Evaluation of Resistance to Scab in Pear Germplasms

2012 13 4 571-576 Journal of Plant Genetic Resources / 125100 197 Evaluation of Resistance to Scab in Pear Germplasms DONG Xing-guangTIAN Lu-mingCAO Yu-fen Research Institute of PomologyChinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences / Key Laboratory of Fruit Germplasm Resources UtilizationMinistry of AgricultureXingcheng Liaoning 125100 Abstract The to pear scab of 197 pear cultivars in national pear germplasm repository was evaluated by artificial inoculation of Venturia nashicola. The results showed that the morbidity of different pear varieties varied widely. Chinese white pear cultivars Pyrus bretschneideri Rehd. and sand pear cultivars P. pyrifolia Burm. f. Nakai were the most susceptible to scab. Ussurian cultivars P. ussuriensis Maxim. and Pyrus hybrid cultivars were the second most susceptible to scab. Xinjiang pear cultivars P. sinkiangensis Yü were resistant to scab. European pears cultivars P. communis L. were the most resistant to scab. The distribution of disease index in pear cultivars was analyzed. HuangjituiShuailiSuanli Jinxiang and a number of resistant resources were identified and the disease susceptibility results between natural occurrence and artificial inoculation were compared. Key words Pear Germplasm Scab 2-3 4 5-8 9-14 197 1 1. 1 2009-2010 197 1 80 61 14 2011-07-22 2012-01-16 ncytx-29-2 NB2011-2130135-35 E-mail dongxingguangde@ 126. com E-mail yufencaas@ 263. com

572 13 17 11 14 SI = Σ /9 30 100 5 HR SI 2 10 1 < 10. 0 R 10 SI < 25. 0 MR 25. 0 SI < 40. 0 S 40 SI < 65. 0 1. 2 1. 2. 1 1 2. 1 10 5 /ml 2009 2010 5 80 197 1 18 S 16 HS 42. 5% 2 ~ 3d 45d 39. 4% 61 18 S 1 HS 15 2009 2010 7 3 S 1 HS 197 28. 57% 32. 0% 17 4 S 1 1. 2. 2 9 0 1 11 2 26% ~ 40% 7 14 9 41% ~ 65% 9 9. 75% 65% HS SI 65. 0 2 31. 15% 28. 2% 14 HS 29. 41% 26. 2% 10% 3 11% ~ 25% 5 8. 85% 1 Table 1 index of scab in pear cultivar accessions 1 % % % % B 1. 1 10. 1 R S 10. 1 42. 1 S B 5. 2 42. 5 M S 2. 1 10. 3 R B 0. 2 14. 5 R S 0. 21 5. 2 HR B 57. 4 75. 2 HS S 0. 31 31. 2 M B 23. 1 51. 2 S S 13. 6 42. 5 S B 15. 6 31. 4 M S 3. 4 13. 4 R B 15. 6 57. 3 S S 4. 6 25. 3 M B 66. 3 76. 8 HS S 2. 1 13. 5 R B 22. 1 45. 2 S S 3. 5 15. 36 R B 75. 2 88. 6 HS S 2. 2 17. 8 R B 11. 3 63. 2 S S 0. 5 18. 5 R B 0. 4 11. 2 R S 22. 1 39. 8 M B 0. 2 0. 6 HR S 0. 9 8. 9 HR

