Identification and pathogenicity of Macrophomina species collected from weeds in melon fields in Northeastern Brazil

"This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Negreiros, AMP, Sales Júnior, R, León, M, et al. Identification and pathogenicity of Macrophomina species collected from weeds in melon fields in Northeastern Brazil. J Phytopathol. 2019; 167: 326 337. , which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1111/jph.12801. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving."[EN] In this work, a collection of 94 Macrophomina isolates obtained from roots of two weed species, Trianthema portulacastrum and Boerhavia diffusa, collected during surveys conducted during 2015 and 2016 in melon production fields in Northeastern Brazil, were characterized by using molecular techniques. Phylogenetic analysis of the EF1-alpha gene allowed the identification of 32 isolates as M. phaseolina and 62 isolates as M. pseudophaseolina. Results of a pathogenicity test performed on melon seedlings of the cv. "Gladial" revealed that all M. phaseolina isolates inoculated were able to cause disease to melon seedlings, but only some M. pseudophaseolina isolates were able to infect them. This study represents the first report of M. pseudophaseolina in both T. portulacastrum and B. diffusa weeds, which are prevalent in the main Brazilian melon producing and exporting regions. Information about the biology and epidemiology of M. pseudophaseolina is scarce because of its recent description; thus, further research is needed for a better understanding of this fungus as a potentially emerging pathogen of melon and other crops.Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior-Brazil (CAPES); Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPq)Negreiros, AMP.; Sales Junior, R.; León Santana, M.; de Assis Melo N.J.; Michereff, S.; de Queiroz Ambrósio M.M.; De Sousa Medeiros, H.... (2019). Identification and pathogenicity of Macrophomina species collected from weeds in melon fields in Northeastern Brazil. Journal of Phytopathology. 167(6):326-337. https://doi.org/10.1111/jph.12801S3263371676Agustí-Brisach, C., Gramaje, D., León, M., García-Jiménez, J., & Armengol, J. (2011). Evaluation of Vineyard Weeds as Potential Hosts of Black-Foot and Petri Disease Pathogens. Plant Disease, 95(7), 803-810. doi:10.1094/pdis-12-10-0888A. C. Alfenas R. Mafia G. Métodos em fitopatologia 2016 Ed. UFV Universidade Federal de Viçosa Viçosa Brasil 516Ambrósio, M. M. Q., Dantas, A. C. A., Martínez-Perez, E., Medeiros, A. C., Nunes, G. H. S., & Picó, M. B. (2015). Screening a variable germplasm collection of Cucumis melo L. for seedling resistance to Macrophomina phaseolina. Euphytica, 206(2), 287-300. doi:10.1007/s10681-015-1452-xAnuário Anuário ‐ Anuário Brasileiro da Fruticultura 2018 2018 Ed. Gazeta Santa Cruz Santa Cruz do Sul Brazil 88Baird, R. E., & Brock, J. H. (1999). First Report of Macrophomina phaseolina on Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) in Georgia. Plant Disease, 83(5), 487-487. doi:10.1094/pdis.1999.83.5.487bBaird, R. E., Watson, C. E., & Scruggs, M. (2003). Relative Longevity of Macrophomina phaseolina and Associated Mycobiota on Residual Soybean Roots in Soil. Plant Disease, 87(5), 563-566. doi:10.1094/pdis.2003.87.5.563Carbone, I., & Kohn, L. M. (1999). A Method for Designing Primer Sets for Speciation Studies in Filamentous Ascomycetes. Mycologia, 91(3), 553. doi:10.2307/3761358Chaves, A. L. R., Braun, M. R., Eiras, M., Colariccio, A., & Galleti, S. R. (2003). Erigeron bonariensis: hospedeira alternativa do Lettuce mosaic virus no Brasil. Fitopatologia Brasileira, 28(3), 307-311. doi:10.1590/s0100-41582003000300014Claudino, M. R., & Soares, D. J. (2014). Pathogenicity and aggressiveness of Macrophomina phaseolina isolates to castor (Ricinus communis). Tropical Plant Pathology, 39(6), 453-456. doi:10.1590/s1982-56762014000600006Cohen, R., Omari, N., Porat, A., & Edelstein, M. (2012). Management of Macrophomina wilt in melons using grafting or fungicide soil application: Pathological, horticultural and economical aspects. Crop Protection, 35, 58-63. doi:10.1016/j.cropro.2011.12.015FAOSTAT(2018). FAO statistical databases food and agriculture organization of the United Nations.http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#home.Farr D. F. &Rossman A. Y.(2018). Fungal Databases. National Fungus Collections ARS USDA: U.S.https://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/.Fuhlbohm, M. J., Ryley, M. J., & Aitken, E. A. B. (2012). New weed hosts of Macrophomina phaseolina in Australia. Australasian Plant Disease Notes, 7(1), 193-195. doi:10.1007/s13314-012-0082-6Funnell-Harris, D. L., O’Neill, P. M., Sattler, S. E., & Yerka, M. K. (2016). Response of Sweet Sorghum Lines to Stalk Pathogens Fusarium thapsinum and Macrophomina phaseolina. Plant Disease, 100(5), 896-903. doi:10.1094/pdis-09-15-1050-reIBGE(2018). Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística.https://sidra.ibge.gov.br/home/pms/brasil.Jacob, C. J., Krarup, C., Díaz, G. A., & Latorre, B. A. (2013). A Severe Outbreak of Charcoal Rot in Cantaloupe Melon Caused by Macrophomina phaseolina in Chile. Plant Disease, 97(1), 141-141. doi:10.1094/pdis-06-12-0588-pdnKumar, S., Stecher, G., & Tamura, K. (2016). MEGA7: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis Version 7.0 for Bigger Datasets. