Sugarcane smut

Last updated

Sugarcane smut
Sugar cane smut.jpg
The black whip produced by sugarcane smut
Common namessmut of sugarcane
Causal agentsSporisorium scitamineum
Hosts sugarcane
EPPO Code USTISC

Sugarcane smut
Scientific classification OOjs UI icon edit-ltr.svg
Domain: Eukaryota
Kingdom: Fungi
Division: Basidiomycota
Class: Ustilaginomycetes
Order: Ustilaginales
Family: Ustilaginaceae
Genus: Sporisorium
Species:
S. scitamineum
Binomial name
Sporisorium scitamineum
(Syd.) M. Piepenbr., M. Stoll & Oberw. 2002
Synonyms

Ustilago scitamineaSyd., 1924

Sugarcane smut is a fungal disease of sugarcane caused by the fungus Sporisorium scitamineum. The disease is known as culmicolous, which describes the outgrowth of fungus of the stalk on the cane. It attacks several sugarcane species and has been reported to occur on a few other grass species as well, but not to a critical amount. The most recognizable characteristic of this disease is a black or gray growth that is referred to as a "smut whip". [1] Resistance to sugarcane smut is the best course of action for management, but also the use of disease free seed is important. On smaller scale operations treatments using hot water and removing infected plants can be effective. The main mode of spore dispersal is the wind but the disease also spreads through the use of infected cuttings. Sugarcane smut is a devastating disease in sugarcane growing areas globally. [2]

Contents

Hosts and symptoms

Sugarcane smut infects all sugarcane species unless the species is resistant. The damage caused depends on the susceptibility of the species. Sugarcane fields are planted using vegetative cuttings from mother plants so they have the same genetic make-up of the parent plant. Seeds are not used in propagation because sugarcane is a multi-species hybrid and therefore is difficult to breed. [3] Sugarcane smuts can also infect some other grass species outside of sugarcane. However, mostly it remains on plants of the genus Saccharum.

Two to four months after the fungus has infected the plant, black whip-like structures, instead of a spindle leaf, emerge from the meristem, or growing point, of the plant. The developing whip is a mixture of plant tissue and fungal tissue. The whip reaches maturity between the sixth and the seventh month. When spores that are contained inside the whip are released, the core of the whip remains behind and is a straw-like color. [4]

Plants infected with the fungus usually appear to have thin stalks and are often stunted. They end up tillering much more than normal and this results in leaves that are more slender and much weaker. They sometimes appear more grass-like than non-infected plants. Less common symptoms of the disease are stem or leaf galls and proliferating buds. [5]

Disease cycle

Sugarcane smut is disseminated via teliospores that are produced in the smut whip. These teliospores located either in the soil or on the plant, germinate in the presence of water. [6] After germination they produce promycelium and undergo meiosis to create four haploid sporidia. Sugarcane smut is bipolar and therefore produces two different mating types of sporida. For infection to occur, two sporida from different mating types must come together and form a dikaryon. This dikaryon then produces hyphae that penetrate the bud scales of the sugarcane plant and infect the meristematic tissue. The fungus grows within the meristematic tissue and induces formation of flowering structures which it colonises to produce its teliopores. [7] The flowering structures, usually typical grass arrows, are transformed into a whip like sorus that grows out between the leaf sheaths. At first it is covered by a thin silvery peridium (this is the host tissue) which easily peels back when desiccated to expose the sooty black-brown teliospores. These teliospores are then dispersed via wind and the cycle continues. The spores are reddish brown, round and subovoid and may be smooth to moderately echinulate. The size varies from 6.5 to 8 um. Sugarcane cultivars intended for distribution to other geographical areas should be tested for susceptibility to S. scitamineum populations in each area. [8]

Environment

Sugarcane smut is a very widespread disease and is prevalent in Central and South America, Africa, and South-Western Asia. Sugarcane smut has been reported in all countries that lie between 20 degrees north and south of the equator. [9] The pathogen does well in hot dry weather [10] for most of the disease cycle but requires wet conditions for teliospores to germinate.

Gene expression

Plant disease resistance is the result of coevolution between the plant and pathogen. [11] During Ustilago scitaminea infection, the fungus grows within the meristematic tissue and induces formation of flowering structures, which it colonises to produce its teliopores. The flowering structures, usually typical grass panicles, are transformed into a whip-like sorus that grows rapidly and protrudes out between the leaf sheaths. The development of sugarcane smut depends on the interaction among environment, the sugarcane variety and the pathogen itself. If the interaction between smut-resistant varieties and the pathogen is nonaffinity, disease resistance occurs; however, if the interaction between smut-susceptible varieties and the pathogen is affinity, disease susceptibility occurs. A series of physiological and biochemical changes, together with the molecular response, occur during the period between the appearance of the stress on plant from the invasion of the pathogen and the subsequent plant-pathogen interaction. Progress has been made in studies of the molecular basis of sugarcane smut resistance. [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] According to one study, the type of resistance is a single gene resistance at the N52/219 gene site. Furthermore this study talked about several different strains or races of Ustilago scitaminea. [18] Despite what has been learned, more studies on the molecular interaction in this pathosystem are needed to discover the mechanisms of smut resistance.

