BIRD DAMAGE TO SUNFLOWERS

Most of you are wondering why the National Cottonseed Products Association, which is the trade organization that I am a staff agronomist for, and have been for twenty-five years, is looking at sunflowers. I hasten to remind you that we are in a changing time and that we must adjust to those changing times. We were a one crop system in the South raising cotton only. It was our trade association that began to look for new oil seed crops as another crop to process and another crop for our farmers to grow. We brought soybeans to the South. We brought safflower into the western area. We have continued to look to new oil seed crops as a partial alternative. Having viewed sunflowers ten to twelve years, I thought they had a potential in our country. Seeing what Russia was doing with sunflowers, I made a trip into Russia at my own expense in 1967 and have been back twice since. I am convinced that this crop can grow in this country and will probably be a potential crop within the next ten years. So we may have a crop that offers a great potential in our country, and I just wanted to alert you of this new crop and of the problems involved. I ask for your help when you are screening chemical materials, because we have had the help of the chemical industry in screening some of the herbicides and insecticides needed for developing this crop. We have many problems involved. The birds were here when this country was founded. They will be here when we leave. We can live with them, but it is with a conference of this type in working together and sitting down and airing our differences that can solve these problems. And I think they can be

Modulation of immune responses by targeting CD169/Siglec-1 with the glycan ligand

A fundamental role in the plant-bacterium interaction for Gram-negative phytopathogenic bacteria is played by membrane constituents, such as proteins, lipopoly- or lipooligosaccharides (LPS, LOS) and Capsule Polysaccharides (CPS). In the frame of the understanding the molecular basis of plant bacterium interaction, the Gram-negative bacterium Agrobacterium vitis was selected in this study. It is a phytopathogenic member of the Rhizobiaceae family and it induces the crown gall disease selectively on grapevines (Vitis vinifera). A. vitis wild type strain F2/5, and its mutant in the quorum sensing gene ΔaviR, were studied. The wild type produces biosurfactants; it is considered a model to study surface motility, and it causes necrosis on grapevine roots and HR (Hypersensitive Response) on tobacco. Conversely, the mutant does not show any surface motility and does not produce any surfactant material; additionally, it induces neither necrosis on grape, nor HR on tobacco. Therefore, the two strains were analyzed to shed some light on the QS regulation of LOS structure and the consequent variation, if any, on HR response. LOS from both strains were isolated and characterized: the two LOS structures maintained several common features and differed for few others. With regards to the common patterns, firstly: the Lipid A region was not phosphorylated at C4 of the non reducing glucosamine but glycosylated by an uronic acid (GalA) unit, secondly: a third Kdo and the rare Dha (3-deoxy-lyxo-2-heptulosaric acid) moiety was present. Importantly, the third Kdo and the Dha residues were substituted by rhamnose in a not stoichiometric fashion, giving four different oligosaccharide species. The proportions among these four species, is the key difference between the LOSs from both the two bacteria. LOS from both strains and Lipid A from wild type A. vitis are now examined for their HR potential in tobacco leaves and grapevine roots