Registration of 90‐2079‐2131, and 90‐2322 PEA Germplasms

Kraft, J. M.

doi:10.2135/cropsci1992.0011183x003200040063x

Cited by 44 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite an absence of high-level resistance within the species, a number of partially resistant to tolerant pea breeding lines have been developed Gritton, 1990;King et al, 1981;Kraft, 1981Kraft, , 1989Kraft, , 1992; Kraft and Tuck, 1986;Rao et al, 1995;Shehata et al, 1976). However, the transfer of this resistance to agriculturally-acceptable lines was made difficult because some sources of resistance also had other undesirable traits for node-length, flower colour and hilum colour (Marx et al, 1972).…”

Section: Host Resistancementioning

confidence: 99%

Biological control of Aphanomyces euteiches root-rot of pea with spore-forming bacteria

Wakelin

Walter

Jaspers

et al. 2002

Austral. Plant Pathol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

i Spore-forming bacteria were investigated as potential biological control agents of the pea root rot fungus, Aphanomyces euteiches (Oomycete). Isolations of the bacteria were made both directly from field soils (558) and from the rhizosphere of peas grown in soil (146).When the 704 isolates were screened for inhibition of A. euteiches mycelial expansion in vitro, a low frequency of suppressiveness was observed in isolates taken directly from field-soil (0.05%), whilst 19% of the bacterial isolates taken from the rhizosphere were suppressive.Mycelial suppressive isolates were subsequently screened for inhibition of zoospore germination and germ tube growth.The Seed coat, prill and granule formulations of B. mycoides MW 27 were evaluated in a field trial. As a seed coat formulation, the isolate significantly (a=0.05) increased plot stand by about 10%. In a prill formulation, B. mycoides MW 27 had no effect on plot stand (early damping-off disease), but significantly (a=0.05) increased the number of pods per plant and average pod weight per plant. Apron C70SD controlled damping-off disease but had no effect on root rot disease.Bacillus pumilus PT 10, B. mycoides MW 27, P. polymyxa 18·25 and fluquinconazole were tested as seed treatments for control of another root disease, take-all of wheat. Bacillus pumilus PT 10 significantly (a=0.05) increased plant yield by 77%. Bacillus mycoides MW 27 had similar efficacy as fluquinconazole, increasing yield by approximately 10%(not significant at a=0.05). As a seed coat treatment, B. mycoides MW 27 also effectively controlled damping-off disease.iii Paenibacillus polymyxa 18'25 suppressed a wide range of plant pathogenic fungi in vitro, possibly through production of the cell wall-degrading enzymes chitinase or cellulase, or an antibiotic compound which the bacterium was found to produce. Bacillus mycoides MW 27 was slightly suppressive to only two pathogenic fungi in vitro, and did not degrade chitin or cellulose.The soil bacterium Bacillus mycoides MW 27 has excellent potential for development as a biological control agent of Aphanomyces root rot of pea. A formulation of the bacterium could be marketed on both its ability to increase yields under Aphanomyces disease pressure, and to limit oospore development, thereby limiting disease in continuous cropping situations.

show abstract

Section: Host Resistancementioning

confidence: 99%

Biological control of Aphanomyces euteiches root-rot of pea with spore-forming bacteria

Wakelin

Walter

Jaspers

et al. 2002

Austral. Plant Pathol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The recent release of several public germplasm lines with resistance to A . euteiches greatly improves the prospect of developing commercial cultivars with improved resistance/tolerance to this important disease (Davis et al ., 1976 ;Kraft, 1986Kraft, , 1989Kraft, , 1992Gritton 1990) . (Linford, 1928) .…”

Section: Common Root Rot Of Peasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Screening techniques and sources of resistance to root rots and wilts in cool season food legumes

et al. 1993

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…We used a mapping population of recombinant inbred lines (RILs), which allowed for replicated trials at several environments. One of the two parents of the RILs was the line 90-2079 (Kraft 1992), which is partially resistant to A. euteiches in the United States (Washington, Minnesota, Wisconsin) and New Zealand (Kraft 1992).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantitative trait loci for partial resistance to Aphanomyces root rot in pea

et al. 2002

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aphanomyces root rot, caused by Aphanomyces euteiches Drechs, is the most-important disease of pea ( Pisum sativum L.) worldwide. No efficient chemicals are available to control the pathogen. To facilitate breeding for Aphanomyces root rot resistance and to better understand the inheritance of partial resistance, our goal was to identify QTLs associated with field partial resistance. A population of 127 RILs from the cross Puget (susceptible) x 90-2079 (partially resistant) was used. The lines were assessed for resistance to A. euteiches under field conditions at two locations in the United States (Pullman, Wash. and LeSueur, Minn.) in 1996 and 1998 for three criteria based on symptom intensity and disease effects on the whole plant. The RILs were genotyped using automated AFLPs, RAPDs, SSRs, ISSRs, STSs, isozymes and morphological markers. The resulting genetic map consisted of 324 linked markers distributed over 13 linkage groups covering 1,094 cM (Kosambi). Twenty seven markers were anchored to other published pea genetic maps. A total of seven genomic regions were associated with Aphanomyces root rot resistance. The first one, located on LG IVb and named Aph1, was considered as "major" since it was highly consistent over the years, locations and resistance criteria studied, and it explained up to 47% of the variation in the 1998 Minnesota trial. Two other year-specific QTLs, namely Aph2 and Aph3, were revealed from different scoring criteria on LG V and Ia, respectively. Aph2 and Aph3 mapped near the r (wrinkled/round seeds) and af (normal/afila leaves) genes, and accounted for up to 32% and 11% of the variation, respectively. Four other "minor" QTLs, identified on LG Ib, VII and B, were specific to one environment and one resistance criterion. The resistance alleles of Aph3 and the two "minor" QTLs on LG Ib were derived from the susceptible parent. Flanking markers for the major Aphanomyces resistance QTL, Aph1, have been identified for use in marker-assisted selection to improve breeding efficiency.

show abstract

Registration of 90‐2079‐2131, and 90‐2322 PEA Germplasms

Cited by 44 publications

References 0 publications

Biological control of Aphanomyces euteiches root-rot of pea with spore-forming bacteria

Biological control of Aphanomyces euteiches root-rot of pea with spore-forming bacteria

Screening techniques and sources of resistance to root rots and wilts in cool season food legumes

Quantitative trait loci for partial resistance to Aphanomyces root rot in pea

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About