IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/caa/jnlpps/v56y2020i2id57-2018-pps.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Differences in responses to Wheat dwarf virus infection in contrasting wheat cultivars Ludwig and Svitava

Author

Listed:
  • Jan Ripl

    (Crop Research Institute, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Tomáš Dráb

    (Crop Research Institute, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Sebastien Gadiou

    (Crop Research Institute, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Jiban Kumar Kundu

Abstract

The two contrasting cultivars, the very susceptible Ludwig and moderately susceptible Svitava, previously evaluated in field trials to determine their resistance levels to Wheat dwarf virus (WDV), were analysed by four different test methods to allow for the comparison of the methods and to consider whether the resistance level of cv. Svitava can be an effective component of wheat protection from the virus. The differences in the proportion of the diseased plants were observed after the inoculation by the viruliferous leafhoppers. The differences in the cultivar resistance levels were evaluated by comparing the biomass production after the infection. The amount of viral DNA was determined using quantitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Concurrently, the cultivar response to the virus infection after the controlled inoculation by the leafhoppers [Psammotettix alienus (Dahlbom, 1850)] under field conditions was further evaluated. The infected plants of cv. Svitava produced five times more dry matter in the vegetative growth stage than cv. Ludwig. The quantitative PCR analysis confirmed the resistance in cv. Svitava. The plant inoculation under a standardised infection pressure showed that the probability of the WDV infection after the inoculation feeding is smaller in the cv. Svitava plants. The comparison of the results from the different test methods shows that the field resistance tests are necessary to obtain a proper assessment of the possibilities for the cultivars' utilisation in the crop protection.

Suggested Citation

  • Jan Ripl & Tomáš Dráb & Sebastien Gadiou & Jiban Kumar Kundu, 2020. "Differences in responses to Wheat dwarf virus infection in contrasting wheat cultivars Ludwig and Svitava," Plant Protection Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 56(2), pages 67-73.
    • Handle: RePEc:caa:jnlpps:v:56:y:2020:i:2:id:57-2018-pps
    DOI: 10.17221/57/2018-PPS
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://pps.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/57/2018-PPS.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: http://pps.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/57/2018-PPS.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17221/57/2018-PPS?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Josef Vacke & Radim Cibulka, 1999. "Silky bent grass (Apera spica-venti [L.] Beauv.) - a new host and reservoir of wheat dwarf virus," Plant Protection Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 35(2), pages 47-50.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pavel Cejnar & Ludmila Ohnoutková & Jan Ripl & Jiban Kumar Kundu, 2019. "Wheat dwarf virus infectious clones allow to infect wheat and Triticum monococcum plants," Plant Protection Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 55(2), pages 81-89.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:caa:jnlpps:v:56:y:2020:i:2:id:57-2018-pps. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ivo Andrle (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cazv.cz/en/home/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.