Submit or Track your Manuscript LOG-IN

Identification of Resistance Sources in Wheat to Brown and Yellow Rust

PJAR_32_1_185-196

 

 

 

Research Article

Identification of Resistance Sources in Wheat to Brown and Yellow Rust

Ateeq ur Rehman1, Syed Atif Hasan Naqvi1*, Ummad-ud-Din Umar1, Muhammad Irfan Zafar1, Faqeer Hussain2, Muhammad Asif Zulfiqar3 and Azhar Ali Khan3

1Department of Plant Pathology, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Pakistan; 2Ayub Agriculture Research Institute, Faisalabad, Pakistan; 3PARC, Research and Training Station, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Pakistan.

Abstract | Current research was depicted the level of resistance among the available wheat germplasm in Pakistan against the deadly rust disease. 152 lines of the wheat were screened against brown and yellow rust of wheat which are a serious pathosystem of wheat throughout the world. Some varieties were found resistant some were found moderately resistant while some were in susceptible response against the both rust disease. No variety was found to be resistant at all against the rust pathosystems. Correspondingly, in the results of yellow rust some varieties were found resistant and some were found to be the most susceptible on the record. The epidemiological studies showed the correlation of the relative humidity of morning, evening and temperature positively in both of the rust disease. Fungicidal application showed great reduction in the management of the disease.


Received | December 03, 2018; Accepted | January 06, 2019; Published | February 03, 2019

*Correspondence | Syed Atif Hasan Naqvi, Department of Plant Pathology, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Pakistan; Email: [email protected]

Citation | Rehman, A., S.A.H. Naqvi, U.D. Umar, M.I. Zafar, F. Hussain, M.A. Zulfiqar and A.A. Khan 2019. Identification of resistance sources in wheat to brown and yellow rust. Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Research, 32(1): 185-196.

DOI | http://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.pjar/2019/32.1.185.196

Keywords | Triticum aestivum L., Leaf rust, Puccinia recondita f. sp. tritici, Stripe rust, Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici



Introduction

Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) is an important crop and staple food for the people of Pakistan. It contributes 34% to GDP (Anonymous, 2015). During recent studies, it has been reported that 100g of edible portion of wheat grains contain 11.50% proteins, 59.40% carbohydrates, 9.70% fats, 10.60% crude fibers and 1.80% ash (Agarwal et al., 2005). In Pakistan, wheat ranked first as staple food followed by rice and maize. The cultivated area of wheat has been recorded 8.49 million ha with production of 23.52 million tons (Anonymous, 2015). This alarming gap between ever increasing demand and current production is a big challenge for all plant scientists. This challenge can be met over by increasing: (a) area under production, (b) yield per unit area and (c) minimizing the production losses. Increasing area seems almost impossible because of constraints like drought, salinity, water logging and trends in urbanization. The wheat crop is attacked by many diseases, of which rusts are of great importance. There are three types of rusts which are found on wheat. Leaf rust or brown rust is caused by Puccinia recondita f.sp. tritici while stripe rust or yellow rust is caused by Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici and stem rust or black rust is caused by Puccinia graminis f. sp. tritici. Leaf and stripe rusts appear periodically on wheat crop and induce heavy losses in yield (Kolmer et al., 2009). Leaf rust or brown rust of wheat is a serious production hazard in wheat all over the world and is an air-borne foliar disease on which early maturing wheat cultivars largely escape serious rust damage. Round to oblong, brick-red pustules (uredia) appear on leaves, stems and later on heads. As the crop ripens, black spores (telia) are produced. Similarly, stripe rust or yellow rust, is one of the most common fungal diseases of bread wheat in many countries because it is also an air borne disease. In the same way oblong, brick red pustules (uredia) appear on leaves, stems and later on heads and as crop ripens the black spores are produced (Hafiz, 1986). Hussain (1989) reported the occurrence of race one hundred and four Puccinia recondita f. sp. Tritici of which three pathotypes were distinguished. However, the new race was unable to overcome the resistance gene Lr13 and Lr26 most probably occurring in Pakistan cultivars. Environmental conditions play an important role in the development of the disease. Khan (1985) studied fifteen varieties of Wheat genotypes on slow rusting response in relation to environmental factors on these varieties. Different varieties showed slow rusting response at 77-78% R.H, 22-28 °C maximum temperature and 16-18 °C minimum temperature. Keeping in view the above facts regarding the rust diseases of the wheat the current research was planned to evaluate the collection of resistant sources against the rust disease of wheat and to determine the conducive environmental variable facilitating the disease in the field.