4 573 % % % % 3 B 81. 2 89. 9 HS S 0. 2 3. 5 HR B 34. 5 66. 1 HS S 45. 1 60. 2 S B 24. 5 42. 1 S S 45. 3 60. 2 S B 0. 6 19. 7 R S 30. 1 50. 2 S B 21. 2 40. 1 S S 0. 1 4. 2 HR B 45. 1 65. 2 HS S 0. 3 10. 1 R B 0. 5 17. 3 R 3 S 12. 5 35. 6 M 4 B 12. 1 22. 5 R S 3. 2 13. 5 R B 12. 3 25. 1 M S 0. 3 3. 5 HR B 43. 5 67. 3 HS S 0. 4 12. 5 R B 35. 1 46. 4 S S 82. 1 92. 2 HS B 2. 0 13. 2 R S 26. 7 40. 2 S 1 B 3. 5 20. 1 R S 0. 2 3. 2 HR B 5. 6 13. 1 R S 0. 3 38. 2 M B 3. 4 33. 2 M S 0. 2 10. 2 R B 55. 3 76. 5 HS S 5. 6 60. 4 S B 5. 6 12. 3 R S 8. 9 25. 6 M B 12. 3 23. 5 R S 0. 3 4. 2 HR B 6. 3 28. 6 M S 3. 1 16. 2 R B 10. 2 31. 2 M S 4. 5 26. 4 M B 4. 5 15. 6 R S 1. 1 12. 1 R B 88. 9 96. 8 HS 9 S 32. 2 46. 2 S B 8. 9 26. 8 M S 12. 5 28. 2 M B 0. 1 6. 5 HR S 1. 5 10. 2 R B 2. 1 12. 1 R S 5. 6 20. 4 R B 23. 1 46. 8 S S 5. 6 17. 4 R B 6. 9 25. 1 M S 6. 7 26. 4 M B 5. 6 28. 5 M S 1. 3 25 M B 8. 2 26. 3 M S 12. 2 20. 5 R B 30. 1 50. 1 S U 5 26 M B 21. 4 45. 2 S U 3 63% S 1 B 5. 3 26. 5 M U 2 30. 1 M B 23. 5 51. 2 S U 12. 3 25. 3 M B 0. 2 26. 4 M U 4. 2 31. 2 M B 15. 3 38. 6 M U 0. 42 4. 8 HR B 52. 2 68. 3 HS U 0. 89 39. 58 M B 85. 3 90. 2 HS U 21. 2 33. 6 M B 45. 2 64. 3 S U 84. 5 87. 5 HS B 5. 3 17. 2 R U 12. 1 31. 2 M B 0. 2 13. 1 R U 5. 6 42. 1 S B 20. 3 40. 2 S U 18. 6 35. 6 M B 24. 5 65. 7 HS U 22. 1 46. 2 S B 5. 8 20. 1 R U 5. 4 14. 1 R B 5. 7 26. 1 M 2 Z 26 41 S

574 13 % % % % B 32. 4 52. 3 S Z 0. 3 3. 5 HR B 0. 3 14. 1 R Z 0. 74 16. 2 R B 30. 2 65. 3 S Z 65. 2 89. 2 HS B 22. 0 68. 2 S Z 0. 12 2. 1 HR B 24. 1 42. 1 S Z 0. 22 3. 1 HR B 10. 2 26. 3 M Z 0. 3 1. 2 HR B 18. 3 30. 4 M Z 45. 3 63. 2 S B 22. 3 38. 6 M Z 16. 2 29. 3 M B 10. 2 16. 2 R Z 11. 5 29. 6 M B 22. 1 55. 2 S Z 32. 1 52. 3 S B 22. 5 35. 2 M Z 40. 3 58. 3 S B 55. 2 68. 2 HS 2 Z 1. 2 10. 2 HR B 6. 2 14. 2 R Z 0. 1 0. 3 HR B 5. 1 13. 2 R Z 1. 5 10. 2 R B 55. 2 75. 6 HS Z 0. 3 25. 2 M B 86. 2 90. 2 HS Z 0. 1 10. 2 R B 12. 3 24. 3 R X 26 38 M B 12. 4 26. 4 M X 0. 4 1 HR B 32. 1 68. 2 HS X 0. 4 1 HR B 5. 6 17. 1 R X 0. 4 1 HR B 5. 2 26. 3 M X 0. 56 33. 45 M B 16. 5 34. 1 M X 0. 6 1. 2 HR B 0. 11 3. 1 HR X 0. 33 2. 1 HR S 7. 2 38. 9 M X 0. 68 6. 9 HR S 12. 2 62. 2 S X 0. 3 1. 2 HR S 0. 42 59. 3 S X 0. 32 5. 3 HR S 0. 33 4. 5 HR X 0. 1 6. 2 HR S 1. 2 52. 3 S C 6. 5 36. 2 M S 2. 3 35. 6 M C 0. 26 23. 4 R S 25. 1 45. 2 S C 11. 2 22. 1 R S 21. 5 45. 3 S C 0 0 HR S 0. 68 15. 3 R C 0 0 HR S 32. 5 61. 5 S C 0 32. 5 M S 21. 2 40. 1 S C 0 0 HR S 2. 3 12. 3 R C 0 0 HR S 17. 4 34. 5 M C 0 0 HR 1 S 41. 2 58. 6 S C 0 0 HR S 21. 4 40. 5 S C 0 0 HR S 19. 8 40. 3 S C 0 0 HR S 0. 13 5. 2 HR Cure C 11. 2 22. 3 R S 0. 21 3. 2 HR C 0 0 HR S 0. 33 6. 5 HR B S U Z X C B Chinese white pear cultivars S Sand pear cultivars U Ussurian cultivars Z Pyrus hybrid cultivars X Xinjiang pear cultivars C common pear cultivars 2. 2 10. 0% ~ 30. 0% 1 42. 5% 60. 0% ~ 70. 0% 0. 3% ~ 96. 8% 13. 75% 70. 0% ~ 100. 0%

