I - --ii

More documents

Recommendations

Info

62 growing and abundantly-sporulating isolates induced moderately susceptible disease reaction on the above cultivars and constituted more virulent race 2. Isolate J 101 gave moderately susceptible reaction on line 1-13 and was distinguished as a biotype of race 2. Fourteen chickpea lines identified as resistant by different workers in the world were found to be moderately susceptible to race 2. Line 1528-1-1 from Morocco, however, showed resistant reaction to this race. References AHMED, T., HASANAIN, S.N. and SATTAR, A. 1949. Some popular methods of plant disease control in Pakistan. Agric. Pakist. 1:18-22. ARIF. A.G. and JABBAR, A. 1965. A study of physiologic specialization in Mycosphaerella rabiei Kovacevski Ascochyta rabiei (Pass.) Lab., the causal organism of gram blight. W. Pakist. J. Agric. Res. 3 (2-3):103-121. ATANASOFF, D. and KOVACEVSKI, I.C. 1929. (Parasitic fungi new for Bulgaria) First contribution. Bull. Soc. Bot. de Bulgaria Sofia 3:45-32. AUJLA, S.S. 1964. Studies on 11isolates of Phyllostictarabiei,the causal agent of gram blight inthe Punjab. Indian Phytopath. 17:83-87. AZIZ, M.A. 1962. C727, a new blight-resistant gram variety for Barani areas. W. Pakist. J. Agric. Res. 1:165-166. BEDI, P.S. and AUJLA, S.S. 1969. Variability in Phyllostictarabiei(Pass.) Trot., the incitant of blight disease of gram in the Punjab. J. Res. Punjab agric. Univ. 6:103-106. BUTLER, E.J. 1918. Fungi and Diseases in Plants. Thacker Spink & Co., Calcutta, India. pp. 244 251. FAO 1963. Quarterly Report for Oct.-Dec. 1962 of the Plant Prntect1un Committee for the Southcast Asia and Pacific region, FAO Publication, Bangkok, Thailand. 15 pp. GENEVA, D. and MATSOV, B. 1977. Comparative testing of introduced and local samples of chickpea. Rastenievdni Nauki 14:57-59. GREWAL, J.S. 1969. Important fungal diseases of Cicer arietinum in India. Seminar on Pulse production. Karaj, Iran. pp. 35-40. GREWAL, ..S. 1975. Ascochyta blight of Bengal gram. Pages 161-167 in Advances in Mycology and Plant Pathology. Prof. R.N. Tandon Birthday Celeration Committee, Indian Phytopath. Soc., New Delhi. GREWAL, J.S. and VIR, S. 1974. Varietal resistance of gram to Asochyta blight. Indian Phytopath. 27:643-645. HALFON-MEIRI, A. 1970. Infection of chickpea seeds by Ascochyta rabid in Israel. Plant Dis. Reptr. 54:442-445. KAISER, W.J. 1972. Occurrence of three fungal diseases of chickpea in Iran. Ascochyta rabiei, Stemphylium sarciniforme and Sclerouinia sclerotiorum. Reporting service on plant diseases and pests. Plant Bull. FAQ 20:74-78. KAISER, W.J. 1973. Factors affecting growth, sporulation, pathogenicity and survival ofAscochyta rabiei. Mycologia 65:444-457. KOVACEVSKI, I.C. 1936. The blight of chickpea, Mycosphaerella rabiel new species. Min. Agric. nat. Domanicus Sofia. 80 pp. LABROUSSE, F. 1930. Anthracnose of chickpea (Cicerarietinum L.) Rev. Path. Veg. Ent. Agric. 17:174-177. LABROUSSE, F. 1931 Anthracnose of chickpea. Rev. Path. Veg. Ent. Agric. 18:226-231.