Materials and Methods

Establishment of rust screening nursery

Seeds of 152 genotypes were collected from the Ayub agriculture research institute (AARI) Faisalabad. Nursery was sown in area of wheat research institute (WRI) of ARRI. Nursery was sown in normal wheat season in experimental area. Line sowing 3m was done with R×R = 30cm. In order to maintain crop health and vigor agronomic practices were followed to keep the crop in good condition.

Artificial inoculation of wheat plants

Artificial inoculation was done by spraying urediospore suspension (30 gram of spore/16 liter of water). After every 5th line/variety a line of highly susceptible wheat cultivar i.e. Morocco, was sown to act as rust spreader row. (Morocco is highly susceptible to all the prevalent rust races and provides a substrate for rapid multiplication and distribution of rust inoculums). The nursery was also surrounded by sowing two rows of morocco to increase the inoculums pressure.

Data collection

Leaf and Stripe rust reaction, symbol field response and response value were recorded by the modified Cobb’s scale described by Peterson et al. (1948). Disease severity was recorded after seven days’ interval. Rust data were recorded up to physiological maturity of the wheat. The disease severity data was for leaf and stripe rusts was converted into coefficient of infection by multiplying severity with constant value for field response as described by Stubbs et al. (1981) and Raelf et al. (1992). Cobb’s scale (Peterson et al., 1948) was used to record the rust severity data (Table 1).

Table 1: Leaf and Yellow rust reaction, symbol field response and response value.

Reaction Visual symptoms Infection %
No disease No visible infection 0
Moderately resistant Small uredia present surrounded by necrotic area 10-19
Moderately resistant to moderately susceptible Small uredia present surrounded by necrotic areas as well as medium uredia with no necrosis but possible some distinct chlorosis 20-39
Moderately susceptible Medium uredia with no necrosis but possible some distinct chlorosis. 40-59
Moderately susceptible susceptible Medium uredia with no necrosis but possible some disinct chlorosis as well as large uredia with little or chlorosis present. 60-79
Susceptible Large uredia and little or no chlorosis present. 80-100

 

Meteorological data collection

Environmental data consisting of maximum and minimum air temperature, relative humidity and sunshine were recorded by conventional instruments installed in meteorological section of Ayub agriculture research institute Faisalabad.

Fungicidal management

Different chemicals were applied to evaluate the efficiency of chemicals in controlling the rust diseases. Susceptible variety MORROCO was selected for this purpose. Trial was conducted at experimental area of Ayub Agricultural Research Institute (AARI), Faisalabad. Fungicides were applied between leaf emergence and booting stages. Three chemicals, Tilt, Myco-guard and Score were evaluated at 200mL/10L, 125 ml/10 L and 125mL/10 L the recommended dose concentration respectively. Trial was conducted in Randomize Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications. Data was analyzed statistically to determine the effectiveness of fungicides at 5% least significant difference using appropriate statistical tools.

Statistical analysis

All the collected datasets were subjected to analysis of variance by using SAS Carry Inc. 8.1 USA to determine the level of variability among the various genotypes through new Duncan’s multiple range tests.

Table 2: Response of different genotypes against leaf or brown rust of wheat.

