马铃薯晚疫病菌的生物防治及寄主抗性机制的研究
|
摘要
本试验测定了木霉T115D发酵滤液对马铃薯晚疫病生物防治,为开发新型防治马铃薯晚疫病的生物农药奠定基础。本试验通过对抗病品种克18、克16,感病品种尤金、东农303接种和未接种处理后,研究叶片中总酚、类黄酮、绿原酸、可溶性糖、可溶性蛋白、木质素等物质的变化规律及POD、PPO、PAL、CAT、α-淀粉酶、蔗糖酶、几丁质酶和β-1,3-葡聚糖酶等相关酶的活性变化,探讨其与马铃薯品种抗病性的关系。
1.测定了木霉T115D发酵滤液对马铃薯晚疫病菌的抑制作用,发酵滤液对菌丝有抑制作用但不明显;发酵滤液对晚疫病菌孢子囊释放游动孢子,游动孢子萌发,孢子囊萌发有明显的抑制作用。其浓度100%的发酵滤液对晚疫病菌孢子囊释放游动孢子的相对抑制率分别为75%,对游动孢子萌发的相对抑制率为60.02%,对孢子囊萌发的相对抑制率为57.60%。提前一天接种发酵液的防治效果最好,防治效果达79.4%。
2.采用火棉胶法和水合氯醛法对马铃薯不同抗性品种茸毛和气孔进行观察,发现抗病品种的茸毛数大于感病品种,气孔数小于感病品种,茸毛数和气孔数与品种的抗病性有关。
3.利用分光光度计法测定不同抗性品种的马铃薯接种和未接种处理下叶片酚类物质的含量。结果表明,接种后抗病品种总酚、类黄酮、绿原酸含量均高于感病品种,未接种处理下抗病品种总酚、绿原酸含量高于感病品种。利用滴定法测定不同抗性品种的马铃薯叶片接种和未接种处理下木质素的含量,未接种处理下抗病品种木质素含量略高于感病品种,接种后,抗感品种木质素含量也高于感病品种。
5.利用分光光度计法测定不同抗性品种的马铃薯接种和未接种处理下叶片防御酶活性的变化。接种后,抗病品种的PPO、POD、PAL、CAT、几丁质酶和β-1,3-葡聚糖酶的活性高于感病品种,未接种处理下,抗病品种的PPO、POD、CAT、几丁质酶和β-1,3-葡聚糖酶的活性高于感病品种。
6.未接种处理下抗病品种叶片中可溶性糖、可溶性蛋白、α-淀粉酶、蔗糖酶含量略高于感病品种,接种后,抗感病品种中可溶性糖、可溶性蛋白、α-淀粉酶、蔗糖酶含量均增加,随着接种时间延长,抗感病品种间差异变大。
Biological control of fermentation filtrate of Trichoderma T115D on potato late blight in this experiment,Laid a foundation for develop new biological pesticide to control potato late blight.By inoculation with resistant variety of kexin18、kexin16 and susceptible bariety youjindongnong -303.Study on the activity changes of total phenols,flavonoids,chlorogenic acid soluble sugar,soluble protein,lignin and POD,PPO,PAL,CAT,α- amylase,invertase,chitinase andβ-glucanase.Study on the relation between the change and disease resistance.
1. Measured the inhibition in fermentation filtrate of Trichoderma T115D on Phytophthora infestans. Found the inhibition of fermentation filtrate on mycelium,but not obvious.The result showed that fermentation filtrate strongly inhibited the germination of sporangia and zoospores,release of zoopores.Fermentation filtrate ihibited the mycelia growth but not obvious.The inhibition rate of the germination of sporangia was 57.60%.The inhibition rate of realease of zoospores fsby fermentation filtrate was 75%. The inhibition rate of the germination of zoospores was 60.02%.The control effect on day ahead of inoculation with fermentation filtrate of Trichoderma T115D was the best.The control effect was79.4%.
2. By using celloidin method and hydration chloral method to observe the pubescence and Stomatal. Found that the number of pubescence in resistant varieties was much than the susceptible varieties, The number of Stomatal in resistant varieties was less than the susceptible varieties,Related with Disease Resistance.
3.Using spectrophotometer to determine the content of henolics in different potato varietises on not inoculation and after inoculation.The results show that : the content of total phenols,flavonoids,chlorogenic acid in resistant varieties was much than the susceptible varieties after inoculation.The content of total phenols, chlorogenic acid was much than the susceptible varieties on not Inoculation.Using titration method to determine the content of lignin in different potato varietises on not inoculation and after inoculation.The content of lignin in resistant varieties was much than the susceptible varieties on not inoculation.The content of lignin in resistant varieties was much than the susceptible varieties also.