LUTHRA, J.C. and BEDI K.S. 1932. Some preliminary siudies in gram bligh, with reference to its control and mode of perennation. Indian J. agric. Sci. 2:499-515. LUTHRA, J.C., SATTAR, A. and BEDI, K.S. 1939. Variation in Ascochyta rabiei (Pass.) Lab., the causal fungus of blight of gram (Cicer arietinum). Indian J. agric. Sci. 9:791-806. LUTHRA, J.C., SATTAR A. and BEDI, K.S. 1941. Deternination of resistince to blight disease (Mycosphaerella rabiei = Ascochyta rabiei) in gram types. Indian J. agric. Sci. 11:249-264. MORRALL, R.A.A. and McKENZIE, D.L. 1974. A note on the inadvertent introduction to North America of Ascochyla raliei, a destructive pathogen of chickpea. Plant Dis. Reptr. 58:342-345. NENE, Y.L., MENGISTU, A., SINCLAIR, J.B. and ROYSE, D.J. 1978. An annotated bibliography of chickpea diseases 1915-1976. ICRISAT, Patancheru, A.P., India. PAVLOVA, A. 1935. Varieties of gram resistant Ascochyta. Bull. Appl. Bo. Leningrad. Scr. A. 14:43-45. RADKOV, P. 1978. Biologica. and economic properties of some new varieties of chickpea. Rastenievdni Nauki 15:81-87. SANDHU, T.S. 1972. New :'nurces of resistance to gram blight disease, Ascochyta rabiei. Madras agric. J. 59:41. SAREJANNI, J.A. 1939. Annotated list of fungi encountered on cultivated plants in Greece. Ann. Inst. Phytopath. Benaki 3:41-66. SATTAR, A. 1933. On occurrence, perpetuatio'n and control of gram (Cicer arielinun L.) blight caused by Ascochyta rabiei (Pass.) Lab. with special reference to Indian conditions. Ann. Appl. Biol. 20:612-632. SATIAR, A. 1934. A comparative study of fungi associated with blight disease of certain cultivated leguminous plants. Trans. Br. Mycol. Soc. 18:276-301. SAVULESCU, T. 1932. Phytosanitary conditions in Romania during the year 1930-31. Inst. Cerc. Agron. al. Romaniei Publ. 8:31. SINGH, K.B., HAWTINl., G.C., NENE, Y.L. and REDDY, M.V. 1981. Resistance in chickpeas in Ascochyta rabiei (Pass.) Lab. Plant Dis. 65:586-587. SOLEL, Z. and KOSTRINSKI, J. 1964. The control of Ascochyta anthracnose of chickpea. Phytopath. Mediterrance 3:119-120. VEDYSHEVA, R.G. 1966. Infection of chickpea with Ascochyta rabiei in infected ground. Zap. Voronezh. Scl. Khosz. Inst. 32:275-281. VIR, S. and GREWAL, J.S. 1974. Physiologic specialization in Ascochyta rabiei, the causal organism of gram blight. Indian Phytopath. 27:355-360. WALLACE, G.B. 1948. Annual report, 1947. Department of Agriculture, Tanganyika. 3 pp. ZACHOS, D.G., PONEGOPOVIOS, C.G. and MAKRIS, S.A. '963. Researches on the biology, epidemology and the control of anthracnose of chickpea. Annis. Inst. Phytopath. Benaki, N.S. 5:167-192. ZALPOOR, N. 1963. Mycosphacreila rabiel Kovacevski Ascochyta rabiei (Pass.) Lab. Ent. Phytop. Appl. Tehran 21:10-12. Discussion H.C. Weltzien Has anybody worked on the perfect stage of the fungus and studied the pathogenic variability of single ascospore isolates? 63
Page 1 and 2:
A14 ""..."W~e S~wn ofCh all il NM I
Page 3 and 4:
WORLD CROPS: PRODUCTION, UTILIZATIO
Page 5 and 6:
Copyright (c) 1984 by ICARDA All ri
Page 7 and 8:
VI THIRD SESSION: WINTER SOWING Agr
Page 9 and 10:
Foreword The advancing of sowing da
Page 11 and 12:
Editors' Note The idea to hold this
Page 13 and 14:
Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen, Ope
Page 15 and 16:
4 including stunt virus (pea leaf r
Page 17 and 18:
6 in with Iarmers'plans and proposa
Page 19 and 20:
8 about 130 to over 200 days, where
Page 21 and 22: 10 Table I Mean yield and range of
