Isolates of the Diaporthe/Phomopsis (D/P) complex were collected in the main soybean producing area of Argentina during the 1996-97, 1997-98, and 1998-99 growing seasons. Twenty-three morphologic characters related to type of colonies, stroma, pycnidia and conidia, presence of perithecia, and asci length were studied by principal component analysis (PCA). Genomic DNA were analyzed by the random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) technique. From both studies, 18 isolates were identified as D/P complex and grouped in four major taxa: (i) Diaporthe phaseolorum var. meridionalis, (ii) D. phaseolorum var. caulivora, (iii) D. phaseolorum var. sojae, and (iv) Phomopsis longicolla. In addition to distinguishing interspecific and intraspecific variability, molecular markers allowed the detection of differences among isolates within the same variety. Pathogenicity was assayed in the greenhouse, by the toothpick method, inoculating the D/P isolates to soybean genotypes carrying different resistance genes (Rdc1, Rdc2, Rdc3, and Rdc4) against soybean stem canker (SSC). Pathogenic analysis distinguished two main groups: (i) the SSC-producing isolates, including D. phaseolorum var. meridionalis and D. phaseolorum var. caulivora, and (ii) the non-SSC-producing isolates, including D. phaseolorum var. sojae and P. longicolla. Cultivar RA-702 (susceptible control) was compatible with both D. phaseolorum var. meridionalis and D. phaseolorum var. caulivora isolates; meanwhile, Tracy-M (Rdc1 and Rdc 2 genes) was incompatible with D. phaseolorum var. meridionalis but compatible with D. phaseolorum var. caulivora isolates. The fact that Rdc1 and Rdc2 together (as in Tracy-M) confer an almost immune reaction to all assayed isolates of D. phaseolorum var. meridionalis but were ineffective against the D. phaseolorum var. caulivora isolates evaluated suggests that the virulence or avirulence genes in D. phaseolorum var. meridionalis and D. phaseolorum var. caulivora are different. Moreover, physiological races of D. phaseolorum var. meridionalis were detected by using differential soybean genotypes carrying distinct single Rdc genes. As far as we know, this is the first report on the existence of physiological races of D. phaseolorum var. meridionalis in South America. Selective pressure due to deployment of resistant host cultivars may have changed the frequency of the virulence or avirulence genes within the population of D. phaseolorum var. meridionalis. On the whole, our results show that pathogenic variability of D. phaseolorum in the core soybean-producing area of Argentina is higher than previously recognized.

The crude methanolic extract of Zuccagnia punctata was active toward the fungal pathogens of soybean Phomopsis longicolla and Colletotrichum truncatum. Assay guided fractionation led to the isolation of two chalcones, one flavanone and a new caffeoyl ester derivative as the compounds responsible for the antifungal activity. Another new caffeoyl ester derivative was isolated from the antifungal chloroform extract but proved to be inactive against the soybean infecting fungi up to 50 microg/mL

Fusarium graminearum, a pathogen of wheat and corn, was reported recently as a saprophytic fungus colonizing soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.) fruits and seeds at R7 in Argentina (2). To evaluate the capacity of F. graminearum obtained from stem and seeds of symptomatic soybean plants that cause disease on soybean seedlings, isolates were obtained during the 2001 to 2002 growing season from: (i) the basal one-third of stems from field-grown soybean plants, collected at R5, with light brown external and internal discoloration and leaves with interveinal chlorosis; and (ii) soybean seeds with pink tegument. The pathogen was isolated on potato glucose agar acidified with 0.2% lactic acid (PGAA). Isolates were identified as F. graminearum on the basis of growth rate and pigmentation of colonies on PGAA, lack of microconidia (1), and morphology and size of typical macroconidia in sporodochia developed on Spezieller Nährstoffarmer Agar (3). Isolates of F. graminearum, CE135 and CE136 (from wheat) and CE137 (from corn) deposited in the Centro de Referencia en Micología (CEREMIC), Fac. Farmacia y Bioquímica, UNR, Argentina, were used as references in identifying the soybean isolates. Plants (14-day-old) were inoculated separately with stem and seed isolates in the greenhouse at 26 ± 2 and 20 ± 2°C day/night temperature by inserting a piece of mycelium into a wound made with a scalpel in the hypocotyl. A completely randomized block design (RCB) was utilized with four replicate pots with four plants per pot. Plants wounded but without mycelium served as controls. This test was conducted twice (experiments 1 and 2). Another test was completed by burying a thin layer of wheat caryopsis colonized by fungal mycelium of the stem isolate CE170 in the soil of pots. Plants in pots with soil without inoculum served as controls (4). The experiment was conducted twice (experiments 3 and 4) in an RCB with five replications, four plants per replication. The progress of symptoms in experiments 1 and 2 were stem with light brown discoloration around the inoculation point that extended progressively along the stem, interveinal chlorosis or loss of turgence of unifoliate leaves, and interveinal chlorosis of trifoliate leaves followed by plant wilting and death. Twenty-one days after inoculation, average percentages of dead plants (%DP) was 42 and 21% for stem and seed isolates, respectively. For experiments 3 and 4, %DP was 56%, 45 days after emergence. These plants had roots with light brown, necrotic areas. Control plants remained healthy. The pathogen was reisolated from the stem (100%) and root (57%) tissues of symptomatic plants but not from similar tissues of control plants. To our knowledge, this is the first report of a pathogenic relationship between F. graminearum and soybean. References: (1) P. E. Nelson et al. Fusarium species: An Illustrated Manual for Identification. The Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park, PA, 1983. (2) R.N. Pioli et al. Fitopatología 35(2):111, 2000. (3) B. A. Summerell et al. Plant Dis. 87:117, 2003. (4) C. E. Windels. Fusarium. Pages 115–128 in: Methods for Research on Soilborne Phytopathogenic Fungi. L. L. Singleton, J. D. Mihail, and C. M. Rush, eds. The American Phytopathological Society, St. Paul, MN, 1992.