4. Using spectrophotometer to determine the activities change of defense Enzymes in different potato varietises on not inoculation and after inoculation.After inoculation,The activities change of POD,PPO,PAL,CAT,chitinase andβ-1,3-glucanase in resistant varieties was much than the susceptible varieties.The activities change of POD,PPO,CAT,chitinase andβ-1,3-glucanase in resistant varieties was much than the susceptible varieties.
5.The content of soluble sugar,soluble protein,α- amylase,invertase in resistant varieties was higher than the susceptible varieties a little.After inoculation,The content of soluble sugar,soluble protein,α- amylase,invertase was higer.As time prolonged,The difference between resistant varieties and susceptible varieties became great.
1.测定了木霉T115D发酵滤液对马铃薯晚疫病菌的抑制作用,发酵滤液对菌丝有抑制作用但不明显;发酵滤液对晚疫病菌孢子囊释放游动孢子,游动孢子萌发,孢子囊萌发有明显的抑制作用。其浓度100%的发酵滤液对晚疫病菌孢子囊释放游动孢子的相对抑制率分别为75%,对游动孢子萌发的相对抑制率为60.02%,对孢子囊萌发的相对抑制率为57.60%。提前一天接种发酵液的防治效果最好,防治效果达79.4%。
2.采用火棉胶法和水合氯醛法对马铃薯不同抗性品种茸毛和气孔进行观察,发现抗病品种的茸毛数大于感病品种,气孔数小于感病品种,茸毛数和气孔数与品种的抗病性有关。
3.利用分光光度计法测定不同抗性品种的马铃薯接种和未接种处理下叶片酚类物质的含量。结果表明,接种后抗病品种总酚、类黄酮、绿原酸含量均高于感病品种,未接种处理下抗病品种总酚、绿原酸含量高于感病品种。利用滴定法测定不同抗性品种的马铃薯叶片接种和未接种处理下木质素的含量,未接种处理下抗病品种木质素含量略高于感病品种,接种后,抗感品种木质素含量也高于感病品种。
5.利用分光光度计法测定不同抗性品种的马铃薯接种和未接种处理下叶片防御酶活性的变化。接种后,抗病品种的PPO、POD、PAL、CAT、几丁质酶和β-1,3-葡聚糖酶的活性高于感病品种,未接种处理下,抗病品种的PPO、POD、CAT、几丁质酶和β-1,3-葡聚糖酶的活性高于感病品种。
6.未接种处理下抗病品种叶片中可溶性糖、可溶性蛋白、α-淀粉酶、蔗糖酶含量略高于感病品种,接种后,抗感病品种中可溶性糖、可溶性蛋白、α-淀粉酶、蔗糖酶含量均增加,随着接种时间延长,抗感病品种间差异变大。
Biological control of fermentation filtrate of Trichoderma T115D on potato late blight in this experiment,Laid a foundation for develop new biological pesticide to control potato late blight.By inoculation with resistant variety of kexin18、kexin16 and susceptible bariety youjindongnong -303.Study on the activity changes of total phenols,flavonoids,chlorogenic acid soluble sugar,soluble protein,lignin and POD,PPO,PAL,CAT,α- amylase,invertase,chitinase andβ-glucanase.Study on the relation between the change and disease resistance.
1. Measured the inhibition in fermentation filtrate of Trichoderma T115D on Phytophthora infestans. Found the inhibition of fermentation filtrate on mycelium,but not obvious.The result showed that fermentation filtrate strongly inhibited the germination of sporangia and zoospores,release of zoopores.Fermentation filtrate ihibited the mycelia growth but not obvious.The inhibition rate of the germination of sporangia was 57.60%.The inhibition rate of realease of zoospores fsby fermentation filtrate was 75%. The inhibition rate of the germination of zoospores was 60.02%.The control effect on day ahead of inoculation with fermentation filtrate of Trichoderma T115D was the best.The control effect was79.4%.
2. By using celloidin method and hydration chloral method to observe the pubescence and Stomatal. Found that the number of pubescence in resistant varieties was much than the susceptible varieties, The number of Stomatal in resistant varieties was less than the susceptible varieties,Related with Disease Resistance.
3.Using spectrophotometer to determine the content of henolics in different potato varietises on not inoculation and after inoculation.The results show that : the content of total phenols,flavonoids,chlorogenic acid in resistant varieties was much than the susceptible varieties after inoculation.The content of total phenols, chlorogenic acid was much than the susceptible varieties on not Inoculation.Using titration method to determine the content of lignin in different potato varietises on not inoculation and after inoculation.The content of lignin in resistant varieties was much than the susceptible varieties on not inoculation.The content of lignin in resistant varieties was much than the susceptible varieties also.