Sr. No. Genotypes Reaction Type Sr. No. Genotypes Reaction Type
1 AS-2002 0 77 MOROCCO 100S
2 BHK-2002 0 78 V-03079 5MS
3 BLUE SILVER 20MR 79 HD-29 0
4 BOB WHITE 0 80 WH-542 0
5 BWP-2000 0 81 MOROCCO 100S
6 BWP-97 0 82 W-462 0
7 C-271 80S 83 BORLOG 95 5MR
8 MOROCCO 100S 84 DAMAN-98 30S
9 C-273 40S 85 LR-1 50S
10 C-518 30S 86 LR-29 10MRMS
11 C-591 40S 87 LR-2b 40S
12 CHK-86 0 88 LR-2c 30S
13 CHK-97 5S 89 LR-3 20S
14 CHANNAB-2000 0 90 MOROCCO 100S
15 CROW 0 91 LR-3KA 20MS
16 GA-2002 0 92 LR-3b6 10MSS
17 V-07096 30MRMS 93 LR-9 0
18 MOROCCO 100S 94 LR-10 40S
19 HD-2169 0 95 LR-11 5MRMS
20 HD-2179 0 96 LR-12 5MRMS
21 INQ-91 0 97 LR-13 5MS
22 IQBAL 2000 0 98 LR-149 30S
23 ERA 0 99 MOROCCO 100S
24 FSD-83 0 100 LR-14b 0
25 FSD-85 0 101 LR-15 10MS
26 FRONTANA 0 102 LR-16 10S
27 KOH-I-NOOR 83 10S 103 LR-17 10MRMS
28 MOROCCO 100S 104 LR-18 10MRMS
29 KOHSAR 95 10S 105 LR-19 0
30 KOH-97 0 106 LR-20 30S
31 LOCAL WHITE 0 107 LR-21 20MRMS
32 LU-26 0 108 MOROCCO 100S
33 LYP-73 0 109 LR-22a 0
34 MANTHAR 10MRMS 110 LR-22b 10S
35 MAXPAL 65 40S 111 LR-23 20S
36 MH-97 0 112 LR-24 0
37 NACOZAR 76 0 113 LR-25 5MS
38 MOROCCO 100S 114 LR-26 20MRMS
39 NASIR 24 0 115 LR-27+31 5MRMS
40 PAK-81 30S 116 LR-28 0
41 PARULLA 0 117 MOROCCO 100S
42 PARWAZ-94 0 118 LR-29 10MS
43 PASBAN 90 0 119 LR-30 30S
44 PAVON-76 0 120 LR-32 10MS
45 PBW-343 0 121 LR-33 5MRMS
46 PND-1 0 122 LR-34 10MRMS
47 POTOHAR 73 0 123 LR-35 10MRMS
48 MOROCCO 100S 124 LR-36 0
49 PB-76 60S 125 LR-37 MRMS
50 PB-81 30S 126 MOROCCO 100S
51 PB-85 10S 127 LR-b 60S
52 PB-96 0 128 LR-b(WL-711) 5S
53 RAWAL-87 0 129 LR-23 GAZA 0
54 ROHTAS 90 20S 130 AOCYRA 0
55 SEHAR 06 20S 131 AOC+YRA 0
56 SHAFAQ 06 0 132 YR-1 0
57 SA-42 60S 133 YR-2 20S
58 MOROCCO 100S 134 TATARA 30S
59 SA-75 5MS 135 MOROCCO 100S
60 SARSABZ 0 136 YR-5 0
61 SHALIMAR 88 20S 137 YR-6 5MRMS
62 SPICA 40S 138 YR-7 0
63 UFFAQ 2000 0 139 YR-8 0
64 UQAB 2000 0 140 YR-9 20S
65 FAREED 06 0 141 YR-10 0
66 V-085205 0 142 YR-15 10S
67 V-87094 0 143 YR-17 20S
68 MOROCCO 100S 144 MOROCCO 100S
69 V-02192 10S 145 YR-18 0
70 WL-711 0 146 YR-24 0
71 YACORA 0 147 YR-26 0
72 DR-07028 0 148 YR-27 5MRMS
73 DR-07029 0 149 YRSP 0
74 V-04179 0 150 MOROCCO 100S
75 LASSANI 08 10MR 151 SERI 0
76 FSD 08 0 152 PBW-343 0

