Author
HARVEY, T - KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY | |
SEIFERS, D - KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY | |
MARTIN, T - KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY | |
Brown-Guedira, Gina | |
GILL, B - KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY |
Submitted to: Crop Science
Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal Publication Acceptance Date: 9/1/1998 Publication Date: N/A Citation: HARVEY,T.L., SEIFERS,D.L., MARTIN,T.J., BROWN GUEDIRA,G.L., GILL,B.S., SURVIVAL OF WHEAT CURL MITES ON DIFFERENT SOURCES OF RESISTANCE IN WHEAT, CROP SCIENCE, 1998. Interpretive Summary: Wheat yield is limited by the wheat streak mosaic virus which is transmitted to wheat by the wheat curl mite (WCM). Growing varieties that are resistant to WCM has reduced yield losses to this virus. Our study evaluated the effectiveness of different sources of resistance in wheat to WCM collected from various locations in the Great Plains of North America. Collections of WCM from Montana, Nebraska, South Dakota, Texas, Alberta, Canada and eight locations in Kansas were compared for their ability to survive and reproduce in the greenhouse on seven lines of wheat and wheat relatives previously identified as resistant. KS96WGRC40 and TA920 were the only entries that were resistant to all WCM collections. Other sources of resistance were effective against WCMs from some but not all locations. Our results show wheat breeders should evaluate resistance genes advanced in breeding programs for resistance to different collections of WCM to insure that varieties will be resistant in the field. Technical Abstract: Wheat yield is limited by wheat streak mosaic virus which is vectored by the wheat curl mite (WCM) Aceria tosicheilla (Keifer).Host resistance to WCM has reduced losses. This study evaluated the effectiveness of resistance in wheat to WCM collected from various locations in the Great Plains. Collections of WCM from Montana, Nebraska, South Dakota, Texas, Alberta, Canada and eight locations in Kansas were compared for their ability to survive and reproduce in the greenhouse on seven lines of wheat and wheat relatives previously identified as resistant. KS96WGRC40 and TA920 were the only entries that were resistant to all WCM collections. Other sources of resistance were effective against WCMs from some but not all locations. WCMs that were virulent to TAM 107 generally were also virulent to PIs 222655 and 475772 but avirulent to Cmc2. WCMs collected at different times or locations may vary in their responses to different sources of resistance; therefore, testing mites for their response to resistance genes advanced in breeding programs may be needed before resistant cultivars are deployed in the field. |