4. Using spectrophotometer to determine the activities change of defense Enzymes in different potato varietises on not inoculation and after inoculation.After inoculation,The activities change of POD,PPO,PAL,CAT,chitinase andβ-1,3-glucanase in resistant varieties was much than the susceptible varieties.The activities change of POD,PPO,CAT,chitinase andβ-1,3-glucanase in resistant varieties was much than the susceptible varieties.
5.The content of soluble sugar,soluble protein,α- amylase,invertase in resistant varieties was higher than the susceptible varieties a little.After inoculation,The content of soluble sugar,soluble protein,α- amylase,invertase was higer.As time prolonged,The difference between resistant varieties and susceptible varieties became great.
引文
[1]杨艳丽,罗文富等.马铃薯无性系对晚疫病的抗病配合力分析[J].山东农业大学学报,2001,32(2):147～157
[2]张志铭,朱杰华,宋伯符,等.中国马铃薯晚疫病菌A2交配型的进一步研究[J],河北农业大学学报,2001,24(2):32～37
[3]林传光,黄河,王高才,等.马铃薯晚疫病都田间动态观察及防治试验.植物病理学报,1995(1)1:31～42
[4] Utrata A.Agrometeorological conditions determining thr occurrence of potato blight (Phytophthora infestans de Bary) in Poland [J].European Plant Protection Organisation Bulletin,1980,10:75～81
[5] J.G.Harrison.Effects of the aerial environment on late blight of potato foliage-areview.Plant Pathology,1992,41:384～416
[6]Vowinckel O.Die.Anfalligkeit deutscher Kartoffe1sorten gegen U ber Phytophthora infestans(Moot.)deBary unter besonderer Berucksichtigung derUnter-suchungsmethoden.Arbeiten aus det. Biologischen Reichssanstalt furLand-and Forstwirtschaft,1926,14:588～641
[7] Kable P.F.,Mackenzie D.R.Survival of Phytophthora infestans in potato stem lesions at high temperatures and implications for disease forecasting. Plant Disease,1980,64:165～167
[8] J.G.Harrison.Effects of the aerial environment on late blight of potato foliage-areview.Plant Pathology,1992,41:384～416
[9] Hyre R.A.Progress in forecasting late blight of potato and tomato.Plant Disease Reporter,1954,38:245～253
[10] Melhus I.E.Hibernation of Phytophthora infestans in the Irish potato.Journal of Agricultural Research,1915,5:71～102
[11] Harrison J.G.,Lowe R.,Heilbronn J..Epidemiology of late blight caused by Phytophthora infestans,Scottish Crop Research Institute Annual Report for 1988,1989:106
[12] De Weille G.,A.Forecasting crop infection by the potato blight fungus.Koninkhk Nederlands Meteorologisch Institute.Mededelintgen enYerhandelinggen No.82,1964,144
[13] Rotem J.,Cohen Y.,Bshi .E.Host and environmental influences on sporuladon in vivo Annual. Review of Phytopatholoty,1978,16:83～101
[14]Utrata A.Agrometeorological conditions determining the occurrence of potato blight (Phytophthora infestans de Bary) in Poland. European. Plant Protection Organisation Bulletin,1980,10:75～81
[15] Can K.Q,M Ruckstuhl,H R Forrer.Crucial weather condition for Phytophthora infestans:A reliable tool for improved control of potato late blight.Specical PAV-report,1996.1:85～90
[16]曹静,罗智敏,胡同乐等.温室马铃薯晚疫病流行动态初步研究.河北农业大学学报,2002,25(增刊1):190～192
[17] Nieder H,The blight the blighter and the blighted.Transactions of New York academy of Science,1956,19:55～63
[18] Hohl H.,R.,Iselin K. Strains of Phytophthora infestans from Switzerland with A2 mating type behavior.Trans.Br MycolSoc.1984,83(2):529～530
[19]朱杰华,张志铭,杨志辉.马铃薯晚疫病菌A2交配型的研究进展.河北农业大学学报,1999,22(4):94～98
[20] Barony J.,Ersek T,First report of the A2 mating type of Phytophthora infestans onpotato in Hungary.Plant Disease,1997,81:1094
[21] Hrestha S K.First report of the A2 mating type of Phytophthora infestans on potato and tomato in Nepal.Plant Diease,1998,82(9):1064
[22] Spielman L.,J.,Drenth A.A.second world-wide migration and population displacement of Phytophthora infestans.Plant Pathology,1991,40:422～430
[23] ZHANG Zhiming,LI Yuqing,TIAN Shimin,et al.The occurrence of potato late blight pathogen (Phytophthora infestans) A2 mating type in China.Journal of Agricultural University of Hebei,1996,19(4):62～65
[24]李克来.呼和浩特马铃薯晚疫病菌生理小种组成及块茎生理小种毒性与植株感病关系[J].内蒙古大学学报(自然版),1988,9(1):179～183.