 

Results and Discussion

Screening of wheat genotypes against leaf rust

Sixty eight resistant genotypes (AS-2002,BHK-2002,Bob-WHITE,BWP-2000,BWP-97, CHK-86, CHENAB-2000, CROW, GA-2002, HD-2169, HD-2179, INQ91, IQBAL2000, ERA, FSD-83, FSD-85, FRONTANA, KOH-97, LOCALWHITE, LU-26, LYP-73, MH97, NACOZAR-76, NASIR-2K, PARULLA, PARWAZ-94, PASBAN-90, PAVAN-76, PVW-343, PND-1, POTOHAR-73, PB-96, RAWAL-87, SHAFAQ-06, SARSABZ, UFFAQ-2000, UQAB-2000, FAREED-06, V-085205, V-87094, WL-711, YACORA, DR-O7028, DR-7029, V-04179, FSD-08, HD-29, WH-542, W462, LR-9, LR-14B, LR-19, LR-22A, LR-24, LR-28, LR-23GAZA, AOC-YRA, AOC+YRA, YR-1, YR-5, YR-7, YR-8, YR-10, YR-18, YR-24, YR-26, YRSP, SERI, PBW343, showed AUDPC as 170, 85, 70, 110, 80, 80, 85 and 95 respectively. Thirty-seven susceptible varieties such as (C271, C273, C518, C591, CHAKWAL-97, KOH-INOOR-83, KOHSAR-95, MAX-PAK65, PAK-81, PB-76, PB-81, PB-85, ROHTAS-90, SAHAR-06, SA-42, SHALIMAR-88, SPICA, V-02192, DAMAN-98, LR-1, LR-2B, LR-2C, LR-3, LR-10, LR-149, LR-16, LR-20, LR-22B, LR-23, LR-30, LR-B, LR-BWL-711, YR-2, TATARA, YR-9, YR-15 and YR-17) with response value 1.0 for each variety (Table 2).

Table 3: Response of different genotypes against stripe or yellow rust of wheat.

