Improvement of lesion phenotyping in cercospora beticolasugar beet interaction by hyperspectral imaging

Phytopathology

Volumn 106, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 177-184

  Leucker, Marlene ^a   Mahlein, Anne Katrin ^a   Steiner, Ulrike ^a   Oerke, Erich Christian ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BONN   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ASCOMYCETES; BEET; FUNGUS SPORE; GENETICS; GENOTYPE; MICROBIOLOGY; PATHOGENICITY; PHENOTYPE; PHYSIOLOGY; PLANT DISEASE; PLANT LEAF;

ASCOMYCOTA; BETA VULGARIS; GENOTYPE; PHENOTYPE; PLANT DISEASES; PLANT LEAVES; SPORES, FUNGAL;

EID: 84958965568     PISSN: 0031949X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1094/PHYTO-04-15-0100-R     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Bleiholder, H., and Weltzien, H. C. 1972. Beitraege zur Epidemiologie von Cercospora beticola Sacc. an Zuckerruebe. J. Phytopathol. 73:93-114.
2. Bock, C. H., Poole, U. H., Parker, P. E., and Uottwald, T. R. 2010. Plant disease severity estimated visually, by digital photography and image analysis, and by hyperspectral imaging. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 29:59-107.
3. Daub, M. E., and Ebrenshaft, M. 20 00. The photoactivated Cercospora toxin cercosporin: Contributions to plant disease and fundamental biology. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 38:461-490.
4. Duffus, J. E., and Ruppel, E. U. 1993. Diseases. Page s 346-427 in: The Sugarbeet Crop. D. A. Cooke and R. K. Scott, eds. Chapman and Hall, London.
5. Feindt, E, Mendgen, K., and Heitefuss, R. 1980. Feinstruktur unterschiedlicher Zellwandreaktionen in Blattparenchym anf aelliger und resistenter Rueben (Beta vulgaris L.) nach Infektion durch Cercospora heticola Sacc. Phytopathol. Z. 101:248-264.
6. Feindt, F, Mendgen, K, and Heitefuss, R 1988 Der Finfluss der Spaltoeff. nungsweite und des Blattalters auf den Infektionserfolg von Cercospora heticola bei Zuckerrueben (Beta vulgaris L.) unterschiedlicher Anfaelligkeit. Phytopathol. Z. 101:281-297.
7. Fetch, T. U., and Steflenson, B. J. 1999. Rating sc ales for assessing infection responses of barley infected with Cochlioholus sativus. Plant Dis. 83:213-217.
8. Foster, D. J., Beute, M. K., and Wynne, J. C. 1980. Spore production and latent period as mechanisms of resistance to Cercospora arachidicola in four peanut genotypes. Peanut Sci. 7:88-90.
9. Uottschalk, T. E., Mikkelsen, J. D., Nielsen, J. E., Nielsen, K. K., and Brunstedt, J. 1998. Inimunolocalization and characterization of a 13-1,3-glucanase from sugar beet, deduction of its primary structure and nucleotide sequence by cDNA and genomic cloning. Plant Sci. 132:153-167.
10. Uoudet, C., Milat, M. L., Sentenac, H., and Thibaud, J. B. 2000. Beticolins, nonpeptidic, polycycic molecules produced by the phytopathogenic fungus Cercospora beticola, as a new family of ion channel-forming toxins. Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact. 13:203-209.
11. Holtschulte, B. 2000. Cercospora beticola worldwide distribution and incidence. Pages 5-16 in: Cercospora heticola Sacc. Biology, Agronomic Influence and Control Measures in Sugar Beet 2000, Vol. 2. Advances in Sugar Beet Research. M. J. C. Asher, B. Holtschulte, M. R. Molard, E Rosso, U. Steinrucken, and R. Beckers, eds. International Institute for Beet Research, Brussels, Belgium.
12. Jacquemoud, S., and Ustin, S. L. 2001. Leaf optical p roperties: A state of the art. Pages 223-332 in: 8th International Symposium of Physical Measurements & Signatures in Remote Sensing, CNES, Aussois, France.
13. Jensen J. R. 2007 Remote Sensing of the Environment: An Earth Resource Perspective. 2nd ed. K. C. Clarke, ed. Prentice Hall, New York.
14. Karadimos, D. A., Karaoglanidis, U. S., and Tzavella-Klonari, K. 2005. Biological activity and physical modes of action of the Qo inhibitor fungicides trifloxystrobin and pyraclostrobin against Cercospora heticola. Crop Prot. 24:23-29.
15. Karaoglanidis, U. S., loannidis, P. M., and Thanassoulopoulos, C. C. 2000. Reduced sensitivity of Cercospora beticola isolates to sterol demethylation inhibiting fungicides. Plant Pathol. 49:567-572.
16. Kirk, W. W., Hanson, L. E., Franc, U. D., Stump, W. L., Uachango, E., Clark, U., and Stewart, J. 2012. First report of strobilurin resistance in Cercospora beticola in sugar beet (Beta vulgaris) in Michigan and Nebraska, USA. N ew Dis. Rep. 26:3.
17. Kolmer, J. A. 1996. Genetics of resistance to wheat leaf rust. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 34:435-455.
