Biological Characteristics of Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae Causing Shoot Dieback Disease on Apple and Screening of Bactericides

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2020-0471

Abstract

Abstract:

A shoot dieback disease caused by Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae was found in several apple orchards in Ili, Xinjiang. In this study, the biological characteristics of the pathogen were tested and bactericides were screened to provide a scientific basis for epidemiology and control practices of this disease. The effects of culture medium, carbon source, nitrogen source, temperature, pH, NaCl concentration and ultraviolet on the growth of the pathogens were determined by growth method, and the indoor virulence and disease control effects of 13 fungicides were compared by plate inhibition method and in vitro branch inoculation method. The results show that the pathogen of apple bacterial blight is most suitable to grow on NA+5% sucrose medium, and the growth is the highest when sucrose is used as carbon source and beef paste as nitrogen source. The suitable temperature for cell growth is 25-30℃, the optimum temperature is 27℃, the suitable pH for growth is 7-9, and the optimum pH is 7.5. The bacteria grow well in the 0.5% NaCl, and are inhibited by NaCl concentration above 1%. The bacteria could be completely killed when they are treated at 49℃ for 10 min and ultraviolet irradiation for 6 min. Indoor virulence test show that 3% benziothiazolinone ME, 0.3% tetramycin AS, 3% zhongshengmycin WP, 2% Kasugamycin WP and 30% copper (ll) busic choride SC have good bacteriostatic effect, and the EC₅₀ is 6.43, 16.36, 22.57, 35.31 and 36.65 mg/L, respectively. The protective effects of the tested agents were determined by in vitro branch inoculation method, and the results show that the control effect of 3% benziothiazolinone ME is the best, up to 82.66%, followed by 2% kasugamycin AS and 20% thiodiazole copper SC, which could reach 77.14% and 73.09%, respectively.

Key words: apple, Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae, biological characteristics, toxicity bioassay, control efficacy

CLC Number:

S210

Li Yan, Li Hongtao, Ye Liangchao, Zhou Junxiang, Luo Ming. Biological Characteristics of Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae Causing Shoot Dieback Disease on Apple and Screening of Bactericides[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(4): 112-119.

Figures/Tables 8

References 25

[1]	翟衡, 赵政阳, 王志强, 等. 世界苹果产业发展趋势分析[J]. 果树学报, 2005(1):44-50.
[2]	翟衡, 史大川, 束怀瑞. 我国苹果产业发展现状与趋势[J]. 果树学报, 2007(3):355-360.
[3]	王金政, 毛志泉, 丛佩华, 等. 新中国果树科学研究70年——苹果[J]. 果树学报, 2019,36(10):1255-1263.
[4]	胡清玉, 胡同乐, 王亚南, 等. 中国苹果病害发生与分布现状调查[J]. 植物保护, 2016,42(1):175-179.
[5]	李保华, 王彩霞, 董向丽. 我国苹果主要病害研究进展与病害防治中的问题[J]. 植物保护, 2013,39(5):46-54.
[6]	潘彤彤, 薛德胜, 李保华, 等. 苹果枝枯病病原菌鉴定及生物学特性[J]. 植物病理学报, 2020,50(1):107-111.
[7]	侯艳敏. 富士苹果套袋果实黑点病病原学研究[D]. 杨凌:西北农林科技大学, 2016.
[8]	徐晓厚. 烟台地区苹果病虫害发生调查及防治技术研究[D]. 泰安:山东农业大学, 2018.
[9]	李洪涛. 新疆苹果细菌性枝枯病的病原鉴定及种质资源抗/感病性评价[D]. 乌鲁木齐:新疆农业大学, 2018.
[10]	赵荣艳. 北京地区杏树上INA细菌种类、分布规律及防霜冻药剂筛选[D]. 郑州:河南农业大学, 2005.
[11]	Mansvelt E L, Hatting M J. Bacterial blister bark and blight of fruit spurs of apple in South Africa caused by Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae[J]. Plant Dis, 1986,70(5).
[12]	邱文, 徐福寿, 谢关林, 等. 引起梨花枯和芽枯的Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae病原细菌鉴定[J]. 中国农业科学, 2008(9):2657-2662.
[13]	Opgenorth D C. Pseudomonas Canker of Kiwifruit[J]. Plant Dis, 1983,67(11):1283-1284.
[14]	徐丽, 王甲威, 陈新, 等. 甜樱桃流胶病原菌的分子鉴定和致病性检测[J]. 植物病理学报, 2015,45(4):350-355.
[15]	李顺鹏. 微生物学实验指导(第二版)[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2015: 120-122.
[16]	徐鹏川. 猕猴桃溃疡病的防治药剂筛选及注干施药技术研究[D]. 雅安:四川农业大学, 2016.
[17]	张乐, 石秀丽. 用离体巴梨枝条测定梨火疫病菌的致病性[J]. 植物检疫, 1993(2):104-105.
[18]	Paprstein F, Sedlak J, Korba J, et al. Testing of resistance to Erwinia amylovora in an in vitro culture assay[J]. Acta Hortic, 2011,896:381-384.
[19]	李洪涛, 张静文, 盛强, 等. 我国20个梨品种(种质)对国外梨火疫病菌的抗病性评价[J]. 果树学报, 2019,36(5):629-637.
[20]	冯洁. 植物病原细菌分类最新进展[J]. 中国农业科学, 2017,50(12):2305-2314. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.12.011 URL
[21]	Bull C T, De Boer S H, Denny T P, et al. Comprehensive list of names of plant pathogenic bacteria, 1980-2007[J]. J Plant Path, 2010,92:551-592.
[22]	管晶晶, 张春竹, 罗明, 等. 加工型辣椒细菌性叶斑病病原菌生物学特性及抑菌药剂筛选[J]. 新疆农业大学学报, 2014,37(2):137-143.
[23]	王爽. 丁香细菌性疫病的发病规律及综合防治[J]. 北京园林, 2012,28(4):47-49.
[24]	Gross D C, Cody Y S, Proebsting E L, et al. Distribution, population dynamics and characteristics of ice nucleation-active bacteria in deciduous fruit tree orchards[J]. Appl Environ Microb, 1984,46(6):1370-1379.
[25]	Sedlak J, Paprstein F, Korba J, et al. Development of a system for testing apple resistance to Erwinia amylovora using in vitro culture techniques[J]. Plant Prot Ence, 2015,51(1):1-5.