[25]郭军,屈冬玉,巩秀峰,等.内蒙古马铃薯晚疫病菌交配型和生理小种研究,2007,35(11):120～124
[26]杨艳丽,罗文富,国立耘.云南马铃薯晚疫病菌生理小种的研究.植物保护,2001,8(4):3～5
[27]金光辉,袁善奎,吕文河,等.黑龙江省马铃薯晚疫病菌生理小种类型和交配型研究.东北农业大学学报,2006,37(5):610～614
[28]杨怀文,张志铭,杨秀芬.嗜线虫致病杆菌代谢物对马铃薯晚疫病菌的抑制作用.中国生物防治,2000,16(3):111～113
[29]曹克强,Ariena H.G. van Bruggcn.几种植物提取物和天然产物对马铃薯晚疫病菌的抑制作用,河北农业大学学报,2001,24(2):90～96
[30]李玉华.嗜线虫杆菌代谢物对马铃薯晚疫病的防治效果.中国蔬菜,2003,(4):40
[31]蓝希钳,周泽扬,胡军华,等.假单孢菌20#-5菌株YFP对马铃薯晚疫病菌的抑制作用[J].植物保护学报,2003,30:300～304
[32]从心黎,杨明挚,李灿辉,等. YX拟青霉菌发酵液浓缩物对马铃薯晚疫病菌的离体抑制活性.西南农业学报,2005,18(2):153～155
[33]曹静,客绍英,王树桐,等.20种植物提取物对马铃薯晚疫病菌的抗菌活性研究.中国农学通报,2005,21(12):343～345
[34]王树桐,曹克强,胡同乐,等.知母提取物对马铃薯晚疫病菌的抑制作用及防病效果.植物病理学报,2006,36(3):267～272
[35]蒋继志,史鹃,赵丽坤,等.几种植物提取物诱导马铃薯对致病疫霉的抗性.植物病理学报,2000,31(2):145～151
[36]黑龙江省农业科学院马铃薯研究所主编.中国马铃薯栽培学[M].中国农业出版社,295.
[37]李汝刚,宋伯符.马铃薯抗晚疫病研究.马铃薯杂志,1997,11(4):243～250
[38]孙慧生.马铃薯遗传与育种.全国《马铃薯遗传与育种》讲学班资料(1987):53.
[39]付道林,王兰岚,蓝海燕,等.将抗真菌病基因导入马铃薯的研究[J].激光生物学报,2000,9(3):189～193
[40]甄伟,陈溪,梁浩博,等.转基因马铃薯中病原诱导GO基因的表达及其对晚疫病的抗性[J].科学通报,2000,45(10):1071～1075
[41]李汝刚,伍宁丰,范云六,等.表达Osmotin蛋白的转基因马铃薯对晚疫病的抗性分析[J].生物工程学报,1999,15(2):135～140
[42] Ali G.,S.,Reddy A S.Inhibition of fungal and bacterial plant pathogens by synthetic peptides:in vitro growth inhibition,interaction between petween peptides and inhibition of disease progression [J].Mol Plant Microbe Interact,2000,13(18):847～859.
[43]张志铭,王仁贵,等.中国马铃薯晚疫病的研究进展和建议[J].河北农业大学学报,2001,24(2):32～37
[44]苗则彦,赵奎华,刘长远,等.葡萄抗、感白腐病品种中PAL,PPO和SOD酶活性的差异[J].沈阳农业大学学报.2003,34(3):177～180
[45]吴岳轩,曾富华.杂交水稻对白叶枯病的诱导抗性与细胞内防御酶系统关系的初步研究[J].植物病理学报,1996,26(2):127～131
[46]马国华,王铨茂.水稻品种过氧化物酶活性和木质素含量与抗稻瘟病菌的关系[J].植物生理学通讯,1992,28(4):264～267
[47]李惠霞,王蒂.马铃薯晚疫病抗性反应中木质素及防御酶活性的变化[J].甘肃农业大学学报,2006(3):52～56
[48] Boller T A , Gehri F,Mauch U V . Chitinase in bean leaves:induction by ethylene,purifyication,properties,and possible function[J].Planta,1983,157(5):22～31
[49] Mauch F,Hadwiger L,Boller T.Ethylene,symptom,not signal for the induction of chitinase andβ-1,3-glucanase in pea pods by pathogens and elicitors[J].Plant Physiol,1984,76(5):607～611
[50]陈坚,李冠.新疆甜瓜疫霉菌毒素对新疆甜瓜黄化苗中β-1,3-葡聚糖酶和几丁酶活性的诱导(简报)[J].植物生理学通讯,1998,34(1):28～30
[51]王敬文,薛应龙.苯丙氨酸解氨酶在抗马铃薯晚疫病中的作用[J].植物生理学报,1982,8(1):35～42
[52]陈晓梅,郭顺星.植物抗病性物质的研究进展[J].植物学通报,1999,16(6):658～664
[53]余叔文,汤章城.植物生理与分子生物学(第二版).北京:科学出版社,1998
[54]从心黎,李灿辉,杨明挚,等.YX拟青霉菌发酵浓缩物对马铃薯晚疫病菌的抑制作用[J].云南大学学报2005,27(5):446～450
[55]杨怀文,张志铭,杨秀芬,嗜线虫致病杆菌代谢物对马铃薯晚疫病菌的抑制作用[J].中国生物放置,2000,16(3):111～113
[56]方中达.植病研究法(第三版)[M].北京:中国农业出版社,1998,12:381
[57] Fakhouri W , Walker F , Vogler B , et al . Isolation and identifica-tion ofN-mercapto-4-formyl-carbostyril , an antibiotic produced by Pseudomonas fluorescens[J].Phytochemistry,2001, 58 (8):1297～1303
