Skip to main content

sugar beet germplasm evaluated for resistance to rhizomania and fungal growth in storage in Idaho, 2011.

Eujayl, Imad A. and Strausbaugh, C.A. (2012) sugar beet germplasm evaluated for resistance to rhizomania and fungal growth in storage in Idaho, 2011. Plant Disease Management Reports. 6:p. FC087.

[img] PDF

Download (43kB)
[img] PDF

Download (43kB)


Resistance to rhizomania is a basic requirement for cultivars’ approval for commercialization. The objectives of this research were to identify germplasm accessions that carry resistance genes to rhizomania and storage root rots. Twenty-one sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) germplasm from the USDA-ARS Kimberly sugar beet program and four check cultivars were screened for resistance to Beet necrotic yellow vein virus (BNYVV) during the 2011 growing season and during the 2011/2012 storage period for fungal growth in an indoor storage. The rhizomania evaluation was conducted at the rhizomania nursery in the USDA-ARS North Farm in Kimberly, ID. The crop was managed according to standard cultural practices and pest control. The plots were rated twice (4 weeks apart) for foliar symptom for percentage of plants with yellow, stunted, and upright leaves. At maturity the plants were mechanically topped and hand harvested with the aid of a single-row lifter at maturity. Ten roots per plot were rated for symptom development using a scale of 0-9 (0 = healthy and 9 = dead). Rhizomania symptom development was uniform and other disease problems were not evident in the nursery. The susceptible check was rated at 98 to 99% foliar symptoms and a high root rating. The three resistant checks entries had limited to no foliar symptoms (0 to 5%) and a low root rating (DSI=14 to 20). To evaluate storability, eight roots per plot were placed in a mesh onion bag and placed in an indoor commercial storage facility. After 18 weeks of storage, the roots were evaluated for the percentage of root surface area covered by fungal growth. The resistant checks had a high percentage of fungal growth in storage (67 to 91%) indicating resistance to BNYVV does not preclude roots from storage rot. The BNYVV susceptible check also had considerable fungal growth in storage as expected. Based on previous research, roots show rots and surface fungal growth when are compromised by BNYVV or lack storability. A single entry (K944-62) had BNYVV resistance similar to the resistant checks and additionally had low rot in storage (18%). Other two entries (K944-191 and K39-16) also showed good level of resistance to both BNYVV and storage rots (16 and 17%). This germplasm will be used in the breeding program to identify additional sources of resistance to both BNYVV and storage fungal rot.

Item Type: Article
NWISRL Publication Number: 1430
Subjects: Irrigated crops > Sugarbeet > Resistance
Irrigated crops > Sugarbeet > Rhizomania
Irrigated crops > Sugarbeet
Irrigated crops > Sugarbeet > Root rots > Fungi
Depositing User: Users 6 not found.
Date Deposited: 20 Aug 2012 17:38
Last Modified: 04 Mar 2014 15:09
Item ID: 1465