Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-pwrkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-20T04:25:20.205Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Observations on Races of Ditylenchus dipsaci Infesting Bulbs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 November 2009

J. F. Southey
J. F. Southey
Affiliation:
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Plant Pathology Laboratory, Harpenden
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The results obtained in the tests described above are summarized in the following table :—

Matricaria matricarioides (Less.) Porter, self-sown in one of the inoculated pots, is an addition to the known weed hosts of narcissus races of D. dipsaci and a new host record for the species.

Seinhorst (1952) has emphasized the need for caution in interpreting the results of host tests with D. dipsaci. Exposure to heavy infestations will often result in invasion and local necrosis of the tissues of plants which are not true hosts of the race concerned. Seedlings may easily be killed outright in this way. The present tests lead to similar conclusions as shown, for example, by the results obtained with red clover and oat seedlings. Even deposition of eggs in the tissues cannot be taken as evidence that the eelworms have established themselves. It is considered, however, that a plant may be regarded as a true host when it is clear that the eelworms are breeding freely in the tissues, i.e. when eelworms in all stages of development are present with numerous eggs, and when infestation is able to persist during the normal life of the plant. With bulbous plants, the establishment of an infestation in the new bulbs after the leaves and flowers had died down was taken as evidence that the plant was a true host. The typical effects of D. dipsaci on the tissues of its hosts, e.g. hypertrophy of parenchyma tissues, enlargement and loosening of the cells and dry, mealy rotting, are also useful criteria, but some of these effects may be produced occasionally after invasion of non-hosts, as was found in a few of the inoculated clover seedlings.

Type
Research Papers
Information
Journal of Helminthology , Volume 31 , Issue 1-2 , June 1957 , pp. 39 - 46
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1957

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Cooper, B. A., 1953—“Eehvorm problems in North Fenland with special reference to crop rotation.” Rep. hort. Educ. Ass., 1953. pp. 106–115. (W.L. 18230h).Google Scholar
Fox Wilson, G., 1943.—“The stem and bulb eelworm, Anguillulina dipsaci (Kühn, 1858): the importance of collating evidence on the behaviour of biologic strains.” Ann. appl. Biol., 30, 364–370. (W.L. 1025).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodey, J. B., 1951.—“Observations on the attack by the stem eelworm, Ditylenchus dipsaci. on strawberry.” Ann. appl. Biol., 38, 618–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodey, T., 1933.—“Plant parasitic nematodes and the diseases they cause.” Methuen, London.Google Scholar
Goodey, T., 1943.—“Tulip bulbs attacked by Anguillulina dipsaci.” J. Helminth., 21, 30–32. (W.L. 11224c).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodey, T., 1945.—“Symptoms of disease in tulips caused by Anguillulina dipsaci.” J. Helminth., 21, 43–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodson, W. É. H., 1938.—“The stem and bulb eelworm, Anguillulina dipsaci (Kühn), in strawberry in Britain.” Ann. appl. Biol., 25, 406–410. (W.L. 1025).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mather, J. C., 1953.—“New tulip pest a danger to whole industry.” Grower, 39, 827. (W.L. 9303g).Google Scholar
Seinhorst, J. W., 1950.—“De betekenis van de tocstand van de grond vobr het optreden van aantasting door het stengelaaltje [Ditylenchus dipsaci (Kühn) Filipjev].” Tijdschr. PlZiekt., 56, 280–348. (W.L. 21280).Google Scholar
Seinhorst, J. W., 1952.—“Ditylenchus dipsaci: host ranges of some biological races.” Proc. int. nemat. Symposium, Harpenden. 1951. F. A. O. Rome, pp. 62–68.Google Scholar
Van Slogteren, E., 1920.—“De nematoden-bestrijding in de bloembollenstreek.” Tijdschr. PIZiekt., 26, 118–139. (W.L. 21280).Google Scholar