Registration of F1024 Sugarbeet Germplasm with Resistance to Sugarbeet Root Maggot

Abstract

sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris L.) germplasm with resistance to sugarbeet root maggot (Tetanops myopaefor mis von Röder), was released by the USDA-ARS and the North Dakota Agricultural Experiment Station, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND on 15 Dec. 2009. F1024 will expedite the incorporation of resistance to sugarbeet root maggot into elite populations and the subsequent production of resistant hybrids that are adapted to areas where the root maggot is a relentless pest. One advantage of F1024 over previously released root maggot-resistant germplasm is its improved resistance to

Screening for Resistance Against the Sugarbeet Root Maggot, Tetanops myopaeformis (Diptera: Ulidiidae), Using a Greenhouse Bioassay

“…Two genotypes were used in these experiments: F1010, which is susceptible to T. myopaeformis feeding damage ( Campbell 1990 ), and F1024, a hybrid cross of F1016 and 19961009H2, which are, respectively, resistant to T. myopaeformis ( Campbell et al 2000 ) and to multiple pathogens ( Panella et al 2008 ). F1010 and F1024 seeds used in these experiments were supplied by Dr. Larry Campbell of the United States Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service.…”

“…Cultural and biological control practices have been pursued for management of T. myopaeformis . However, these control methods are not as effective as chemical control in areas of high pest pressure ( Campbell et al 2000 , Majumdar et al 2008 , Dunkel et al 2010 , Wenninger et al 2018 ); thus, insecticides remain the cornerstone for management of this pest. The two groups of insecticides most commonly used against T. myopaeformis , carbamates and organophosphates, are being phased out of use ( Anonymous 2010 ), and application of these pesticides is opposed by advocates for farm workers, child-safety, and the environment ( Donley 2016 ).…”

“…Following the first report on genetic factors for resistance to T. myopaeformis feeding in sugar beet ( Theurer et al 1982 ), work on the development of resistant sugar beet varieties has increased. Several varieties have been registered that exhibit lower T. myopaeformis feeding damage relative to susceptible varieties ( Campbell et al 2000 , 2011 ; Campbell 2015 ). However, varieties with resistance to the T. myopaeformis are not widely used partly because yield potential and pathogen resistance may be lower than in other commercial varieties.…”

Transcriptome analysis of sugar beet root maggot (Tetanops myopaeformis) genes modulated by the Beta vulgaris host

“…Sugar beet breeding lines F1016 with moderate resistance to SBRM and a susceptible line, F1010, were used in this study (Campbell, 1990;Campbell et al, 2000). Plants were grown in the growth chamber at 25°C during the day and 18-20°C at night with a 16-h photoperiod.…”

“…To date, only 3 moderately Correspondence: Ann C. Smigocki, USDA-ARS, Molecular Plant Pathology Laboratory, 10300 Baltimore Ave., Beltsville, MD 20705, USA. Tel: +1 301 504 7118; fax: +1 301 504 5449; email: ann.smigocki@ars.usda.gov resistant sugar beet lines have been released with at best 40% reduction of the SBRM damage (Campbell et al, 2000. Pesticides continue to be the primary control measure, but a critical need exists for an environmentally sound alternative that does not rely solely on pesticides.…”