Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T21:27:05.307Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Leafy Spurge (Euphorbia esula) Cell Cultures for Screening Deleterious Rhizobacteria

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Thouraya Souissi  and
Robert J. Kremer
Thouraya Souissi
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Missouri
Robert J. Kremer
Affiliation:
U.S. Dep. Agric., Agric. Res. Serv., Crop Syst. Water Qual. Res., 144 Mumford Hall, Columbia, MO 65211
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Bioassays using cell cultures and callus tissues of leafy spurge were devised to evaluate the potential of rhizobacteria as biocontrol agents. Rhizobacteria isolated from roots of leafy spurge seedlings were screened in suspension-cultured leafy spurge cells. Cell viability was assessed using the Evan's blue bioassay 48 h after bacterial inoculation. Among the 30 isolates tested, LS102 and LS105 consistently caused intensive cell death determined by measuring the A630 of the inoculated cell cultures. Cell death was 2.5 to 3 times higher in cultures inoculated with LS105 and LS102, respectively, than in the control. Population levels of the two isolates within cell cultures and callus tissues of leafy spurge increased during the first 48 h. Leafy spurge callus tissues were inoculated with rhizobacteria either directly or by using the Host Pathogen Interaction System (HPIS). The latter exposes calli to bacteria without any physical contact. LS102 caused cellular leakage and eventually death of the callus tissue. Callus growth was reduced by about 30 to 70% when exposed to LS102 and LS105, respectively. Results suggest that these two isolates may affect leafy spurge at the cellular level by different mechanisms. A screening method based on cell cultures and callus tissues offers a good and rapid technique for detecting deleterious rhizobacteria with potential as biocontrol agents for leafy spurge.

Keywords

Leafy spurge, Euphorbia esula L. # EPHES2,4-D (2,4-dichlorophenoxy) acetic acidBiological controlrhizobacteriatissue cultureEPHES
Type
Special Topics
Information
Weed Science , Volume 42 , Issue 2 , June 1994 , pp. 310 - 315
Copyright
Copyright © 1994 by the Weed Science Society of America 

