Limits...
Magnetic resonance imaging of sugar beet taproots in soil reveals growth reduction and morphological changes during foliar Cercospora beticola infestation.

Schmittgen S, Metzner R, Van Dusschoten D, Jansen M, Fiorani F, Jahnke S, Rascher U, Schurr U - J. Exp. Bot. (2015)

Bottom Line: However, during this period, the volumetric growth of the taproot had already started to decrease.Additionally, inoculated plants showed a reduction of the increase in width of inner cambial rings while the width of outer rings increased slightly compared with non-inoculated plants.This response partly compensated for the reduced development of inner rings that had a vascular connection with Cercospora-inoculated leaves.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, Institut für Bio-und Geowissenschaften, IBG-2: Plant Sciences, Wilhelm-Johnen-Straße, D-52425 Jülich, Germany simone.schmittgen@julumni.fz-juelich.de s.jahnke@fz-juelich.de.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Shoot and root development of the HS and LS sugar beet plants. (A) Representative, visually scored leaf samples illustrating different levels of disease severity (% infected leaf area per leaf). Due to tissue sampling, two leaves (with 3% and 30% disease severity) showed punched holes. (B) Disease severity progression (mean ±SE) with increasing average number of infected leaves per plant (ILPa), 1–16 leaves for LS and 7–20 leaves for HS from 14 to 89 dpi. (C) Leaf area development during –28 to 89 dpi; asterisks indicate statistically significant differences between the inoculated (+ C.b.) and non-inoculated (– C.b.) treatment of the HS and LS genotype at 89 dpi analysed by a t-test, P<0.05. (D) Taproot volume measured non-invasively with MRI; asterisks indicate statistically significant differences between the treatments of the HS and LS plants analysed at 90 dpi with one-way ANOVA, P<0.01. The + C.b. and – C.b. treatments of each genotype did not differ significantly (P=0.159 between the treatments of LS and P=0.165 of HS). (E) Taproot fresh weight after harvest at 90 dpi. Comparing the HS and LS genotypes, asterisks indicate statistically significant differences between the + C.b. plants (P<0.001) and the – C.b. plants of the HS and LS genotype (P<0.01) analysed by a t-test. (C, D, E) The arithmetic mean of each plant was calculated during –14 dpi to 90 dpi (mean ±SE; n=5 per treatment). The two dates of inoculation with C. beticola are indicated by grey arrows.
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4585413&req=5

Figure 2: Shoot and root development of the HS and LS sugar beet plants. (A) Representative, visually scored leaf samples illustrating different levels of disease severity (% infected leaf area per leaf). Due to tissue sampling, two leaves (with 3% and 30% disease severity) showed punched holes. (B) Disease severity progression (mean ±SE) with increasing average number of infected leaves per plant (ILPa), 1–16 leaves for LS and 7–20 leaves for HS from 14 to 89 dpi. (C) Leaf area development during –28 to 89 dpi; asterisks indicate statistically significant differences between the inoculated (+ C.b.) and non-inoculated (– C.b.) treatment of the HS and LS genotype at 89 dpi analysed by a t-test, P<0.05. (D) Taproot volume measured non-invasively with MRI; asterisks indicate statistically significant differences between the treatments of the HS and LS plants analysed at 90 dpi with one-way ANOVA, P<0.01. The + C.b. and – C.b. treatments of each genotype did not differ significantly (P=0.159 between the treatments of LS and P=0.165 of HS). (E) Taproot fresh weight after harvest at 90 dpi. Comparing the HS and LS genotypes, asterisks indicate statistically significant differences between the + C.b. plants (P<0.001) and the – C.b. plants of the HS and LS genotype (P<0.01) analysed by a t-test. (C, D, E) The arithmetic mean of each plant was calculated during –14 dpi to 90 dpi (mean ±SE; n=5 per treatment). The two dates of inoculation with C. beticola are indicated by grey arrows.

Mentions: In experiment 1, sugar beets grew in pots until harvest at 90 dpi, showing phenotypic differences between genotypes with respect to the development of non-inoculated (Fig. 1A, B) and inoculated shoots (Fig. 1C, D). After inoculation, CLS disease severity increased in leaves of both genotypes from single leaf spots to the final loss of the inoculated leaves (Fig. 2A). Disease severity was estimated by the combination of two scoring scales (Rossi et al. 1989; Shane and Teng, 1992), and the average number of infected leaves per plant (ILPa) was calculated (see Equation 1).