Sr. No Genotypes Reaction Type Sr. No Genotypes Reaction Type
1 AS-2002 0 77 MOROCCO 100S
2 BHK-2002 40S 78 V-03079 5S
3 BLUE SILVER 10MRMS 79 HD-29 10S
4 BOB WHITE 10S 80 WH-542 10MRMS
5 BWP-2000 5S 81 MOROCCO 100S
6 BWP-97 5S 82 W-462 5S
7 C-271 0 83 BORLOG 95 0
8 MOROCCO 100S 84 DAMAN-98 20S
9 C-273 0 85 LR-1 0
10 C-518 0 86 LR-29 20S
11 C-591 0 87 LR-2b 0
12 CHK-86 5MR 88 LR-2c 5S
13 CHK-97 10MRMS 89 LR-3 10MS
14 CHANNAB-2000 20S 90 MOROCCO 100S
15 CROW 10S 91 LR-3KA 10S
16 GA-2002 10MRMS 92 LR-3b6 10S
17 V-07096 0 93 LR-9 20S
18 MOROCCO 100S 94 LR-10 5S
19 HD-2169 10MRMS 95 LR-11 40S
20 HD-2179 20S 96 LR-12 5S
21 INQ-91 40S 97 LR-13 5S
22 IQBAL 2000 10S 98 LR-149 10MS
23 ERA 5S 99 MOROCCO 100S
24 FSD-83 30S 100 LR-14b 10S
25 FSD-85 10S 101 LR-15 5S
26 FRONTANA 5S 102 LR-16 5S
27 KOH-I-NOOR 83 10S 103 LR-17 5S
28 MOROCCO 100S 104 LR-18 5MS
29 KOHSAR 95 5S 105 LR-19 10S
30 KOH-97 20S 106 LR-20 5MRMS
31 LOCAL WHITE 80S 107 LR-21 10MS
32 LU-26 20MRMS 108 MOROCCO 100S
33 LYP-73 5MS 109 LR-22a 5S
34 MANTHAR 5MS 110 LR-22b 0
35 MAXPAL 65 20S 111 LR-23 10S
36 MH-97 10S 112 LR-24 5S
37 NACOZAR 76 20S 113 LR-25 20S
38 MOROCCO 100S 114 LR-26 10MR
39 NASIR 24 20S 115 LR-27+31 5MRMS
40 PAK-81 5MRMS 116 LR-28 0
41 PARULLA 0 117 MOROCCO 100S
42 PARWAZ-94 0 118 LR-29 5MS
43 PASBAN 90 10S 119 LR-30 0
44 PAVON-76 10S 120 LR-32 0
45 PBW-343 0 121 LR-33 0
46 PND-1 20S 122 LR-34 0
47 POTOHAR 73 60S 123 LR-35 5S
48 MOROCCO 100S 124 LR-36 5S
49 PB-76 10S 125 LR-37 10S
50 PB-81 20S 126 MOROCCO 100S
51 PB-85 10S 127 LR-b 0
52 PB-96 30S 128 LR-b(WL-711) 20S
53 RAWAL-87 10S 129 LR-23 GAZA 30MRMS
54 ROHTAS 90 5S 130 AOCYRA 80S
55 SEHAR 06 10S 131 AOC+YRA 50S
56 SHAFAQ 06 10S 132 YR-1 5S
57 SA-42 0 133 YR-2 10S
58 MOROCCO 100S 134 TATARA 5S
59 SA-75 0 135 MOROCCO 100S
60 SARSABZ 5S 136 YR-5 0
61 SHALIMAR 88 30S 137 YR-6 10S
62 SPICA 10S 138 YR-7 20S
63 UFFAQ 2000 5S 139 YR-8 40S
64 UQAB 2000 10MS 140 YR-9 0
65 FAREED 06 10MR 141 YR-10 0
66 V-085205 5MRMS 142 YR-15 0
67 V-87094 10S 143 YR-17 0
68 MOROCCO 100S 144 MOROCCO 100S
69 V-02192 5S 145 YR-18 0
70 WL-711 30S 146 YR-24 5MR
71 YACORA 5S 147 YR-26 5MRMS
72 DR-07028 0 148 YR-27 5S
73 DR-07029 0 149 YRSP 5MRMS
74 V-04179 0 150 MOROCCO 100S
75 LASSANI 08 0 151 SERI 5MS
76 FSD 08 10MS 152 PBW-343 20S

 

Screening of wheat genotypes against yellow rust

Thirty one resistant varieties (AS-2002, C-271, C-273, C-518, C-591, V07096, PARULLA, PARWAZ-94, PBW-343, SA-42, SA-75, DR-07028, DR-07029, V-04179, LASANI-08, BORLOUG-95, LR-1, LR-2B, LR-22B, LR-28, LR-30, LR-32, LR-33, LR-34, LR-B, LR-5, YR-9, YR-10, YR-15, YR-17, YR-18), with response value 0.2 for each variety. Sixty three susceptible varieties such as (MAX-PAK-65, MH-97, NACOZAR-76, NASIR-2K, PASBAN-90, PAVAN-76, PND-1, POTOHAR-73, PB-76, PB-81, PB-85, PB-96, RAWAL-87, ROHOTAS-90, SEHAR-06,SHAFAQ-06,SARSABZ, SHALIMAR-88, SPICA, UFAQ-2000, V-87094, V-02192, WL-711, YACURA, V-03079, W-462, DAMAN-98, LR-29, LR-2C, LR-3KA, LR-3B6, LR-9, LR-10, LR-11, LR-12, LR-13, LR-14B, LR-15, LR-16, LR-17, LR-19, LR-22A, LR-23, LR-24, LR-25, LR-35, LR-36, LR-37, LR-BWL711, AOC-YRA, AOC+YRA, YR1, YR-2, TATARA, YR-6,