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 33(7), 1870-1874. doi:10.1093/molbev/msw054Machado, A. R., Pinho, D. B., & Pereira, O. L. (2014). Phylogeny, identification and pathogenicity of the Botryosphaeriaceae associated with collar and root rot of the biofuel plant Jatropha curcas in Brazil, with a description of new species of Lasiodiplodia. Fungal Diversity, 67(1), 231-247. doi:10.1007/s13225-013-0274-1Machado, A. R., Pinho, D. B., Soares, D. J., Gomes, A. A. M., & Pereira, O. L. (2018). Bayesian analyses of five gene regions reveal a new phylogenetic species of Macrophomina associated with charcoal rot on oilseed crops in Brazil. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 153(1), 89-100. doi:10.1007/s10658-018-1545-1Medeiros, A. C., Melo, D. R. M. de, Ambrósio, M. M. de Q., Nunes, G. H. de S., & Costa, J. M. da. (2015). Métodos de inoculação de Rhizoctonia solani e Macrophomina phaseolina em meloeiro (Cucumis melo). Summa Phytopathologica, 41(4), 281-286. doi:10.1590/0100-5405/2083Miller M. A. Pfeiffer W. &Schwartz T.(2012). The CIPRES science gateway: enabling high‐impact science for phylogenetics researchers with limited resources. In: Proceedings of the 1st Conference of the Extreme Science and Engineering Discovery Environment: Bridging from the extreme to the campus and beyond (pp.39).Chicago IL.Mir, Z. R., Singh, P. K., Zaidi, P. H., Vinayan, M. T., Sharma, S. S., Krishna, M. K., … Nair, S. K. (2018). Genetic analysis of resistance to post flowering stalk rot in tropical germplasm of maize ( Zea mays L.). Crop Protection, 106, 42-49. doi:10.1016/j.cropro.2017.12.004Mbaye, N., Mame, P. S., Ndiaga, C., & Ibrahima, N. (2015). Is the recently described Macrophomina pseudophaseolina pathogenically different from Macrophomina phaseolina? African Journal of Microbiology Research, 9(45), 2232-2238. doi:10.5897/ajmr2015.7742Nylander J. A. A.(2004). MrModeltest V2. Program Distributed by the Author: Evolutionary Biology Centre Uppsala University Sweden.Reuveni, R., Krikun, J., Nachmias, A., & Shlevin, E. (1982). The role ofMacrophomina phaseolina in a collapse of melon plants in Israel. Phytoparasitica, 10(1), 51-56. doi:10.1007/bf02981892Ronquist, F., Teslenko, M., van der Mark, P., Ayres, D. L., Darling, A., Höhna, S., … Huelsenbeck, J. P. (2012). MrBayes 3.2: Efficient Bayesian Phylogenetic Inference and Model Choice Across a Large Model Space. Systematic Biology, 61(3), 539-542. doi:10.1093/sysbio/sys029Rusuku, G., Buruchara, R. A., Gatabazi, M., & Pastor-Corrales, M. A. (1997). Occurrence and Distribution in Rwanda of Soilborne Fungi Pathogenic to the Common Bean. Plant Disease, 81(5), 445-449. doi:10.1094/pdis.1997.81.5.445Sales Junior, R., Oliveira, O. F. de, Medeiros, É. V. de, Guimarães, I. M., Correia, K. C., & Michereff, S. J. (2012). Ervas daninhas como hospedeiras alternativas de patógenos causadores do colapso do meloeiro. Revista Ciência Agronômica, 43(1), 195-198. doi:10.1590/s1806-66902012000100024Short, G. E. (1980). Survival ofMacrophomina phaseolinain Soil and in Residue of Soybean. Phytopathology, 70(1), 13. doi:10.1094/phyto-70-13Francisco, de A. S. e S., & Carlos, A. V. de A. (2016). The Assistat Software Version 7.7 and its use in the analysis of experimental data. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 11(39), 3733-3740. doi:10.5897/ajar2016.11522Stamatakis, A. (2014). RAxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics, 30(9), 1312-1313. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btu033Thompson, J. D., Higgins, D. G., & Gibson, T. J. (1994). CLUSTAL W: improving the sensitivity of progressive multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting, position-specific gap penalties and weight matrix choice. Nucleic Acids Research, 22(22), 4673-4680. doi:10.1093/nar/22.22.4673Wrather, J. A., Anderson, T. R., Arsyad, D. M., Gai, J., Ploper, L. D., Porta-Puglia, A., … Yorinori, J. T. (1997). Soybean Disease Loss Estimates for the Top 10 Soybean Producing Countries in 1994. Plant Disease, 81(1), 107-110. doi:10.1094/pdis.1997.81.1.107Wrather, J. A., Anderson, T. R., Arsyad, D. M., Tan, Y., Ploper, L. D., Porta-Puglia, A., … Yorinori, J. T. (2001). Soybean disease loss estimates for the top ten soybean-producing counries in 1998. Canadian Journal of Plant Pathology, 23(2), 115-121. doi:10.1080/0706066010950691

Níveis de proteína bruta para juvenis de pirarucu

The objective of this work was to verify the effect of four protein levels on pirarucu, Arapaima gigas, growth performance. One hundred and twenty pirarucu juveniles, with an average weight of 120.6±3.5 g, were stocked into 12 floating cages with 1 m3 (ten fish per cage), in a complete randomized design with four treatments (32.7%, 39.3%, 43.4% and 48.6% crude protein), in three replicates each. After 45 days, results showed that diet with highest protein level (48.6%) produced a better weight gain, specific growth rate, and differentiated body composition. Feed conversion and protein efficiency ratios did not show any differences among treatments. The dietary protein level required to produce maximum growth is 48.6%