碳源	生长量	氮源	生长量
蔗糖	1.91±0.03a	牛肉膏	1.95±0.09a
甘露醇	1.77±0.03b	蛋白胨	1.88±0.05b
山梨醇	1.75±0.05b	?蛋白胨	1.85±0.03b
葡萄糖	1.66±0.03c	组氨酸	1.83±0.04b
果糖	1.65±0.09c	酵母膏	1.79±0.18bc
麦芽糖	1.64±0.03cd	丙氨酸	1.70±0.06c
乳糖	1.59±0.04d	精氨酸	1.58±0.11d
半乳糖	1.58±0.04d	氯化铵	1.31±0.06e
淀粉	1.49±0.03e	硫酸铵	1.18±0.03f
		甘氨酸	1.14±0.11f
		苏氨酸	1.01±0.08g

碳源	生长量	氮源	生长量
蔗糖	1.91±0.03a	牛肉膏	1.95±0.09a
甘露醇	1.77±0.03b	蛋白胨	1.88±0.05b
山梨醇	1.75±0.05b	?蛋白胨	1.85±0.03b
葡萄糖	1.66±0.03c	组氨酸	1.83±0.04b
果糖	1.65±0.09c	酵母膏	1.79±0.18bc
麦芽糖	1.64±0.03cd	丙氨酸	1.70±0.06c
乳糖	1.59±0.04d	精氨酸	1.58±0.11d
半乳糖	1.58±0.04d	氯化铵	1.31±0.06e
淀粉	1.49±0.03e	硫酸铵	1.18±0.03f
		甘氨酸	1.14±0.11f
		苏氨酸	1.01±0.08g

药剂	毒力回归方程	相关系数	EC₅₀
3%噻霉酮ME	y=17.501x+6.951	0.963	6.43
0.3%梧宁霉素AS	y=0.635x+37.366	0.708	16.36
3%中生菌素WP	y=0.781x+23.997	0.989	22.57
2%春雷霉素WP	y=0.317x+37.905	0.865	35.31
30%王铜SC	y=0.330x+35.016	0.824	36.65
8%噻霉酮·春雷DP	y=0.411x+26.958	0.845	41.10
2%春雷霉素AS	y=0.570x+14.986	0.981	46.44
20%噻菌铜SC	y=0.221x+32.266	0.738	56.01
10%丙硫唑SC	y=0.432x+16.891	0.949	57.04
72%农用链霉素SP	y=0.210x+32.256	0.801	62.07
16%苯甲中生WP	y=0.293x+20.059	0.920	70.19
70%碱式碳酸铜WG	y=0.242x+29.439	0.772	81.86
80%波尔多液WP	y=0.190x+24.349	0.925	104.09

药剂	毒力回归方程	相关系数	EC₅₀
3%噻霉酮ME	y=17.501x+6.951	0.963	6.43
0.3%梧宁霉素AS	y=0.635x+37.366	0.708	16.36
3%中生菌素WP	y=0.781x+23.997	0.989	22.57
2%春雷霉素WP	y=0.317x+37.905	0.865	35.31
30%王铜SC	y=0.330x+35.016	0.824	36.65
8%噻霉酮·春雷DP	y=0.411x+26.958	0.845	41.10
2%春雷霉素AS	y=0.570x+14.986	0.981	46.44
20%噻菌铜SC	y=0.221x+32.266	0.738	56.01
10%丙硫唑SC	y=0.432x+16.891	0.949	57.04
72%农用链霉素SP	y=0.210x+32.256	0.801	62.07
16%苯甲中生WP	y=0.293x+20.059	0.920	70.19
70%碱式碳酸铜WG	y=0.242x+29.439	0.772	81.86
80%波尔多液WP	y=0.190x+24.349	0.925	104.09

药剂	有效成分质量浓度/(mg/L)	发病率/%	病情指数	防效/%
3%噻霉酮ME	50	33.33	13.33±0.00a	82.66±2.38a
2%春雷霉素AS	150	41.67	17.50±0.83a	77.14±4.22ab
20%噻菌铜SC	400	47.22	20.56±1.92ab	73.09±5.68ab
10%丙硫唑SC	150	50.00	27.22±2.55bc	64.55±5.85bc
72%农用链霉素SP	400	72.22	32.50±2.50c	58.00±2.60cd
80%波尔多液WP	600	63.89	34.44±0.96cd	55.09±7.09cde
2%春雷霉素WP	300	41.67	41.67±7.26de	46.46±5.05def
70%碱式碳酸铜WG	500	80.56	44.89±6.19ef	42.22±4.38efg
16%苯甲中生WP	200	69.45	50.56±4.19ef	34.52±6.77fg
30%王铜SC	300	52.78	52.22±6.94f	31.29±18.44g
对照	-	100	77.78±10.18g	—