[58]蓝希钳,周泽扬,胡军华,等.假单孢菌20#-5菌株YFP对马铃薯晚疫病菌的抑制作用[J].植物保护学报,2003,30:300～304
[59]张培花,罗文富,杨艳丽.紫茎泽兰汁液及其萃取物对马铃薯晚疫病菌的抑制作用[J].西南农业学报,2006,19(2):246～250
[60]朱广廉,钟海文,张爱琴,等.植物生理学试验指导,北京:北京大学出版社,1990:37～39
[61]张龙翔,生化试验方法和技术[M].北京:高等教育出版社,1997
[62] Kraus T.E,Fletcher R.A.Plant Cell Physiol.1994,35:45～52
[63]史益敏.现代植物生理学实验指南[M].北京:科学出版社,1999,128
[64]董金皋.植物的形态结构与抗病性[J].植物病理学报,1994,25(1):1～3.
[65]庄炳昌,王玉民,等.抗性不同大豆品种感染灰斑病后若干生化变化[J].作物学报.1993,19(6):568～569
[66]李靖,利谷千,等.黄瓜感染霜霉病菌叶片中的一些酶活性的变化[J].植物病理学报,1999,2(4):277～283。
[67]陈玲,向小奇,陈军等.猕猴桃果实采后α-淀粉酶活性的变化.吉首大学学报(自然科学版),1998,19(1):39～40
[68]陈晓亚.植物次生代谢及其调控[C].北京:科学出版社,1998
[69]朱宏波,腾冰,等.不同抗性大豆品种感染SMV1后若干生化变化[J].西北农业学报.2001,10(3):41～43
[70]陈坚,李冠.新疆甜瓜疫霉菌毒素对新疆甜瓜黄化苗中β-1,3-葡聚糖酶和几丁酶活性的诱导(简报)[J].植物生理学通讯,1998,34(1):28～30
[71]王维荣,郑春辉.黄瓜几丁酶的诱导、提取纯化及其基本性质(简报)[J].植物生理学通讯,1994,30(5):333～336
[72]Boller T A , Gehri F , Mauch U V . Chitinase in bean leaves:induction by ethylene,purifyication,properties,and possible function[J].Planta,1983,157(5):22～31
[73] Mauch F,Hadwiger L,Boller T.Ethylene,ymptom,not signal for the induction of chitinase andβ-1,3-glucanase in pea pods by pathogens and elicitors[J].Plant Physiol,1984,76(5):607～611
[74] Bronner R E,Biddle P,Cressman R, et al. Pathogenesis-related proteins I Solanum dulcamara resisitance to the gall mite Aceria caldophthirus[J].Physiological and Molecular Plant Pathology.1991, 38: 93～104
[75] Grison R, Grezes-Besset B,Schneider M, et al. Field toerance to fungal pathogens of Brassica napus constitutively expressing achimeric chitinase gene [J]. Nature Biotechnology,1996,14(5):643～646
[76]徐惠风.向日葵叶片可溶性糖含量的研究[J].吉林农业大学学报,2000,22 (1):23～25
[77]李海燕,刘惕若,甄艳.辣椒品种对疫病的抗性研究--脯氨酸、丙氨酸及可溶性糖在抗病中的作用[J].中国农学通报,2006,22(11):315～317
[78]周宝利,姜荷,赵鑫,等.嫁接茄抗黄萎病特性与苯丙烷类代谢关系[J].沈阳农业大学学报,2000,31(1):57～60
[79]庄炳昌,王玉民,等.抗性不同大豆品种感染灰斑病后若干生化变化[J].作物学报。1993,19(6):568～569
[80] Legrand M,Callow JA.Biochemical plant Pathology[M].John Wiley and Sons Ltd,1993,367
[81]王保通,商鸿生,小麦高温抗条锈性表达与木质素合成的关系[J].植物保护学报,1996,23(3):229～234
[82] Moerschbacher B M,Noll UN,et al.Lignin biosynthetic enzymesis stem rust infected,resistant and susceptible near-isogenic wheatlines[J].Physiol,Plant Pathol.1988,33:33～3
[2]张志铭,朱杰华,宋伯符,等.中国马铃薯晚疫病菌A2交配型的进一步研究[J],河北农业大学学报,2001,24(2):32～37
[3]林传光,黄河,王高才,等.马铃薯晚疫病都田间动态观察及防治试验.植物病理学报,1995(1)1:31～42
[4] Utrata A.Agrometeorological conditions determining thr occurrence of potato blight (Phytophthora infestans de Bary) in Poland [J].European Plant Protection Organisation Bulletin,1980,10:75～81
[5] J.G.Harrison.Effects of the aerial environment on late blight of potato foliage-areview.Plant Pathology,1992,41:384～416
