18.06.2013 Views

Sorghum Diseases in India

Sorghum Diseases in India

Sorghum Diseases in India

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Table 2. Comparison of disease <strong>in</strong>tensities between sorghum heads <strong>in</strong>oculated with a 72 h sporidal<br />

<strong>in</strong>oculum and with fresh teliospores of Tolyposporium ehrenbergii.<br />

Disease <strong>in</strong>tensity With sporidial <strong>in</strong>oculum With fresh teliospores<br />

no. of sori head -1<br />

(no.) (no.)<br />

(0) 33 1<br />

(1-20) 26 20<br />

(21-50) 13 11<br />

(51-100) 9 10<br />

(10-200) • 3 10<br />

(>200) 3 3<br />

Total heads <strong>in</strong>oculated 87 55<br />

Total heads <strong>in</strong>fected 54 54<br />

Infection (%) 62% 98%<br />

Mean disease <strong>in</strong>tensity 2.2 3.3<br />

Cross <strong>in</strong>oculation with long smut isolates<br />

Tarr (1955) reported pearl millet as a host of<br />

T. ehrenbergii The causal organism of long smut<br />

on the wild sorghum, <strong>Sorghum</strong> purpureosericeum,<br />

<strong>in</strong> <strong>India</strong> was classified as T. ehrenbergii var grandiglobum<br />

(Uppal and Patel 1943). Other wild sorghum<br />

species are predom<strong>in</strong>ant <strong>in</strong> most areas<br />

where cultivated sorghum is grown. Cross <strong>in</strong>oculation<br />

tests carried out by the authors <strong>in</strong>dicated<br />

no difference between isolates <strong>in</strong>fect<strong>in</strong>g sorghum<br />

and the wild sorghum, S. purpureosericeum,<br />

but millet <strong>in</strong> the Sudan was not<br />

susceptible to T. ehrenbergii; neither did long<br />

smut isolated from millet <strong>in</strong>fect sorghum (Table<br />

3).<br />

Control of long smut<br />

At this time, the control of long smut by host<br />

resistance is under consideration. Clearly, differences<br />

<strong>in</strong> reaction exist. Some old sorghum culti-<br />

Table 3. Cross <strong>in</strong>oculation with long smut isolates.<br />

vars, such as BTx 378, are resistant whereas<br />

BTx 623 is not. Currently, the sorghum improvement<br />

program <strong>in</strong> Sudan <strong>in</strong>oculates sorghums for<br />

reaction to long smut and a similar program is<br />

be<strong>in</strong>g considered for Niger and Mali. Evidence<br />

of good resistance among the cultivars tested <strong>in</strong><br />

the Sudan is reported <strong>in</strong> Table 4. QL 3 (<strong>India</strong>), SC<br />

326-6, and SC 630-11 E were among the best performers<br />

<strong>in</strong> two seasons' test<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Uniform flower<strong>in</strong>g of sorghum should reduce<br />

plant-to-plant spread of the pathogen and<br />

lessen the impact of the disease. Study of the<br />

effects of the level of smut on disease development<br />

has not been carried out. However, the<br />

relationship between the level of <strong>in</strong>fection and<br />

damage appears to be l<strong>in</strong>ear.<br />

The Kernel Smuts<br />

Covered kernel and loose kernel smut are seedborne<br />

seedl<strong>in</strong>g-<strong>in</strong>fect<strong>in</strong>g smut fungi. While early<br />

workers exploited host resistance and detected<br />

Pearl millet<br />

Long smut isolate S. purpureosericium <strong>Sorghum</strong> feterita Baladi Ugandi<br />

S. purpureosericium<br />

S.bicolor<br />

Pearl millet<br />

250

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!