4 575 11. 25% 100. 0% 5. 9% 3. 2% ~ 92. 5% 0 ~ 20. 0% 0 ~ 10. 0% 44. 27% 50. 0% ~ 100. 0% 16. 39% 30. 0% ~ 40. 0% 43. 0% 50. 0% ~ 100. 0% 7. 0% 0 ~ 30. 0% 70. 6% 40. 0% ~ 70. 0% 23. 5% 70. 0% ~ 30. 0% ~ 40. 0% 81. 8% 18. 2% 0 9 64. 3% 20. 0% ~ 40. 0% 35. 7% 197 77. 90% Fig. 1 1 Frequency distribution of disease index in 6 pear species 2. 3 2 Table 2 The breeding parents of Pyrus hybrid varieties Variety Breeding parents 56-11-155 59-89-1 56-11-155 2. 4 16. 04 % 56-11-155 7 6 100% 85. 71% R = 0. 8741

576 13 3 64 342 16 4 Vf Vr Vb Vbj Vm Va 17-20 Terakami 21 and fruit characters J 6 kinchaku Vnk 7 Vnk Vf 1 Gessler 22 9 Siebs E. Investigations on scab in pears J. Phytopathal195523 37-48 10 I. J 19919 2 285-290 11Park P Ishii HAdachi Y. Infection behavior of Venturia nashi- the cause of scab on Asian pears J. Phytopathol2000 90 11 1209-1216. J. 200320 3 187-188 Sugiyama T Faize Let al. Polygalacturonase-inhibiting protein PGIP from Japanese pear possible involvement in against scab J. Physiol Mol Plant Pathol200363 319-327 14Faize MFaize LKoike N. Acibenzolar-S-methyl - induced to Japanese pear scab is associated with potentiation of multiple defense responses J. Phytopathology200494 6 Venturia nashicola 23 cola 6 12 13Faize M 4 24 12 Venturia nashicola 5 25 604-612 8 15 5 ~ 6 M. 16 Venturia pirina Chevalier 26 Malus floribunda Sieb J Venturia pirina 341-347 197095 735-736 20Lespinasse Y. Three genes 22Gessler C. Results of plant breeding during the last decade in re-. Plant Breeding Venturia nashicola J. Theor Appl Genet2006113 743-752 Venturia pirina Cure lation to against pathogens J 1994118 2 183-186 23. J 1 Tanaka SYamamoto S. Studies on pear scab II taxonomy of the causal fungus of Japanese pear scab J. Ann Phytopathol Soc Jpn196429 128-136 2 Ishii HYanase H. Venturia nashicolathe scab fungus of Japanese and Chinese pears a species distinct from V. pirina J. Mycol Res2000104 6 755-759 3 Adachi Y Ishii HJeki H. Ribosomal DNA ITS analysis of scab fungus of pear species J. Ann Phytopathol Soc Jpn1998. J. 19908 2 141-146 5 Crane M BLewis D. Genetical studies in pears V. vegetative. Heredity19493 85-97. J. 19791 1 25-28. J. 199311 2 266-272 8 Abe KKotobuki KSaito Tet al. Inheritance of to pear scab from European pears to Asian pears J. J Jpn Soc Hort Sci200069 1 1-8 3 an indication of the chemical basis for to leaf scab in German.. OD.. 2006. AFLP J. 201040 5 552-555 17Hough I FShay J RDayton D F. Apple scab from. Proc Am Soc Hort Sci195362 18Dayton D FWilliams E B. Independent genes in Malus for to Venturia inaequalis J. Proc Am Soc Hort Sci 196892 89-94 19Dayton D FWilliams E B. Additional allelic genes in Malus for scab of two reaction types J. J Am Soc Hort Sci mechanisms. present work and prospects J. IOBC-WPRS Bull198912 100-115 21Terakami SShoda MAdachi Yet al. Genetic mapping of the pear scab gene Vnk of Japanese pear cultivar Kinchaku Venturia nashicola. 19894 3 231-236 24. Venturia nashicola J. 199311 3 282-286 25. J. 199815 3 223-227 26Chevalier MBernard CTellier Met al. Variability in the reaction of several pear Pyrus communis cultivars to different inoculation of Venturia pirina J. Acta Hort2004663 177-181