Protein expression

Despite what has been learned, little is known about the proteomic background of the interaction between pathogen and host in this pathosystem. [19] [20] [21]

Management

The management of sugarcane smut is done through the use of resistant cultivars, fungicide and using disease free planting stock. Control is mainly accomplished through the use of resistant cultivars in areas where the disease is present. [22] Fungicides also are used in the control of this disease, but typically resistant cultivars are preferred due to the cost of fungicides. In areas where this disease is not yet found it is important to use disease-free planting stock so as not to introduce the pathogen. Important regulations are sometimes implemented by governments to help prevent the spread of the disease. Quarantines are also implemented in areas that are infected.

Importance

Historically, sugarcane smut was first noted in 1877, in the Natal region of South Africa. The disease has been a problem in almost all countries where sugarcane is grown. Sugarcane smut did not make it to the western hemisphere until the 1940s when it reached Argentina. [23] Australia was the last major producer of sugarcane to be infected. In 1998, the western coast was infected but the major production centers for Australia are on the country's east coast. [24] Now infected plants have been found on both sides of the country, making sugarcane smut an issue in all production centers. At times the disease would go unnoticed or undetected until it would completely wipe out huge tracts of the crop.

Sugarcane smut can cause any amount of loss to susceptible varieties. Anywhere from 30% to total crop failure could be seen. [25] The reduction in yield is mainly dependent on the races of the pathogen present, the variety of sugarcane, and the environmental conditions. [26] Sugarcane plants are ratoon, meaning the plant resprouts after it is harvested providing the next crop. [27] Because of this perennial nature, a total crop failure can lead to the need to replant a field. Now, it is typical to replace areas that have been infected with resistant varieties of sugarcane.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rust (fungus)</span> Order of fungi

Rusts are fungal plant pathogens of the order Pucciniales causing plant fungal diseases.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Corn smut</span> Fungal plant disease on maize and teosint

Corn smut is a plant disease caused by the pathogenic fungus Ustilago maydis. One of several cereal crop pathogens called smut, the fungus forms galls on all above-ground parts of corn species such as maize and teosinte. The infected corn is edible; in Mexico, it is considered a delicacy called huitlacoche, often eaten as a filling in quesadillas and other tortilla-based foods, as well as in soups.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Smut (fungus)</span> Reproductive structure of fungi

The smuts are multicellular fungi characterized by their large numbers of teliospores. The smuts get their name from a Germanic word for 'dirt' because of their dark, thick-walled, and dust-like teliospores. They are mostly Ustilaginomycetes and comprise seven of the 15 orders of the subphylum. Most described smuts belong to two orders, Ustilaginales and Tilletiales. The smuts are normally grouped with the other basidiomycetes because of their commonalities concerning sexual reproduction.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Karnal bunt</span> Smut fungus damaging wheat plants

Karnal bunt is a fungal disease of wheat, durum wheat, and triticale. The smut fungus Tilletia indica, a basidiomycete, invades the kernels and obtains nutrients from the endosperm, leaving behind waste products with a disagreeable odor that makes bunted kernels too unpalatable for use in flour or pasta. While Karnal bunt generally does not lead to devastating crop losses, it has the potential to dramatically decrease yield, and poses additional economic concerns through quarantines which limit the export of suspected infectious wheat products from certain areas, including the U.S. Several chemical control methods exist for Karnal bunt of wheat, but much work remains to be done in identifying resistant host varieties.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ustilaginomycotina</span> Subdivision of fungi

The Ustilaginomycotina is a subdivision within the division Basidiomycota of the kingdom Fungi. It consists of the classes Ustilaginomycetes and Exobasidiomycetes, and in 2014 the subdivision was reclassified and the two additional classes Malasseziomycetes and Monilielliomycetes added. The name was first published by Doweld in 2001; Bauer and colleagues later published it in 2006 as an isonym. Ustilagomycotina and Agaricomycotina are considered to be sister groups, and they are in turn sister groups to the subdivision Pucciniomycotina.

Common bunt, also known as hill bunt, Indian bunt, European bunt, stinking smut or covered smut, is a disease of both spring and winter wheats. It is caused by two very closely related fungi, Tilletia tritici and T. laevis.

This is a glossary of some of the terms used in phytopathology.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Covered smut (barley)</span> Species of fungus

Covered smut of barley is caused by the fungus Ustilago hordei. The disease is found worldwide and it is more extensively distributed than either loose smut or false loose smut.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Loose smut</span> Fungal disease of barley plants

Loose smut of barley is caused by Ustilago nuda. It is a disease that can destroy a large proportion of a barley crop. Loose smut replaces grain heads with smut, or masses of spores which infect the open flowers of healthy plants and grow into the seed, without showing any symptoms. Seeds appear healthy and only when they reach maturity the following season is it clear that they were infected. Systemic fungicides are the major control method for loose smut.

False loose smut is a fungal disease of barley caused by Ustilago nigra. This fungus is very similar to U. nuda, the cause of loose smut, and was first distinguished from it in 1932.