YR-7, YR-8, YR-27, PBW-343), with response value 1.0 for each variety. Three moderately resistant varieties (CHK-86, FAREED-06, LR-26) with response value 0.4 for each variety. Ten moderately susceptible varieties (LYP-73, MANTHAR, UQAB-2000, FSD-08, HD-29, LR-3, LR-149, LR-18, LR-21and LR-29) with response value 0.8 for each variety. Ten moderately resistant to moderately susceptible varieties (BLUE SILVER, CHK-97, GA-2002, HD-2169, LU-26, PAK-81, V-085205, WH-542, LR-20 and LR-27+31)with response value 0.6 for each variety (Table 3).

Relationship of environmental variables with disease severity of leaf rust and stripe rust

Effect of maximum temperature on leaf rust: The correlation of maximum temperature with leaf rust infection was found to be positive in all five genotypes/varieties. There was increasing trend in leaf rust disease development with maximum air temperature. The data shows that the disease severity

increase with the increase in Temperature in varieties MANTHAR, MAXPAL 65, SHALIMAR 88, MOROCCO and LR-30 (Figure 1).

Effect of minimum temperature on leaf rust: The correlation of minimum temperature with leaf rust infection was found to be positive in all five genotypes/varieties. There was increasing trend in leaf rust disease development with minimum air temperature. The data shows that the disease severity increase with the increase in Temperature in varieties MANTHAR, MAXPAL 65, SHALIMAR 88, MOROCCO and LR-30. (Figure 2).

Effect of relative humidity on leaf rust: The correlation of relative humidity with leaf rust infection was found to be positive in all five genotypes/varieties. There was increasing trend in leaf rust disease development with relative humidity. The data shows that the disease severity increase with the increase in Temperature in varieties MANTHAR, MAXPAL 65, SHALIMAR 88, MOROCCO and LR-30 (Figure 3).

Effect of rain fall on leaf rust: The correlation of rain fall with leaf rust infection was found to be negative in all five genotypes/varieties. There was decreasing trend in leaf rust disease development with rain fall. The data shows that the disease severity decrease with the increase in rain fall in varieties MANTHAR, MAXP AL 65, SHALIMAR 88, MOROCCO and LR-30 (Figure 4).

Effect of maximum temperature on stripe rust: The correlation of maximum temperature with leaf rust infection was found to be positive in all five genotypes/varieties. There was increasing trend in leaf rust disease development with maximum air temperature. The data shows that the disease severity increase with the increase in Temperature in varieties CHANNAB-2000,GA-2002,MANTHAR, ROHTAS 90 and SARSABZ (Figure 5).

Effect of minimum temperature on stripe rust: The correlation of minimum temperature with leaf rust infection was found to be positive in all five genotypes/varieties. There was increasing trend in leaf rust disease development with minimum air temperature. The data shows that the disease severity increase with the increase in Temperature in varieties CHANNAB-2000, GA-2002, MANTHAR, ROHTAS 90 and SARSABZ (Figure 6).

Effect of relative humidity on stripe rust: The correlation of relative humidity with leaf rust infection was found to be positive in all five genotypes/varieties. There was increasing trend in leaf rust disease development with relative humidity. The data shows that the disease severity increase with the increase in Temperature in varieties CHANNAB-2000, GA-2002, MANTHAR, ROHTAS 90 and SARSABZ (Figure 7).