[6]Vowinckel O.Die.Anfalligkeit deutscher Kartoffe1sorten gegen U ber Phytophthora infestans(Moot.)deBary unter besonderer Berucksichtigung derUnter-suchungsmethoden.Arbeiten aus det. Biologischen Reichssanstalt furLand-and Forstwirtschaft,1926,14:588～641
[7] Kable P.F.,Mackenzie D.R.Survival of Phytophthora infestans in potato stem lesions at high temperatures and implications for disease forecasting. Plant Disease,1980,64:165～167
[8] J.G.Harrison.Effects of the aerial environment on late blight of potato foliage-areview.Plant Pathology,1992,41:384～416
[9] Hyre R.A.Progress in forecasting late blight of potato and tomato.Plant Disease Reporter,1954,38:245～253
[10] Melhus I.E.Hibernation of Phytophthora infestans in the Irish potato.Journal of Agricultural Research,1915,5:71～102
[11] Harrison J.G.,Lowe R.,Heilbronn J..Epidemiology of late blight caused by Phytophthora infestans,Scottish Crop Research Institute Annual Report for 1988,1989:106
[12] De Weille G.,A.Forecasting crop infection by the potato blight fungus.Koninkhk Nederlands Meteorologisch Institute.Mededelintgen enYerhandelinggen No.82,1964,144
[13] Rotem J.,Cohen Y.,Bshi .E.Host and environmental influences on sporuladon in vivo Annual. Review of Phytopatholoty,1978,16:83～101
[14]Utrata A.Agrometeorological conditions determining the occurrence of potato blight (Phytophthora infestans de Bary) in Poland. European. Plant Protection Organisation Bulletin,1980,10:75～81
[15] Can K.Q,M Ruckstuhl,H R Forrer.Crucial weather condition for Phytophthora infestans:A reliable tool for improved control of potato late blight.Specical PAV-report,1996.1:85～90
[16]曹静,罗智敏,胡同乐等.温室马铃薯晚疫病流行动态初步研究.河北农业大学学报,2002,25(增刊1):190～192
[17] Nieder H,The blight the blighter and the blighted.Transactions of New York academy of Science,1956,19:55～63
[18] Hohl H.,R.,Iselin K. Strains of Phytophthora infestans from Switzerland with A2 mating type behavior.Trans.Br MycolSoc.1984,83(2):529～530
[19]朱杰华,张志铭,杨志辉.马铃薯晚疫病菌A2交配型的研究进展.河北农业大学学报,1999,22(4):94～98
[20] Barony J.,Ersek T,First report of the A2 mating type of Phytophthora infestans onpotato in Hungary.Plant Disease,1997,81:1094
[21] Hrestha S K.First report of the A2 mating type of Phytophthora infestans on potato and tomato in Nepal.Plant Diease,1998,82(9):1064
[22] Spielman L.,J.,Drenth A.A.second world-wide migration and population displacement of Phytophthora infestans.Plant Pathology,1991,40:422～430
[23] ZHANG Zhiming,LI Yuqing,TIAN Shimin,et al.The occurrence of potato late blight pathogen (Phytophthora infestans) A2 mating type in China.Journal of Agricultural University of Hebei,1996,19(4):62～65
[24]李克来.呼和浩特马铃薯晚疫病菌生理小种组成及块茎生理小种毒性与植株感病关系[J].内蒙古大学学报(自然版),1988,9(1):179～183.
