Department of Botany and Plant Pathology, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331.
USDA-ARS Horticultural Crops Disease and Pest Management Research Unit, Corvallis, OR 97330.
Plant Dis. 2023 Oct;107(10):3096-3105. doi: 10.1094/PDIS-02-23-0216-RE. Epub 2023 Oct 20.
Information on the presence and severity of grape powdery mildew (GPM), caused by , has long been used to guide management decisions. While recent advances in the available molecular diagnostic assays and particle samplers have made monitoring easier, there is still a need for more efficient field collection of . The use of vineyard worker gloves worn during canopy manipulation as a sampler (glove swab) of was compared with samples identified by visual assessment with subsequent molecular confirmation (leaf swabs) and airborne spore samples collected by rotating-arm impaction traps (impaction traps). Samples from United States commercial vineyards in Oregon, Washington, and California were analyzed using two TaqMan qPCR assays targeting the internal transcribed spacer regions or cytochrome gene of . Based on qPCR assays, visual disease assessments misidentified GPM up to 59% of the time with a higher frequency of misidentification occurring earlier in the growing season. Comparison of the aggregated leaf swab results for a row ( = 915) to the row's corresponding glove swab had 60% agreement. The latent class analysis (LCA) indicated that glove swabs were more sensitive than leaf swabs in detecting presence. The impaction trap results had 77% agreement to glove swabs ( = 206) taken from the same blocks. The LCAs estimated that the glove swabs and impaction trap samplers varied each year in which was more sensitive for detection. This likely indicates that these methods have similar levels of uncertainty and provide equivalent information. Additionally, all samplers, once was detected, were similarly sensitive and specific for detection of the A-143 resistance allele. Together, these results suggest that glove swabs are an effective sampling method for monitoring the presence of and, subsequently, the G143A amino acid substitution associated with resistance to quinone outside inhibitor fungicides in vineyards. Glove swabs could reduce sampling costs due to the lack of need for specialized equipment and time required for swab collection and processing
有关 引起的葡萄白粉病(GPM)的存在和严重程度的信息长期以来一直被用于指导管理决策。虽然最近在可用的分子诊断检测和颗粒采样器方面取得了进展,使监测变得更加容易,但仍需要更有效地在田间收集 。将在冠层操作过程中佩戴的葡萄园工人手套用作(手套拭子)与通过视觉评估(叶片拭子)随后通过分子确认以及通过旋转臂撞击陷阱(撞击陷阱)收集的空气传播孢子样本进行了比较。使用针对 内部转录间隔区或细胞色素 基因的两种 TaqMan qPCR 检测方法分析了来自美国俄勒冈州,华盛顿州和加利福尼亚州的商业葡萄园的样本。基于 qPCR 检测,视觉疾病评估错误识别 GPM 的频率高达 59%,在生长季节早期错误识别的频率更高。对行(= 915)的聚合叶片拭子结果与该行对应的手套拭子进行比较,其一致性为 60%。潜在类别分析(LCA)表明,在检测 存在时,手套拭子比叶片拭子更敏感。撞击陷阱的结果与从同一块地采集的手套拭子(= 206)具有 77%的一致性。LCA 估计,每年的手套拭子和撞击陷阱采样器都有所不同,其中检测的灵敏度更高。这可能表明这些方法具有相似的不确定性水平,并提供等效信息。此外,一旦检测到所有采样器,都对检测与对醌外抑制剂杀菌剂的抗性相关的 A-143 抗性等位基因具有相似的敏感性和特异性。总之,这些结果表明,手套拭子是监测葡萄园 存在的有效采样方法,进而与对葡萄白粉病的抗性相关的 G143A 氨基酸取代有关。由于不需要特殊设备以及拭子采集和处理所需的时间,手套拭子可以降低采样成本。