Effect of rain fall on stripe rust: The correlation of rain fall with leaf rust infection was found to be negative in all five genotypes/varieties. There was decreasing trend in leaf rust disease development with rain fall. The data shows that the disease severity decrease with the increase in rain fall in varieties CHANNAB-2000,GA-2002, MANTHAR, ROHTAS 90 and SARSABZ (Figure 8).

Chemical control of brown rust and yellow rust: At the start of the experiment when no treatment was applied the value of mean disease severity was 40.



After three days’ mean disease severity was reduced in those blocks where fungicides were applied and in the block of control. Values remain constant which was 40. After 7 days and 10 days’ mean disease severity was also calculated (Table 4, Figure 9, Table 5, Figure 10).

Plant diseases are a great threat to plants, in such that fungal diseases facade a potential threat to successful cereal production in general and particularly wheat in Pakistan. Wheat is a staple food for the people of Pakistan so the rust diseases are of too economic



importance for Pakistan because they pose a serious threat to the wheat production. During the current research all the varieties showed a varying response regarding the development of disease with moderately resistant to highly susceptible. Yet it is too alarming that no variety is resistant against the rust pathogen in Pakistan. Afzal et al. (2009) during 2005-2007, carried out variability for field based partial resistance


against stripe rust among 188 wheat breeding lines grown at the experimental area of the PMAS Arid Agriculture University, Rawalpindi, along with Morocco as susceptible check. The wheat lines and commercial varieties were screened out under natural climatic conditions of arid zone of Pakistan. Average Coefficient of Infection (ACI) and Relative Resistance Index (RRI) values of two year trial showed



that out of 188 cultivars, 150 responded with RRI value ≥7 ≤9 and were found in the desirable range; 28 cultivars were included among the acceptable range having RRI value ≥5 ≤ 7. However, only 10 cultivars showed RRI value <5 and were placed under undesirable range. Ahmad et al. (2010) screened thirty six genotypes against yellow rust to check their level of susceptibility or resistance. Among these, 18 were susceptible, 6 were moderately susceptible to susceptible, 7 were moderately resistant to moderately susceptible and 5 genotypes remained resistant. Wheat yield lost due to varying level of yellow rust

Table 4: Effect of different treatments on the disease severity of brown rust.

Treatments Application Mean
Before Application After 3 days After 7 days After 10 days
T1 40.00 ± 0.00 b-e 41.67 ± 1.67 b-d 53.33 ± 3.33 ab 60.00 ± 0.00 a 48.75 ± 2.62 A
T2 38.33 ± 1.67c-e 28.33 ± 4.41 d-f 31.67 ± 1.67 c-f 43.33 ± 3.33 bc 35.42 ± 2.17 B
T3 40.00 ± 0.00 b-e 23.33 ± 3.33 f 23.33 ± 3.33 f 26.67 ± 3.33 ef 28.33 ± 2.41 C
T4 40.00 ± 0.00 b-e 26.67 ± 3.33 ef 28.33 ± 1.67 d-f 33.33 ± 3.33 c-f 32.08 ± 1.89 BC
Mean 39.58 ± 0.42 A 30.00 ± 2.54 B 30.00 ± 2.54 B 34.17 ± 3.63 B ----

 

Table 5: Effect of different treatments on the disease severity of yellow rust.

Treatments Application Mean
Before Application After 3 days After 7 days After 10 days
T1 39.00 ± 0.00 b-e 0.00±0.00e 0.00±0.00e 0.00±0.00e 0.00±0.00D
T2 36.33 ± 1.37c-e 31.67±4.41cd 40.00±0.00bcd 28.33±1.67d 33.33±2.20C
T3 38.00 ± 0.00 b-e 43.33±3.33abc 53.33±6.67ab 55.00±2.89a 50.56±2.94A
T4 37.00 ± 0.00 b-e 33.33±3.33cd 41.67±1.67a-d 50.00±0.00ab 41.67±2.64B
Mean 36.51 ± 0.41 A 27.08±5.09B 33.75±6.25A 33.33±6.58A ----