[25]郭军,屈冬玉,巩秀峰,等.内蒙古马铃薯晚疫病菌交配型和生理小种研究,2007,35(11):120～124
[26]杨艳丽,罗文富,国立耘.云南马铃薯晚疫病菌生理小种的研究.植物保护,2001,8(4):3～5
[27]金光辉,袁善奎,吕文河,等.黑龙江省马铃薯晚疫病菌生理小种类型和交配型研究.东北农业大学学报,2006,37(5):610～614
[28]杨怀文,张志铭,杨秀芬.嗜线虫致病杆菌代谢物对马铃薯晚疫病菌的抑制作用.中国生物防治,2000,16(3):111～113
[29]曹克强,Ariena H.G. van Bruggcn.几种植物提取物和天然产物对马铃薯晚疫病菌的抑制作用,河北农业大学学报,2001,24(2):90～96
[30]李玉华.嗜线虫杆菌代谢物对马铃薯晚疫病的防治效果.中国蔬菜,2003,(4):40
[31]蓝希钳,周泽扬,胡军华,等.假单孢菌20#-5菌株YFP对马铃薯晚疫病菌的抑制作用[J].植物保护学报,2003,30:300～304
[32]从心黎,杨明挚,李灿辉,等. YX拟青霉菌发酵液浓缩物对马铃薯晚疫病菌的离体抑制活性.西南农业学报,2005,18(2):153～155
[33]曹静,客绍英,王树桐,等.20种植物提取物对马铃薯晚疫病菌的抗菌活性研究.中国农学通报,2005,21(12):343～345
[34]王树桐,曹克强,胡同乐,等.知母提取物对马铃薯晚疫病菌的抑制作用及防病效果.植物病理学报,2006,36(3):267～272
[35]蒋继志,史鹃,赵丽坤,等.几种植物提取物诱导马铃薯对致病疫霉的抗性.植物病理学报,2000,31(2):145～151
[36]黑龙江省农业科学院马铃薯研究所主编.中国马铃薯栽培学[M].中国农业出版社,295.
[37]李汝刚,宋伯符.马铃薯抗晚疫病研究.马铃薯杂志,1997,11(4):243～250
[38]孙慧生.马铃薯遗传与育种.全国《马铃薯遗传与育种》讲学班资料(1987):53.
[39]付道林,王兰岚,蓝海燕,等.将抗真菌病基因导入马铃薯的研究[J].激光生物学报,2000,9(3):189～193
[40]甄伟,陈溪,梁浩博,等.转基因马铃薯中病原诱导GO基因的表达及其对晚疫病的抗性[J].科学通报,2000,45(10):1071～1075
[41]李汝刚,伍宁丰,范云六,等.表达Osmotin蛋白的转基因马铃薯对晚疫病的抗性分析[J].生物工程学报,1999,15(2):135～140
[42] Ali G.,S.,Reddy A S.Inhibition of fungal and bacterial plant pathogens by synthetic peptides:in vitro growth inhibition,interaction between petween peptides and inhibition of disease progression [J].Mol Plant Microbe Interact,2000,13(18):847～859.
[43]张志铭,王仁贵,等.中国马铃薯晚疫病的研究进展和建议[J].河北农业大学学报,2001,24(2):32～37
[44]苗则彦,赵奎华,刘长远,等.葡萄抗、感白腐病品种中PAL,PPO和SOD酶活性的差异[J].沈阳农业大学学报.2003,34(3):177～180
[45]吴岳轩,曾富华.杂交水稻对白叶枯病的诱导抗性与细胞内防御酶系统关系的初步研究[J].植物病理学报,1996,26(2):127～131
[46]马国华,王铨茂.水稻品种过氧化物酶活性和木质素含量与抗稻瘟病菌的关系[J].植物生理学通讯,1992,28(4):264～267
[47]李惠霞,王蒂.马铃薯晚疫病抗性反应中木质素及防御酶活性的变化[J].甘肃农业大学学报,2006(3):52～56
[48] Boller T A , Gehri F,Mauch U V . Chitinase in bean leaves:induction by ethylene,purifyication,properties,and possible function[J].Planta,1983,157(5):22～31
[49] Mauch F,Hadwiger L,Boller T.Ethylene,symptom,not signal for the induction of chitinase andβ-1,3-glucanase in pea pods by pathogens and elicitors[J].Plant Physiol,1984,76(5):607～611
[50]陈坚,李冠.新疆甜瓜疫霉菌毒素对新疆甜瓜黄化苗中β-1,3-葡聚糖酶和几丁酶活性的诱导(简报)[J].植物生理学通讯,1998,34(1):28～30
[51]王敬文,薛应龙.苯丙氨酸解氨酶在抗马铃薯晚疫病中的作用[J].植物生理学报,1982,8(1):35～42
[52]陈晓梅,郭顺星.植物抗病性物质的研究进展[J].植物学通报,1999,16(6):658～664
[53]余叔文,汤章城.植物生理与分子生物学(第二版).北京:科学出版社,1998
[54]从心黎,李灿辉,杨明挚,等.YX拟青霉菌发酵浓缩物对马铃薯晚疫病菌的抑制作用[J].云南大学学报2005,27(5):446～450
[55]杨怀文,张志铭,杨秀芬,嗜线虫致病杆菌代谢物对马铃薯晚疫病菌的抑制作用[J].中国生物放置,2000,16(3):111～113
