Additional sources of resistance to groundnut rosette disease in groundnut germplasm and breeding lines

Olorunju, P. E.; Ntare, B. R.; Pande, S.; Reddy, S. V.

doi:10.1111/j.1744-7348.2001.tb00402.x

Cited by 12 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Farmers have adopted several cultural, biological and chemical methods to curb the spread of the disease but the adoption rate of these methods has been very low because they are not economical and effective (Olorunju et al, 2001). However, the most economic, ecological and environmentally-friendly method of control is the use of rosette resistant lines (Adu-Dapaah et al, 2004).…”

Section: Author(s) Agree That This Article Remain Permanently Open Acmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This was done to ensure effective inoculation by the vectors. Each of the test plants was evaluated for GRD symptoms at weekly interval for the first four weeks and every two weeks thereafter using a 1-5 rating scale (Pande et al, 1997;Olorunju et al, 2001) as follows: 1= No visible symptoms on leaves (Highly Resistant), 2= Rosette symptoms on 1 to 20% leaves, but no obvious stunting (Resistant), 3= Rosette symptoms on 21-50% leaves with stunting (Moderately Resistant), 4= Severe symptoms on 51 to 70% leaves with stunting (Susceptible), and 5= Severe symptoms on 71 to 100% leaves with stunting (Highly Susceptible).…”

Section: Disease Evaluation Of Parental and Progeniesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Genetic control of resistance to rosette virus disease in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.)

Amoah¹,

Akromah²,

Asibuo³

et al. 2016

J. Plant Breed. Crop Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Groundnut rosette disease is one of the most damaging diseases militating against groundnut production in sub-Saharan Africa. The disease cause up to 100% yield loss whenever epidemic occurs. The most effective, economic and environmental friendly method to control the disease is through genetic resistance. Knowledge on inheritance of resistance to the rosette disease is required to accelerate breeding of resistant varieties. A study was conducted to understand the nature and magnitude of gene effect of resistance to the disease. Thus F 1 , RF 1 , F 2 , RF 2 , BC 1 , RBC 1 , BC 2 , and RBC 2 progenies were derived from crosses of Otuhia × Manipintar, Otuhia × Shitaochi, ICGV 01276 × Manipintar, and ICGV 01276 × Shitaochi along with their parents were evaluated in a randomized complete block design at CSIR -CRI, Fumesua, under artificial infection. Generation mean analysis revealed that additive gene action effect was predominant on the resistance to the disease in all the crosses. Additive by dominance was the only form of non-allelic interaction observed to be significant in ICGV 01276 × Manipintar cross. Reciprocal differences suggested the presence of maternal effect involved in the inheritance of resistance to groundnut rosette disease. Estimates of broad and narrow sense heritability indicated that genetic effect was larger than the environmental effects in this study. Disease diagnosis using TAS ELISA revealed the presence of groundnut rosette assistor virus (GRAV) antigens in the resistant samples analyzed. Resistant genotypes containing GRAV were considered to be resistant to the GRV and its Sat-RNA, but not the GRAV which causes no obvious symptoms by itself. Pure line breeding with selection from early generation is suggested for the improvement of resistance to rosette virus disease, because additive genetic effect contributed significantly in controlling the inheritance of resistance to groundnut rosette disease (GRD).

show abstract

Section: Author(s) Agree That This Article Remain Permanently Open Acmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Disease Evaluation Of Parental and Progeniesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genetic control of resistance to rosette virus disease in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.)

Amoah¹,

Akromah²,

Asibuo³

et al. 2016

J. Plant Breed. Crop Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The nine parental lines along with the 36 F2 progenies were evaluated for GCRD resistance using a 9 x 5   lattice design with two replications at two locations (Samaru, Kaduna state, and Lafia, Nasarawa state (8  32"N, 742"E ) during the 2011/2012 growing seasons using an infectorrow techniques (susceptible SAMNUT 14 genotype was planted in alternate rows with test materials) as described by Olorunju et al (2001) at the two locations. The infector rows were planted 2 weeks prior to the test materials to allow the build-up of inoculum.…”

Section: Population Development and Phenotype Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genetic analysis of groundnut rosette virus disease in groundnut (Archis hypogaea L.)

