ARTICLES

Comparison of Pod and Seed Screening Methods on Aspergillus spp. Infection of Peanut Genotypes¹

Author: Aubrey C. Mixon

  • Comparison of Pod and Seed Screening Methods on Aspergillus spp. Infection of Peanut Genotypes¹

    ARTICLES

    Comparison of Pod and Seed Screening Methods on Aspergillus spp. Infection of Peanut Genotypes¹

    Author:

Abstract

Six peanut genotypes grown at three locations (sources) were tested in laboratory studies for the influence of pod and seed inoculation methods on seed colonization by Aspergillus parasiticus Speare and/or incidental prior contamination (uninoculated method) in the field or storage by A. flavus Link ex Fr. or A. parasiticus. The genotypes has been identified as having varying levels of resistance to seed colonization by Aspergillus spp. in laboratory screening. There was no difference between the pod and seed inoculation on the mean percentage of seed colonization, but pod inoculation resulted in a noticeable reduction in seed colonization of the more susceptible genotypes when compared to inoculated seed (genotype x method interaction). Uninoculated seed incubated similarly to the inoculated samples exhibited considerably less colonization. For all three methods, seed colonization was consistently less for the resistant genotypes than for the Florunner variety or the highly susceptible check P. I. 343419. A source genotype interaction resulted from the difference in the magnitude of percent colonization but the resistant genotypes were colonized less frequently than susceptible genotypes. The seed screening method currently in use (seed inoculation) was equally or more effective than the pod inoculation or uninoculated seed method in identifying genotypes resistant to A. parasiticus.

Available as PDF only - Use Download Feature

Keywords: A. flavus, Peanut Seed Contamination, mycotoxin, Fungal Resistance

How to Cite:

Mixon, A., (1980) “Comparison of Pod and Seed Screening Methods on Aspergillus spp. Infection of Peanut Genotypes¹”, Peanut Science 7(1), p.1-3. doi: https://doi.org/10.3146/i0095-3679-7-1-1

12 Views

0 Downloads

Published on
01 Jan 1980
Peer Reviewed

Author Notes

1Contribution from Agricultural Research, Science and Education Administration, USDA, in cooperation with the University of Georgia College of Agriculture Experiment Station, Tifton, GA 31794.