[56]方中达.植病研究法(第三版)[M].北京:中国农业出版社,1998,12:381
[57] Fakhouri W , Walker F , Vogler B , et al . Isolation and identifica-tion ofN-mercapto-4-formyl-carbostyril , an antibiotic produced by Pseudomonas fluorescens[J].Phytochemistry,2001, 58 (8):1297～1303
[58]蓝希钳,周泽扬,胡军华,等.假单孢菌20#-5菌株YFP对马铃薯晚疫病菌的抑制作用[J].植物保护学报,2003,30:300～304
[59]张培花,罗文富,杨艳丽.紫茎泽兰汁液及其萃取物对马铃薯晚疫病菌的抑制作用[J].西南农业学报,2006,19(2):246～250
[60]朱广廉,钟海文,张爱琴,等.植物生理学试验指导,北京:北京大学出版社,1990:37～39
[61]张龙翔,生化试验方法和技术[M].北京:高等教育出版社,1997
[62] Kraus T.E,Fletcher R.A.Plant Cell Physiol.1994,35:45～52
[63]史益敏.现代植物生理学实验指南[M].北京:科学出版社,1999,128
[64]董金皋.植物的形态结构与抗病性[J].植物病理学报,1994,25(1):1～3.
[65]庄炳昌,王玉民,等.抗性不同大豆品种感染灰斑病后若干生化变化[J].作物学报.1993,19(6):568～569
[66]李靖,利谷千,等.黄瓜感染霜霉病菌叶片中的一些酶活性的变化[J].植物病理学报,1999,2(4):277～283。
[67]陈玲,向小奇,陈军等.猕猴桃果实采后α-淀粉酶活性的变化.吉首大学学报(自然科学版),1998,19(1):39～40
[68]陈晓亚.植物次生代谢及其调控[C].北京:科学出版社,1998
[69]朱宏波,腾冰,等.不同抗性大豆品种感染SMV1后若干生化变化[J].西北农业学报.2001,10(3):41～43
[70]陈坚,李冠.新疆甜瓜疫霉菌毒素对新疆甜瓜黄化苗中β-1,3-葡聚糖酶和几丁酶活性的诱导(简报)[J].植物生理学通讯,1998,34(1):28～30
[71]王维荣,郑春辉.黄瓜几丁酶的诱导、提取纯化及其基本性质(简报)[J].植物生理学通讯,1994,30(5):333～336
[72]Boller T A , Gehri F , Mauch U V . Chitinase in bean leaves:induction by ethylene,purifyication,properties,and possible function[J].Planta,1983,157(5):22～31
[73] Mauch F,Hadwiger L,Boller T.Ethylene,ymptom,not signal for the induction of chitinase andβ-1,3-glucanase in pea pods by pathogens and elicitors[J].Plant Physiol,1984,76(5):607～611
[74] Bronner R E,Biddle P,Cressman R, et al. Pathogenesis-related proteins I Solanum dulcamara resisitance to the gall mite Aceria caldophthirus[J].Physiological and Molecular Plant Pathology.1991, 38: 93～104
[75] Grison R, Grezes-Besset B,Schneider M, et al. Field toerance to fungal pathogens of Brassica napus constitutively expressing achimeric chitinase gene [J]. Nature Biotechnology,1996,14(5):643～646
[76]徐惠风.向日葵叶片可溶性糖含量的研究[J].吉林农业大学学报,2000,22 (1):23～25
[77]李海燕,刘惕若,甄艳.辣椒品种对疫病的抗性研究--脯氨酸、丙氨酸及可溶性糖在抗病中的作用[J].中国农学通报,2006,22(11):315～317
[78]周宝利,姜荷,赵鑫,等.嫁接茄抗黄萎病特性与苯丙烷类代谢关系[J].沈阳农业大学学报,2000,31(1):57～60
[79]庄炳昌,王玉民,等.抗性不同大豆品种感染灰斑病后若干生化变化[J].作物学报。1993,19(6):568～569
[80] Legrand M,Callow JA.Biochemical plant Pathology[M].John Wiley and Sons Ltd,1993,367
[81]王保通,商鸿生,小麦高温抗条锈性表达与木质素合成的关系[J].植物保护学报,1996,23(3):229～234
[82] Moerschbacher B M,Noll UN,et al.Lignin biosynthetic enzymesis stem rust infected,resistant and susceptible near-isogenic wheatlines[J].Physiol,Plant Pathol.1988,33:33～3