors
  1. F. E. Manzer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. N. C. Gudmestad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. G. A. Nelson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Manzer, F.E., Gudmestad, N.C. & Nelson, G.A. Factors affecting infection, disease development, and symptom expression of bacterial ring rot. American Potato Journal 64, 671–676 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02853913

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02853913

Keywords

Search

Navigation