An Outbreak of Gummosis of Mango Trees Caused by <i>Lasiodiplodia theobromae</i> in Guangxi, South China
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Mango (Mangifera indica L.) is an economically important fruit in southern provinces of China. In May 2012, field surveys including 2,250 mango trees were done in nine orchards of five different counties in Guangxi Province. An outbreak of gummosis was observed in the province involving over 30,000 ha with an average of 50% disease incidence (DI) and a maximum of 70% in some orchards. Until then, gummosis had been considered a common but not serious disease. In 2012, high temperatures in April and extensive rain in May favored increased disease development. Infected plants showed abundant gum secretion from branches, stems, and main trunks. Some branches died from the disease. During the early stages of infection, branches or stems turned brown followed by xylem necrosis and exudation of a milky sap. The sap turned yellow and finally formed amber gum within several days. Initially, the gum appeared as small droplets, increasing in number, and covering most of the branches and the trunk with bark cracking under severe conditions. On potato dextrose agar (PDA), isolates with similar morphology were consistently recovered from symptomatic plant tissues after surface sterilization in 75% ethanol for 30 seconds and then in 0.1% mercuric chloride for 1 min. Five single-spore isolates from five different locations in Guangxi Province were used to evaluate characteristics of the pathogen. On PDA, cultures were gray with an irregularly distributed, fast-growing, and fluffy aerial mycelium, showing a dark underside as the colony changed from greenish to black after 5 days at 28°C. After 1 month, cultures produced globose pycnidia. Conidia were elliptical and hyaline when immature, becoming dark brown and one-septate, longitudinally striate when mature, and ranged from 20.0 to 28.0 × 10.5 to 16.0 μm (average 23.3 × 13.7 μm). Paraphyses produced within the tissues of pycnidia were hyaline, cylindrical, nonseptate, and up to 61 μm long. The fungus was identified as Lasiodiplodia theobromae (Pat.) Griffon & Maubl. (=Botryosphaeria rhodina (Cooke) Arx) based on morphological and cultural characteristics (1,2). The rDNA internal transcribed spacer region of one isolate showed 100% identity to L. theobromae (GenBank HM346876.2) and was deposited in GenBank (JX982240). Pathogenicity of the five isolates was tested in the field on healthy tissues in June 2012. Five green twigs and five 3-year-old branches were used. Three wounds were made on each twig or branch with a sterilized needle. Mycelial plugs were placed on wounds and covered with Parafilm. Uncolonized PDA plugs were used as controls. Two weeks later, typical brown lesions were observed on inoculated branches, and gum exuded from infected wounds. No symptoms were seen on the controls. Koch's postulates were fulfilled by reisolation of L. theobromae from diseased branches. L. theobromae is well documented as a pathogen of mango. In China, the disease was observed in the 1990s in Hainan Province, and the causal agents were identified as L. theobromae and Colletotrichum gloeosporioides Penz. & Sacc based on morphological observation (3). To our knowledge, this is the most severe outbreak reported from China. References: (1) V. S. de Oliveira Costa et al. Eur. J. Plant Pathol. 127:509, 2010. (2) F. Wang et al. Plant Dis. 95:1378, 2011. (3) Q. C. Xiao et al. Tropical Crops Research (in Chinese) 2:25, 1995.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».