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

Literature Cited

1. Alstrom, S. 1987. Factors associated with detrimental effects of rhizobacteria on plant growth. Plant Soil 102:3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Atkinson, M. M., Keppler, L. D., Orlandi, E. W., Baker, C. J., and Mischke, C. F. 1990. Involvement of plasma membrane calcium influx in bacterial induction of the K+/H+ and hypersensitive responses in tobacco. Plant Physiol. 92:215–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Bruckart, W. L., Turner, S. K., Sutker, E. M., Vonmoos, R., Sedler, L., and Defago, G. 1986. Relative virulence of Melampsora euphorbia from Central Europe toward North American and European spurges. Plant Dis. 70:847–850.Google Scholar
4. Callahan, F. E. and Rowe, D. E. 1991. Use of a host-pathogen interaction system to test whether oxalic acid is the sole pathogenic determinant in the exudate of Sclerotinia trifolium . Phytopathology 81:1546–1550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Camper, N. D. 1986. Herbicide studies with plant tissue and cell cultures. Pages 385–395 in Camper, N. D., ed. Research Methods in Weed Science. South. Weed Sci. Soc., Champaign, IL.Google Scholar
6. DeBoer, S. H. and Sasser, M. 1986. Differentiation of Erwinia carotovora ssp. carotovora and E. carotovora ssp. atroseptica on the basis of cellular fatty acid composition. Can. J. Microbiol. 32:796–800.Google Scholar
7. De Mot, R. and Vanderleyden, J. 1991. Purification of a root-adhesive outer membrane protein of root-colonizing Pseudomonas fluorescens . FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 81:323–328.Google Scholar
8. Gamborg, O. L., Miller, R. A., and Ojima, K. 1968. Nutrient requirements of suspension cultures of soybean root cells. Exp. Cell Res. 50:151–158.Google Scholar
9. Harris, P., Dunn, P. H., Schroeder, D., and Vonmoos, R. 1985. Biological control of leafy spurge in North America. Pages 79–92 in Watson, A. K., ed. Leafy Spurge. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Mongr. 3. WSSA, Champaign, IL.Google Scholar
10. Hogan, M. E. and Manners, G. D. 1990. Allelopathy of small everlasting (Antennaria microphylla): Phytotoxicity to leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) in tissue culture. J. Chem. Ecol. 16:931–939.Google Scholar
11. Hogan, M. E. and Manners, G. D. 1991. Differential allelochemical detoxification mechanism in tissue cultures of Antennaria microphylla and Euphorbia esula . J. Chem. Ecol. 17:167–174.Google Scholar
12. Kennedy, A. C., Elliott, L. F., Young, F. L., and Douglas, C. L. 1991. Rhizobacteria suppressive to the weed downy brome. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 55:722–727.Google Scholar
13. Kremer, R. J. 1987. Identity and properties of bacteria inhabiting seeds of selected broadleaf weed species. Microbial Ecol. 14:29–37.Google Scholar
14. Kremer, R. J., Begonia, M. F. T., Stanley, L., and Lanham, E. T. 1990. Characterization of rhizobacteria associated with weed seedlings. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 56:1649–1655.Google Scholar
15. Kremer, R. J. 1991. Rhizosphere organisms for potential biocontrol of leafy spurge. Pages 44–45 in Report of leafy spurge control coordination/planning meeting. USDA-ARS, Bozeman, MT.Google Scholar
16. Leistritz, F. L., Thompson, F., and Leitch, J. A. 1992. Economic impact of leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) in North Dakota. Weed Sci. 40:275–280.Google Scholar
17. Lippincott, B. B. and Lippincott, J. A. 1969. Bacterial attachment to a specific wound site as an essential stage in tumor initiation by Agrobacterium tumefaciens . J. Bacterid. 97:620–628.Google Scholar
18. Messersmith, C. E. and Lym, R. G. 1983. Distribution and economic impacts of leafy spurge in North Dakota. N.D. Farm Res. 40:8–13.Google Scholar
19. Mumma, R. O. and Davidonis, G. H. 1983. Plant tissue culture and pesticide metabolism. Pages 255–280 in Huston, D. H. and Roberts, T. R., eds. Progress in Pesticide Biochemistry and Toxicology. Vol. 3. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
20. Schaad, N. W. 1980. Laboratory guide for identification of plant pathogenic bacteria. Am. Phytopathol. Soc, St. Paul, MN.Google Scholar
21. Schippers, B., Bakker, A. W., and Peter, A. H. M. 1987. Interactions of deleterious and beneficial rhizosphere microorganisms and the effect of cropping practices. Ann. Rev. Phytopathol. 25:331–358.Google Scholar
22. Schroth, M. N., Loper, J. E., and Hidelbrand, D. C. 1984. Bacteria as biocontroi agents of plant disease. Pages 362–369 in Klug, M. J. and Reddy, C. A., eds. Current Perspectives in Microbial Ecology. Am. Soc. Microbiol., Washington, DC.Google Scholar
23. Smibert, R. M. and Krieg, N. R. 1981. General characterization. Pages 409–443 in Gerhardt, P., ed. Manual of Methods for General Bacteriology. Am. Soc. Microbiol., Washington, DC.Google Scholar
24. Tomaso-Peterson, M. and Krans, J. V. 1990. Evaluation of a new in vitro cell selection technique. Crop Sci. 30:226–229.Google Scholar
25. Tunlid, A., Hoitink, H. A. J., Low, C., and White, D. C. 1989. Characterization of bacteria that suppress Rhizoctonia damping-off in bark compost media by analysis of fatty acid biomarkers. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 55:1368–1374.Google Scholar
26. Yang, S. M. 1992. Can plant pathogens alone control leafy spurge? Pages 33–34 in Proceedings of the 1992 Leafy Spurge Symposium. Great Plains Agric. Counc. Publ. No. 144.Google Scholar
27. Zilkah, S. and Gressel, J. 1977. Cell cultures vs. whole plants for measuring phytotoxicity: Correlations between phototoxicities in cell suspension cultures, calli and seedlings. Plant Cell Physiol. 18:815–820.Google Scholar