| 褐腐病菌三种分子鉴定方法的比较 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 樊锦艳,朱小琼,国立耘,骆勇.褐腐病菌三种分子鉴定方法的比较[J].植物保护学报,2007,34(3):289-295. |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 樊锦艳 朱小琼 国立耘 骆勇 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 中国农业大学植物病理学系 北京100094 |
| |
| 基金项目： | IFS项目;自然科技资源共享平台项目 |
| |
| 摘 要： | 为了筛选出适用于口岸检疫的、可快速鉴定三种褐腐菌,即美澳型核果褐腐菌(Monilinia fructicola)、核果褐腐菌(M. laxa)和仁果褐腐菌(M. fructigena)的方法,采用Lane等基于形态学特征的方法对采自北京、山东、河北等省市的58株褐腐菌进行了种类鉴定,并以这些菌及三个种的标准菌株为材料比较了已报道的三种分子检测方法的可靠性。研究发现,58株菌中有53株是美澳型核果褐腐菌,2株为核果褐腐菌,3株为仁果褐腐菌。采用Ioos等的PCR方法,从3个标准菌株、53株美澳型核果褐腐菌和2株核果褐腐菌中都只扩增出相应种的特征条带,而从3株仁果褐腐菌中的2株中扩增出了两个种的特征条带。采用Ma等的方法,从美澳型核果褐腐菌标准菌株、采自国内的53株美澳型核果褐腐菌和核果标准菌株中,只扩增到相应种的特征条带,而从采自国内的2株核果褐腐菌株中不仅扩增出了核果褐腐菌的条带还扩增出了美澳型核果褐腐菌的特征条带,3株仁果褐腐菌株产生了核果褐腐菌的特征条带,仁果褐腐菌标准菌株中没有得到产物。采用Cote等的方法,只从16株美澳型核果褐腐菌中扩增出该种的特征条带,从其余菌株(包括标准菌株)中没有获得产物。这些研究结果表明:Ioos等的检测方法可用于检测美澳型核果褐腐菌和核果褐腐菌;Ma等的检测方法可用于检测美澳型核果褐腐菌,而不适用于检测其它两个种;而仁果褐腐菌的分子检测方法需要进一步研究和完善。
|
| 关 键 词： | 褐腐菌 形态鉴定 分子鉴定 |
| 收稿时间： | 2007/3/16 0:00:00 |
| 修稿时间： | 2007-03-16 |
Comparison of three molecular identification methods for Monilinia species on stone and pome fruits |
| |
| FAN Jin-yan,ZHU Xiao-qiong,GUO Li-yun and LUO Yong.Comparison of three molecular identification methods for Monilinia species on stone and pome fruits[J].Acta Phytophylacica Sinica,2007,34(3):289-295. |
| |
| Authors: | FAN Jin-yan ZHU Xiao-qiong GUO Li-yun and LUO Yong |
| |
| Institution: | Department of Plant Pathology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100094, China |
| |
| Abstract: | In order to screen out a molecular methods that is suitable for quarantine purpose and can be used in fast identifying the three brown rot pathogens,Monilinia fructicola,Monilinia laxa and Monilinia fructigena,the method developed by Lane et al.based on the morphological characteristic was firstly used to identify 58 isolates of Monilinia from stone and pome fruits collected from Beijing,Shandong,Hebei,etc.in China.Among the 58 isolates,53 were identified as M.fructicola,two were M.laxa and the other three were M.fructigena.Then,three molecular identification methods that have been developed previously were compared using these isolates and the standard isolates of these three species.With the method developed by Ioos et al.,species-specific bands of respective species were amplified from the standard isolates of three respective species,53 isolates identified as M.fructicola and two isolates identified as M.laxa,but species-specific bands of two different species were amplified from two of three isolates iden-tified as M.fructigena.With method developed by Ma et al.,species-specific bands of respective species were amplified from the standard isolate and 53 isolates of M.fructicola and the standard isolate of M.laxa.But bands that supposed to be specific to M.fructicola were also amplified from two isolates of M.laxa,and the band supposed to be specific for M.laxa were amplified from three M.fructigena isolates.No product had been obtained from the standard isolates of M.fructigena.With method of Cote et al.,species-specific band was only yield from sixteen isolates of M.fructicola.No product had been obtained from other isolates including the standard isolates.These results showed that the method of Ioos et al.can be used in identification of M.fructicola and M.laxa,the method of Ma et al.can be used only in identification of M.fructicola.The molecular identification method for M.fructigena remains to be investigated. |
| |
| Keywords: | Monilinia spp morphologic identification molecular identification |
| 本文献已被 CNKI 维普 万方数据 等数据库收录！ |
| 点击此处可从《植物保护学报》浏览原始摘要信息 |
| 点击此处可从《植物保护学报》下载免费的PDF全文 |
|
