ARTICLES

A Detached Shoot Technique To Evaluate the Reaction of Peanut Genotypes to Sclerotinia Minor¹

Authors: H. A. Melouk , C. N. Akem , C. Bowen

  • A Detached Shoot Technique To Evaluate the Reaction of Peanut Genotypes to Sclerotinia Minor¹

    ARTICLES

    A Detached Shoot Technique To Evaluate the Reaction of Peanut Genotypes to Sclerotinia Minor¹

    Authors: , ,

Abstract

The cut ends of 15-cm-long shoot tips from 15 peanut genotypes were immersed individually in 1 14 cm test tubes containing Hoagland's solution. Shoots were supported by foam plugs leaving about 12 cm extending above the foam plugs. All leaves were removed leaving about 1 cm of each petiole on the shoot. A 4-mm-mycelial plug of Sclerotinia minor, taken from the periphery of a 2-day old culture grown on potato dextrose agar containing 100 ugml streptomycin sulfate (SPDA), was placed between the stem and a petiole in the middle of the shoot. Tubes with shoots were then placed in a polyethylene enclosure on a greenhouse bench where the day and night temperature were 29 2C and 25 2C, respectively. Relative humidity (RH) was maintained at 95 to 100 by lining the bottom of the enclosure with wet burlap. Lesions appeared on shoot tips 3 days after inoculation, and their length was measured at various times. Genotypes with the least percent of symptomatic stems also had the lowest rates of lesion expansion. Two weeks after inoculation, tubes were drained, and shoots remained in the chamber at about 6070 RH to allow sclerotial production. Sclerotia from each shoot were removed, counted, and their viability determined by germination on SPDA at 25 2C in darkness. This method was effective in differentiating the reaction of peanut genotypes to infection by S. minor.

Full Article Available as PDF only - Use Download Feature

Keywords: Arachis hypogaea L, Groundnut, Disease resistance

How to Cite:

Melouk, H. & Akem, C. & Bowen, C., (1992) “A Detached Shoot Technique To Evaluate the Reaction of Peanut Genotypes to Sclerotinia Minor¹”, Peanut Science 19(1), p.58-62. doi: https://doi.org/10.3146/i0095-3679-19-1-16

5 Views

0 Downloads

Published on
01 Jan 1992
Peer Reviewed

Author Notes

1Cooperative investigation of U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service and Oklahoma State University. Journal Article No. 6111, Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment Station, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater. Mention of a trademark, proprietary product, or vendor does not constitute a guarantee or warranty of the product by the USDA or by Oklahoma State University, or imply their approval to the exclusion of other products or vendors that may also be suitable.