Advertisement
Identification of pearl millet blast resistant source against different pathotypes
Upcoming SlideShare
3 mab apple kellerhals markus3 mab apple kellerhals markus
Loading in ... 3
1 of 1
Advertisement

More Related Content

Slideshows for you(20)

Advertisement

More from ICRISAT(20)

Advertisement

Identification of pearl millet blast resistant source against different pathotypes

  1. About ICRISAT: www.icrisat.org ICRISAT’s scientific information: http://EXPLOREit.icrisat.org Nov 2019 Identification of pearl millet blast resistant source against different pathotypes Rajan Sharma, N Naresh and SK Gupta International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru-502 324, Telangana, India Email: R.Sharma@CGIAR.org Figure 1. (a) typical symptoms of Pearl millet blast, (b) Greenhouse screening for blast resistance. Introduction Pearl millet leaf blast caused by Pyricularia grisea (teleomorph: Magnaporthe grisea), is one of the most important diseases of pearl millet in India. Host plant resistance is the economical and viable disease management strategy to control pearl millet blast; however, resistance in the commercial hybrids being grown in India is not available as no efforts were made in the past to breed for blast resistance. Therefore, efforts are being made to identify resistance sources to different pathotypes of M. grisea (Figure 1). Objective ▪▪ The objective of this study was to identify resistance in the elite hybrid parental lines of pearl millet to diverse pathotypes of M. grisea. Materials and Methods ▪▪ Two hundred lines of designated B and R-lines (each) were screened under greenhouse conditions against six diverse pathotype-isolates of M. grisea (Pg 45, Pg 118, Pg 138, Pg 186, Pg 204 and Pg 232) ▪▪ Inoculum of each isolate was multiplied on oatmeal agar plates by incubating the inoculated plates at 25°C with 12 h of darkness for 7 to 10 days (Figure 2). ▪▪ Twelve-days old seedlings were inoculated with aqueous conidial suspension of M. grisea (spore concentration was adjusted to 1× 105 spores/ml). ▪▪ The experiment was conducted in a completely randomized design (CRD) with three replicates; 1pot/replicate with 12 seedlings. ▪▪ Blast severity was recorded 7 days after inoculation using a 1-9 progressive scale. a b Results ▪▪ Of the 200 designated B-lines, 34 lines were found to be resistant to at least one pathotype. Though none of the lines was resistant to all six pathotypes, ICMB 97222 was found resistant to five pathotypes. ▪▪ While three lines [ICMB 94333, ICMB 10999 and advanced B -line ((B x B) F2 S1-109-2-3-3-1-1- 4)] were resistant to any four pathotypes. Eleven lines were resistant to three pathotypes and six were resistant to any two pathotypes (Table 1). ▪▪ Maximum 20 lines were resistant to Pg 45 followed by 17 to Pg 186 and 15 to Pg 118 and 12 to Pg 232 (Figure 3). 20 15 0 17 11 12 26 10 61 12 42 39 102 104 124 108 105 113 52 71 15 63 42 36 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Pg 45 Pg 118 Pg 138 Pg 186 Pg 204 Pg 232 No.ofB-lines Pathotypes Resistant Moderately Resistant Susceptible Highly Susceptible Figure 3. Reaction of B-lines against six pathotypes of Magnaporthe grisea. Figure 2. (a) Pure culture of Magnaporthe grisea , (b) Conidia of M. grisea. Table 1. Number of resistant B-lines and R-lines against six pathotypes of Magnaporthe grisea Resistant to No. of pathotypes No. of resistant lines found B -lines R-lines 6 0 2 5 1 10 4 3 11 3 11 10 2 6 14 1 13 20 0 166 133 39 33 4 31 44 33 47 37 82 33 59 60 103 109 106 114 89 96 11 21 8 22 8 11 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Pg 45 Pg 118 Pg 138 Pg 186 Pg 204 Pg 232 No.ofR-lines Pathotypes Resistant Moderately Resistant Susceptible Highly Susceptible Figure 4. Reaction of R-lines against six pathotypes of Magnaporthe grisea. Figure 5. Disease reaction of breeding lines. Conclusion ▪▪ The designated A/B-lines and R-lines having resistance to multiple pathotypes can be used to develop pearl millet hybrids with durable blast resistance. ▪▪ Among designated R-lines, ICMR 08111 and ICMR 10888 exhibited resistance to all the six pathotypes. ▪▪ Whereas, ten lines were resistant to any five pathotypes and 11 lines were resistant to any four pathotypes and ten lines were resistant to any three pathotype and fourteen lines were resistant to any two pathotype. ▪▪ Maximum 44 lines were resistant to Pg 204 followed by 39 to Pg 45 and 33 each to Pg 118 and Pg 232 and 31 to Pg 186 (Figure 4 and 5). a b ICMR 08111 ICMB 89111 ICMB 95444
Advertisement