18. Kuska. M.. Wahabzada. M.. Leucker. M.. Dehne. H.-W.. Kersting. K.. Oerke. E.-C., Steiner, U., and Mahlein, A.-K. 2015. Hyperspectral phenotyping on the microscopic scale: Towards automated characterization of plant-pathogen interactions. Plant Methods 11:28.
19. Mahlein, A.-K., Stei ner, U., Dehne, H.-W., and Oerke, E.-C. 2010. Spectral signatures of sugar beet leaves for the detection and differentiation of diseases. Precis. Agric. 11:413-43 1.
20. Mahlein, A.-K., Steiner, U., Hillnhuetter, C., Dehne, H.-W., and Oerke, E.-C. 2012. Hyperspectral imaging for small-scale analysis of symptoms caused by different sugar beet diseases. Plant Methods 8:3.
21. Malthus, T. J., and Madeira, A. C. 1993. High resolution spectroradiometry: Spectral reflectance of field bean leaves infected by Botrytisftthae. Remote Sens. Environ. 45:107-116.
22. Meier, U. 2001. Entwicklungsstadien mono-und dikotyler Pflanzen. Biol. Bundesanstalt fuer Land-und Forstwirtschaft. 2:1-165.
23. Montes, J. M., Melchinger, A. E., and Reif, J. C. 2007. Novel throughput phenotyping platforms in plant genetic studies. Trends Plant Sci. 12:433-436.
24. Mutka, A. M., and Bart, R. S. 2015. Image-based phenotyping of plant disease symptoms. Front. Plant Sci. 5:734.
25. Nielsen, K. K., Nielsen, J. E., Madrid, S. M., and Mikkelsen, J. D. 1997. Characterization of a new antifungal chitin-binding peptide from sugar beet leaves. Plant Physiol. 113:83-9 1.
26. Niks, R. E., and Kuiper, H. J. 1983. Histology of the relation between minor and major genes for resistance of barley to leaf rust. Phytopathology 73:55-59.
27. Parlevliet, J. E. 1976. The genetics of seedling resistance to leaf rust, Puccinia hordei Otth. in some spring barley cultivars. Euphytica 25:249-254.
28. Parlevliet, J. E. 1979. Components of resistance that reduce the rate of epidemic development. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 17:203-222.
29. Picker, M. D., Beute, M. K., and Campbell, C. L. 1985. Components of resistance in peanut to Cercospora arachidicola. Plant Dis. 69:1059-1064.
30. Rossi, V., Battilani, P., Chiusa, U., Giosué, S., Languasco, L., and Racca, P. 1 999. Components of rate-reducing resistance to Cercospora leaf spot in sugar beet: Incubation length, infection efficiency, lesion size. J. Plant Pathol. 81:25-35.
31. Rossi, V., Battilani, F, Chiusa, U., Giosué, S., Languasco, L., and Racca, P. 2000. Components of rate-reducing resistance to Cercospora leaf spot in sugar beet: Conidiation length, spore yield. J. Plant Pathol. 82: 125-13 1.
32. Ruppel, E. U.1972. Variation among isolates of Cercospora beticola from sugar beet. Phytopathology 62:134-136.
33. Savitzky, A., and Golay, M. J. E. 1964. Smoothing and differentiation of data by simplified least squares procedures. Anal. Chem. 36:1627-1629.
34. Shane, W. W., and Teng, P. 5. 1992. Impact of Cercospora leaf spot on root weight, sugar yield, and purity of Beta vulgaris. Plant Dis. 76:812-820.
35. Smith U. A.,Campbell, LU. 1996. Association between resistance to Cercospora and yield in commercial sugarbeet hybrids. Plant Breed. 115 28 32.
36. Staerkel, C., Boenisch, M. J., Kroeger, C., Bormann, J., Schaefer, W., and Stahl, D. 2013. CbCTB2, an 0-methyltransferase is essential for biosynthesis of the phytotoxin cercosporin and infection of sugar beet by Cercospora heticola. BMC Plant Biol. 13:50.
37. Steinkamp, M. P., Martin, S. S., Hoefert, L. L., and Ruppel, E. U. 1979. Ultrastructure of lesions produced by Cercospora heficola in leaves of Beta vulgaris. Physiol. Plant Pathol. 15:13-26.
38. Trkulja, N., Ivanovié, Z., PfafDolovac, E., Dolovac, N., Mitrovié, M., Toevs1ci, I., and Jovié, J. 2012. Characterisation of benzimidazole resistance of Cercospora beticola in Serbia using PCR-based detection of resistance-Associated mutation s of the li-tubulin gene. Eur. J. Plant Pathol. 135:889-902.
39. Weiland, J., and Koch, U. 2004. Sugarbeet leaf spot disease (Cercospora heticola Sacc.). Mol. Plant Pathol. 5:157-166.
40. We ltmeier, E, Maser, A., Menze, A., Hennig, S., Schad, M., Breuer, E, Schulz, B., Holtschulte, B., Nehls, R., and Stahl, D. J. 2011. Transcript profiles in sugar beet genotypes uncover timing and strength of defense r eactions to Cercospora beticola infection. Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact. 24: 758-772.
41. Wolt P., and Verreet, J. 2002. The 1PM sugar beet model. Plant Dis. 86:336-344.
42. Yuhas, R., Goetz, E H., and B oardman, J. W. 1992. Discrimination among semi-Arid landscape endmembers using the Spectral Angle Mapper (SAM) algorithm. Summaries of the Third Annual JPL Airborne Geoscience Workshop. Jet Propulsion Laboratory Publication 92:147-149.