 

severities. Maximum severity of 90% of yellow rust resulted in 54% to 55% calculated and predicted losses, respectively. While 40, 50, 60 and 70% disease severity of yellow rust caused 35-34%, 38-37%, 42-40% and 46-47% calculated and predicted losses, respectively. Minimum temperature and relative humidity remained positively correlated while the maximum temperature showed negative correlation with stripe rust severity. With the rise of minimum temperature and relative humidity a rise up in stripe rust infection was seen while as the maximum temperature rise stripe rust infection decreased on different genotypes. From this study it may be concluded that epidemiological factors played important role in the dispersion of the disease which resulted in yield losses.

Acknowledgements

This manuscript is a part of thesis of Mr. Muhammad Irfan Zafar submitted to the Department of Plant Pathology, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan.

Author’s Contribution

Faqeer Hussain and Ateeq ur Rehman conceived the idea. The experiments were conducted by Muhammad Irfan, Syed Atif Hasan Naqvi, Muhammad Irfan wrote the article while statistical analysis was made by Ummad ud Din Umar and Muhammad Asif Zulfiqar.

References

Afzal, S.N., I. Haque, M.S. Ahmedani, M. Munir, S.S. Firdous, A. Rauf, I. Ahmad, A.R. Rattu and M. Fayyaz. 2009. Resistance potential of wheat germplasm (Triticum aestivum L.) against stripe rust disease under rain fed climate of Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot. 41(3): 1463-1475.

Agarwal, S., R.G. Saini and A.K. Sharma. 2005. Temperature sensitive resistance in some bread wheat against leaf rust (Puccinia recondite f.sp. tritici). Pl. Dis. Res. Ludhiana. 20: 159-160. 2007-2023. 78: 600-602.

Ahmad, S., M. Afzal, I.R. Noorka, Z. Iqbal, N. Akhtar, Y. Iftkhar and M. Kamran. 2010. Prediction of yield losses in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) caused by yellow rust in relation to epidemiological factors in Faisalabad. Pak. J. Bot. 42(1): 401-407.

Anonymous. 2015. Pakistan statistical year book, Statistic division, Federal Bureau of Statistcs. GoP. Islamabad.

Hafiz, A. 1986. Plant diseases. PARC. Islamabd. pp: 552.

Hussain, S.F. 1989. Wheat disease situation in Pakistan. Proc. Nat. Sem. Wheat Res. Prod. 10: 609.

Khan., M.A. 1985. Wheat Breeding rust epidemiology in Pakistan. Proc. Nat. Sem. Epidemiol. Forecasting Plant Dis. Univ. Agric. Faisalabad.

Kolmer, J.A. 2009. Physiologic specialization of Puccinia recondite f.sp. triticiin Canada in 1991. Can. J. Plant Pathol. 15: 34-36. 34: 435-455.

Peterson, R.F., A.B. Campbell and A.E. Hannah. 1948. A diagrammatic scale for estimating rust intensity on leaves and stems of cereals. Can. J. Res. 26: 496–500. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjr48c-033

Ralph, S. C., T. Cardoso, C. G. Poole, L. C. Conquest, and R. J.Naiman, 1992. Status and Trends of Instream Habitat in Forested Lands of Washington: The Timber, Fish, and Wildlife Ambient Monitoring Project – 1989-1991. Biennial Progress Report, University of Washington, Center for Streamside Studies Report to the Washington Department of Natural Resources, Olympia Washington.

Stubbs, C. D., T. Kouyama, K. Kinosita, Jr., and A. Ikegami. 1981. Effect of double bonds on the dynamic properties of the hydrocarbon region of lecithin bilayers. Biochemistry. 20: 4257-4262.

Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Research

September

Vol.37, Iss. 3, Pages 190-319

Featuring

Click here for more

Subscribe Today

Receive free updates on new articles, opportunities and benefits


Subscribe Unsubscribe