Usman¹,

Ofori²,

Danquah³

et al. 2015

Afr. J. Plant Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Groundnut chlorotic rosette disease (GCRD) transmitted by the aphid, Aphis craccivora, is an important virus disease of groundnut in Africa. Breeding for host resistance remains the best strategy to minimize losses due to this disease. Nine cultivated groundnut genotypes with differential reaction to GCRD were crossed in an incomplete diallel mating design to determine the combining ability of GCRD resistance. The parents and 36 F 2 populations were inoculated with veruliferous A. craccivora at the seedling stage and evaluated for disease reaction at two locations in Nigeria in 2012. Disease incidence (based on visual symptoms) was recorded three times at fortnightly interval using area under disease progress curve. General combining ability (GCA) and specific combining ability (SCA) effects for GCRD resistance were highly significant (P < 0.01), indicating that both additive and non-additive gene effects governed the inheritance of GCRD resistance. The Baker ratio was low (0.3) for GCRD indicating that non-additive gene effects was more important than additive gene effects in controlling GCRD resistance in these crosses. As a result, progeny performance could not be adequately predicted from GCA effects alone. Therefore, effective selection of superior genotypes would be achieved at advanced generations when maximum homozygosity is attained.

show abstract

“…Cropping practices have led to effective management practices for controlling GRD (Naidu et al, 1998); however, the approach is seldom feasible for the subsistence farming systems of SSA . Efforts in breeding for hostplant resistance and evaluation of the global collection of groundnut germplasm have contributed to the identifycation and development of several groundnut germplasm lines with acceptable levels of field resistance to GRD (Olorunju et al, 1991;2001;van der Merwe and Subrahmanyam, 1997;Subrahmanyam et al, 1998). Since 1995, the Uganda National Groundnut Improvement Programme has released 13 rosette resistant commercial varieties.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Groundnut rosette disease symptoms types distribution and management of the disease in Uganda

Okello¹,

Akello²,

Tukamuhabwa³

et al. 2014

Afr. J. Plant Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Groundnut rosette disease (GRD), caused by a complex of three agents: groundnut rosette assistor luteovirus, groundnut rosette umbravirus, and the associated satellite RNA, is a major groundnut disease in Uganda. Two main symptom types, chlorotic rosette and green rosette occur. A nationwide survey covering 23 districts was done in 2012 and 2013 to ascertain the predominant GRD symptom types, GRD incidences and severity, farmers' knowledge and their GRD coping mechanisms, the current groundnut seed system and farming practices. Data were analysed using SPSS and Chi-square tests of association. Mean GRD severity scores were geo-referenced and plotted on the Uganda map. Most respondent (52%) were females. Other than Northern Uganda, most regions grow groundnut landraces. Major seed sources were home saved and marketed. Thirty six percent of farmers grew groundnuts after cereals as recommended. All the farmers sampled knew about and had seen both rosette symptoms types, which were more visible during the second rains. A whole 42% of the farmers have no coping mechanism against GRD. The current knowledge of GRD did not have a significant effect on its management, seed source, varieties grown or gender of the farmers. The green rosette type predominates, making Uganda a green rosette belt.

show abstract

Additional sources of resistance to groundnut rosette disease in groundnut germplasm and breeding lines

Cited by 12 publications

References 15 publications

Genetic control of resistance to rosette virus disease in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.)

Genetic control of resistance to rosette virus disease in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.)

Genetic analysis of groundnut rosette virus disease in groundnut (Archis hypogaea L.)

Groundnut rosette disease symptoms types distribution and management of the disease in Uganda

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About