Page 23 and 24: 12 International Yield Trials A 10-
Page 25 and 26: 14 small plots on farmers' fields i
Page 27 and 28: 16 HANOUNIK, S.B. 1979. Diseases of
Page 29 and 30: 18 diospores (Khune and Kapoor 1980
Page 31 and 32: 20 2. Reproduction Asexual. The ase
Page 33 and 34: 22 surface. However, the fungus los
Page 35 and 36: 24 observed small reddish brown spo
Page 37 and 38: 26 Reddy and Nene (1979) developed
Page 39 and 40: 28 suggested the application of pot
Page 41 and 42: 30 ASKEROV, I.B. 1968. Ascochytosis
Page 43 and 44: 32 NEMLIENKO, F.E. and LUKASHEVICH,
Page 45 and 46: Proceedings ofthe Workshop on Ascoc
Page 47 and 48: 100/ ILC 1929 90 -80./ 8o0 / ILC
Page 49 and 50: 30 24 18 12 6 Temperature (°C) t6
Page 51 and 52: I I -I - --ii ' Disase Ic I ii I'll
Page 53 and 54: infected seed is a much more potent
Page 55 and 56: Proceedingsof the Workshop on Ascoc
Page 57 and 58: early February were found to give e
Page 59 and 60: pot assembly consists of a stem tha
Page 61 and 62: Table I A quantitative 9-point rati
Page 63 and 64: inoculating the plants by uniformly
Page 65 and 66: Proceedings ofthe Workshopon Ascoch
Page 67 and 68: Table I Cultural characteristics of
Page 69 and 70: Line/ Table 2 Disease grades produc
Page 71: India and Iran were highly sporulat
Page 75 and 76: J.S. Grewal There are more chances
Page 77 and 78: 68 Table I Summary of results of sc
Page 79 and 80: 70 Table 3 Summary of results of sc
Page 81 and 82: 72 ery originated from the USSR, Sp
Page 83 and 84: Table 7. Contd. Rating on 1-9 Scale
Page 85 and 86: Table 8 Contd. Rating on 1-9 Scale
Page 87 and 88: Table 9. Contd. Entry Origin Rating
Page 89 and 90: Table 10 Differential reaction of s
Page 91 and 92: 82 1069, 1467, 1591 were found resi
Page 93 and 94: 84 ing of the remaining collections
Page 95 and 96: 86 AUJLA, S.S. 1964. Study of eleve
Page 97 and 98: Proceedings ofthe Workshop on Ascac
Page 99 and 100: Parents diallel cross F1 diallel cr
Page 101 and 102: R.Pieters Malic acid is known to ha
Page 103 and 104: 96 (Hawtin and Singh 1983). Asv.-,h
Page 105 and 106: 98 3. Identification of as many sou
Page 107 and 108: 100 Germ. Evaluation Disease Res. M
Page 109 and 110: 102 Robinson (1976) has further dev
Page 111 and 112: 104 and by the time a multilinc cul
Page 113 and 114: 106 lines will then be made availab
Page 115 and 116: 108 GILL, K.S., NANDA, G.S., SINGH,
Page 117 and 118: 110 the program for the development
Page 119 and 120: 112 where they are not present. See
Page 121 and 122: 114 cides have been found to be eff
Page 123 and 124:
116 indicates that this propagate i
Page 125 and 126:
118 Great care must be exercised in
Page 127 and 128:
120 nature. Ascochyta propagules on
Page 129 and 130:
122 ZACHOS, D.G., PANAGOPOULOS, C.G
Page 131 and 132:
124 0 40 g30 Max 30 20. .,,10 Min ,
Page 133 and 134:
126 ranged from November 22, 1978 t
Page 135 and 136:
128 Genotypes Table 2 Grain yield o
Page 137 and 138:
130 Response to Plant Population Th
Page 139 and 140:
132 ILC 1929 at Tel Hadya and ILC 4
Page 141 and 142:
134 Data in Tab. 5 emphasize the im
Page 143 and 144:
136 appears adequate, therefore no
Page 145 and 146:
138 Discussion F. EI-Sayed I am ass
Page 147 and 148:
Proceedings of the Workshop on Asco
Page 149 and 150:
Table I The timing of reproductive
Page 151 and 152:
Table 3 Accumulated water use by sp
Page 153 and 154:
Es x (1 - a) x Eo t where t is the
Page 155 and 156:
BRIDA cm Water /Depth Interva', 3 4
Page 157 and 158:
crops extended deeper than under wi
Page 159 and 160:
(as at Jindiress), the winter-sown
Page 161 and 162:
eduction in the size of the crop's
Page 163 and 164:
Discussion G.C. Hawtin You raised a
Page 165 and 166:
Table I Nodutation and total drymat
Page 167 and 168:
162 Inoculation with single strain
Page 169 and 170:
164 These results indicate that pho
Page 171 and 172:
166 T.S. Sandhu Is there any techni
Page 173 and 174:
168 April for Tal Abaid (36*42'N, 3
Page 175 and 176:
170 At the end of the severe cold p
Page 177 and 178:
172 Table 4 Origin of lines having
Page 179 and 180:
174 stage (Tab. 6). Of the five cul
Page 181 and 182:
176 HERZOG, H. 1978. Wachsturnsverh
Page 183 and 184:
Proeedings of the Workshop on Ascoc
Page 185 and 186:
There is little information availab
Page 187 and 188:
of the major and minor pests in thi
Page 189 and 190:
attack any other important crop pla
Page 191 and 192:
KAY, D.E. 1979. Food Legumes - Crop
Page 193 and 194:
190 On the other hand, two items th
Page 195 and 196:
192 M.V. Reddy It looks as if the c
Page 197 and 198:
Country World ICARDA region Algeria
Page 199 and 200:
196 Table 2a Export of chickpeas by
Page 201 and 202:
198 India, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela
Page 203 and 204:
Proceedings ofthe Workshop on Ascoc
Page 205 and 206:
Chickpea Cultivation 203 In Syria m
Page 207 and 208:
Table 2 Comparison of the growth, s
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Excessive postharvest losses. Posth
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Seedbed preparation is very minimal
Page 217 and 218:
carried out at the same time with w
Page 219 and 220:
Table 4 Topographical classificatio
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
were absorbed by the canning indust
Page 225 and 226:
223 The advantages of winter sowing
Page 227 and 228:
226 cultivars which could be plante
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Table 2 Area, production and yicld
Page 233 and 234:
233 Threshing is mostly done by bul
Page 235 and 236:
182, 192,'194,1069, 1772,3279,2380,
Page 237 and 238:
238 4. Mycosphaerella pinodes and A
Page 239 and 240:
240 Kausar (1960) discussed the rea
Page 241 and 242:
242 Date Tale 2 Maximum temperature
Page 243 and 244:
244 Table 4 Maximum temperature and
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
soil moisture and therefore it is a
Page 249 and 250:
Table 2 Characteristics of chickpea
Page 251 and 252:
253 Table 5 Results of a trial on w
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Conclusion Chickpea in Tunisia has
Page 257 and 258:
260 however, remained almost static
Page 259 and 260:
262 Agricultural Universities and s
Page 261 and 262:
264 greatest at flowering and fruit
Page 263 and 264:
266 Basis of Resistance Kunzru and
Page 265 and 266:
268 Discussion M. Aslain What is yo
Page 267 and 268:
270 vars. It was assumed that the d
Page 269 and 270:
Proceedings of the Workshop an Asco
Page 271 and 272:
0- 400 ha ® Em 401 -1000 ha 1001 -
Page 273 and 274:
277 Castille and even (1500 kg/ha)
Page 275 and 276:
Table 3 'Rabia' attacks - environme
Page 277 and 278:
would be pure extension. Diffusion
Page 279 and 280:
284 7. The role of crop debris as a
Page 281 and 282:
286 involving only a few treatments
Page 283:
288 MAKKOUK, Khalid, Faculty of Agr
show all

I - --ii

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?