Magnetic resonance imaging of sugar beet taproots in soil reveals growth reduction and morphological changes during foliar Cercospora beticola infestation.

Schmittgen S, Metzner R, Van Dusschoten D, Jansen M, Fiorani F, Jahnke S, Rascher U, Schurr U - J. Exp. Bot. (2015)

Shoot and root development of the HS and LS sugar beet plants. (A) Representative, visually scored leaf samples illustrating different levels of disease severity (% infected leaf area per leaf). Due to tissue sampling, two leaves (with 3% and 30% disease severity) showed punched holes. (B) Disease severity progression (mean ±SE) with increasing average number of infected leaves per plant (ILPa), 1–16 leaves for LS and 7–20 leaves for HS from 14 to 89 dpi. (C) Leaf area development during –28 to 89 dpi; asterisks indicate statistically significant differences between the inoculated (+ C.b.) and non-inoculated (– C.b.) treatment of the HS and LS genotype at 89 dpi analysed by a t-test, P<0.05. (D) Taproot volume measured non-invasively with MRI; asterisks indicate statistically significant differences between the treatments of the HS and LS plants analysed at 90 dpi with one-way ANOVA, P<0.01. The + C.b. and – C.b. treatments of each genotype did not differ significantly (P=0.159 between the treatments of LS and P=0.165 of HS). (E) Taproot fresh weight after harvest at 90 dpi. Comparing the HS and LS genotypes, asterisks indicate statistically significant differences between the + C.b. plants (P<0.001) and the – C.b. plants of the HS and LS genotype (P<0.01) analysed by a t-test. (C, D, E) The arithmetic mean of each plant was calculated during –14 dpi to 90 dpi (mean ±SE; n=5 per treatment). The two dates of inoculation with C. beticola are indicated by grey arrows.
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4585413&req=5

Figure 2: Shoot and root development of the HS and LS sugar beet plants. (A) Representative, visually scored leaf samples illustrating different levels of disease severity (% infected leaf area per leaf). Due to tissue sampling, two leaves (with 3% and 30% disease severity) showed punched holes. (B) Disease severity progression (mean ±SE) with increasing average number of infected leaves per plant (ILPa), 1–16 leaves for LS and 7–20 leaves for HS from 14 to 89 dpi. (C) Leaf area development during –28 to 89 dpi; asterisks indicate statistically significant differences between the inoculated (+ C.b.) and non-inoculated (– C.b.) treatment of the HS and LS genotype at 89 dpi analysed by a t-test, P<0.05. (D) Taproot volume measured non-invasively with MRI; asterisks indicate statistically significant differences between the treatments of the HS and LS plants analysed at 90 dpi with one-way ANOVA, P<0.01. The + C.b. and – C.b. treatments of each genotype did not differ significantly (P=0.159 between the treatments of LS and P=0.165 of HS). (E) Taproot fresh weight after harvest at 90 dpi. Comparing the HS and LS genotypes, asterisks indicate statistically significant differences between the + C.b. plants (P<0.001) and the – C.b. plants of the HS and LS genotype (P<0.01) analysed by a t-test. (C, D, E) The arithmetic mean of each plant was calculated during –14 dpi to 90 dpi (mean ±SE; n=5 per treatment). The two dates of inoculation with C. beticola are indicated by grey arrows.
Mentions: In experiment 1, sugar beets grew in pots until harvest at 90 dpi, showing phenotypic differences between genotypes with respect to the development of non-inoculated (Fig. 1A, B) and inoculated shoots (Fig. 1C, D). After inoculation, CLS disease severity increased in leaves of both genotypes from single leaf spots to the final loss of the inoculated leaves (Fig. 2A). Disease severity was estimated by the combination of two scoring scales (Rossi et al. 1989; Shane and Teng, 1992), and the average number of infected leaves per plant (ILPa) was calculated (see Equation 1).

Bottom Line: However, during this period, the volumetric growth of the taproot had already started to decrease.Additionally, inoculated plants showed a reduction of the increase in width of inner cambial rings while the width of outer rings increased slightly compared with non-inoculated plants.This response partly compensated for the reduced development of inner rings that had a vascular connection with Cercospora-inoculated leaves.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, Institut für Bio-und Geowissenschaften, IBG-2: Plant Sciences, Wilhelm-Johnen-Straße, D-52425 Jülich, Germany simone.schmittgen@julumni.fz-juelich.de s.jahnke@fz-juelich.de.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus