Most popular articles
Everything About Peaches. Clemson University Cooperative Extension Service Everything About Peaches Website: whether you are a professional or backyard peach...
Mission Statement. For the sake of mankind and the world as a whole a further increase of the sustainability...
Newsletter 9: July 2013 - Temperate Fruits in the Tropics and Subtropics. Download your copy of the Working Group Temperate...
USA Walnut varieties. The Walnut Germplasm Collection of the University of California, Davis (USA). A description of the Collection and a History...
China Walnut varieties.

Articles

FIELD EVALUATION OF TISSUE CULTURE-DERIVED PEACH TREES FOR SUSCEPTIBILITY TO BACTERIAL SPOT (XANTHOMONAS CAMPESTRIS PV. PRUNI)

Article number
336_19
Pages
155 – 164
Language
Abstract
Peach trees from plants regenerated from calluses of two immature embryos of ‘Redhaven’ and five immature embryos of ‘Sunhigh’ were evaluated under field conditions in North Carolina for susceptibility to bacterial spot.
Trees of two regenerants (#13–9 and #19–1), obtained by in vitro selection for insensitivity to culture filtrates of X. campestris pv. pruni, also were evaluated.
Tissue culture-derived trees were compared with ‘Sunhigh’ and ‘Redhaven’ trees produced from axillary buds by micropropagation and ‘Sunhigh’ budded onto ‘Lovell’ rootstock.
Trees were transplanted into the research site in late March 1988 in a completely randomized experimental design with each tree being a replicate.
Foliar disease was evaluated 1989-1991. Fruit were evaluated in 1990 and 1991. Bacterial spot occurred naturally in the site all three years but was especially severe in 1990 and 1991. Diseased foliage and fruit of ‘Sunhigh’ budded onto ‘Lovell’ and self-rooted ‘Sunhigh’ micropropagated from axillary buds did not differ (p=0.05). Self-rooted, micropropagated ‘Redhaven’ trees had less disease than budded or micropropagated ‘Sunhigh’. Fruit and foliage of trees derived from ‘Redhaven’ regenerant #122-1 had significantly (p=0.05) less bacterial spot than did parent ‘Redhaven’ trees.
Trees derived from six regenerants of ‘Redhaven’ embryo #30 generally had more disease than did parent ‘Redhaven’ trees.
Percent defoliation or diseased foliage of trees micropropagated from five regenerants of ‘Sunhigh’ embryo #156 did not differ significantly (p=0.05); however, there were significant (p=0.05) differences in amount and severity of disease on fruit.
There were differences in bacterial spot among the regenerants from the five different ‘Sunhigh’ embryos.
Trees regenerated from culture-filtrate insensitive cells exhibited less defoliation and less diseased fruit than did budded ‘Sunhigh’ and ‘Sunhigh’ propagated from axillary buds.

Publication
Authors
D.F. Ritchie, F.A. Hammerschlag, D.J. Werner
Keywords
Full text
Online Articles (52)
W. R. Woodson | Amanda S. Brandt | H. Itzhaki | Julie M. Maxson | K. Park | H. Wang
A.M. Callahan | R.A. Cohen | L.J. Dunn | P.H. Morgens
L.E. Belthoff | R. Ballard | A. Abbott | P. Morgens | A. Callahan | R. Scorza | W.V. Baird | R. Monet
N. Courtney-Gutterson | E. Firoozabady | C. Lemieux | J. Nicholas | A. Morgan | K. Robinson | A. Otten | M. Akerboom
M. Machado | A. Machado | V. Hanzer | H. Weiss | F. Regner | H. Steinkellner | R. Plail | E. Knapp | H. Katinger
A.K. Hvoslef-Eide | K. Boger | M. Olsen | T. Fjeld
Lisa J. Rowland | J. Chartisathian | John L. Maas | Gene J. Galletta
M. Hassan | S.L. Sinden | R.S. Kobayashi | R.O. Nordeen | L.D. Owens
J.W. Fahey | J.L. Kelly | S.J. Kostka | D.L. Warkentin
M.R. Söndahl | S. Liu | C. Bellato | A. Bragin
F. Blando | A. Niglio | A. Frattarelli | S. Speranza | C. Damiano
S.K. Roy | M.S. Islam | J. Sen | A.B.M.E. Hossain | S. Hadiuzzaman
M. Jordan | M. Obando | L. Iturriaga | A. Goreux | J. Velozo
Robert M. Skirvin | M. Norton | K.D. McPheeters
P.J. Larkin | Y. Li | L.H. Spindler | G.J. Tanner | P.M. Banks
J. W. Adelberg | Bill B. Rhodes | Halina T. Skorupska