<i>Leptosphaeria sacchari</i> Species of fungus

Leptosphaeria sacchari is a plant pathogenic fungus which causes a disease called ring spot on Saccharum officinarum. This species was originally described in 1890 by Kruger and in 1892 by Van Breda de Haan after it was discovered in the Dominican Republic. L. sacchari is the applied name, whereas Epicoccum sorghinum is the accepted name.

<i>Tilletia caries</i> Species of fungus

Tilletia caries is a basidiomycete that causes common bunt of wheat. The common names of this disease are stinking bunt of wheat and stinking smut of wheat. This pathogen infects wheat, rye, and various other grasses. T. caries is economically and agriculturally important because it reduces both the wheat yield and grain quality.

<i>Urocystis agropyri</i> Species of fungus

Urocystis agropyri is a fungal plant pathogen that causes flag smut on wheat.

Verticillium longisporum, also known as Verticillium Wilt, is a fungal plant pathogen that commonly infects canola. V. longisporum can attack other brassica plants as well as woody ornamentals. A main symptom of the infected plant is wilting. In America, V. longsiporum primarily effects eudicot plants. This pathogen can be very devastating and hard to eradicate, responding only to expensive fumigation or fungal resistant plants.

<i>Puccinia coronata</i> Species of fungus

Puccinia coronata is a plant pathogen and causal agent of oat and barley crown rust. The pathogen occurs worldwide, infecting both wild and cultivated oats. Crown rust poses a threat to barley production, because the first infections in barley occur early in the season from local inoculum. Crown rusts have evolved many different physiological races within different species in response to host resistance. Each pathogenic race can attack a specific line of plants within the species typical host. For example, there are over 290 races of P. coronata. Crops with resistant phenotypes are often released, but within a few years virulent races have arisen and P. coronata can infect them.

<i>Uromyces viciae-fabae <span style="font-style:normal;">var.</span> viciae-fabae</i> Species of fungus

Uromyces viciae-fabae var. viciae-fabae is a plant pathogen commonly known as faba-bean rust. The rust is distinguished by the typical rust-like marks on the stem and leaves, causing defoliation and loss of photosynthetic surface along with reduction in yield. The disease is fungal and is autoecious meaning it has one plant host. The rust of faba beans is macrocyclic, or contains 5 spores during its life cycle.

Sporisorium sorghi, commonly known as sorghum smut, is a plant pathogen that belongs to the Ustilaginaceae family. This fungus is the causative agent of covered kernel smut disease and infects sorghum plants all around the world such as Sorghum bicolor (sorghum), S. sudanense, S. halepense and Sorghumvulgare var. technichum (broomcorn). Ineffective control of S. sorghi can have serious economic and ecological implications.

<i>Anisogramma anomala</i> Species of fungus

Anisogramma anomala is a plant pathogen that causes a disease known as Eastern filbert blight on Corylus spp. (hazlenut). Also known as EFB.

Sporisorium reilianum Langdon & Full., (1978), previously known as Sphacelotheca reiliana, and Sporisorium reilianum, is a species of biotrophic fungus in the family Ustilaginaceae. It is a plant pathogen that infects maize and sorghum.

<i>Gibberella fujikuroi</i> Species of fungus

Gibberella fujikuroi is a fungal plant pathogen. It causes bakanae disease in rice seedlings.

References

  1. ↑ Comstock, J. C. and Lentini, R. S. Sugarcane Smut Disease, University of Florida.
  2. ↑ "Information Sheet ISO6052." BSES Sugarcane for the Future. Queensland Government: Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries, 2006. Web. 5 October 2011. < "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 27 February 2011. Retrieved 26 October 2011.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  3. ↑ Baucum, L. E., R. W. Rice, and T. J. Schueneman. "AnOverview of Florida Sugarcane." Science Daily: News & Articles in Science, Health, Environment & Technology. University of Florida. Web. 10 December 2011. <https://www.sciencedaily.com/articles/s/sugarcane.htm>.
  4. ↑ "Information Sheet ISO6052." BSES Sugarcane for the Future. Queensland Government: Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries, 2006. Web. 5 October 2011. < "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 27 February 2011. Retrieved 26 October 2011.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)>.
  5. ↑ Que Youxiong, Xu Liping, Lin Jianwei, Ruan Miaohong, Zhang Muqing and Chen Rukai. "Differential Protein Expression in Sugarcane during Sugarcane-Sporisorium Scitamineum Interaction Revealed by 2-DE and MALDI-TOF-TOF/MS." Comparative and Functional Genomic (2011): 1–10. Web. 26 October 2011.
  6. ↑ J. M. WALLER (1969). "Sugarcane smut (Ustilago scitaminea) in Kenya. I. Epidemiology." Trans. Brit. mycol. Soc. 52: 13951.
  7. ↑ Croft, B. J., and K. S. Braithwaite. "Management of an Incursion of Sugarcane Smut in Australia." Australasian Plant Pathology 35.2 (2006): 113–22. Print.
  8. ↑ Y . Que, L. Xu, J. Lin, et al."Molecular Variation of Sporisorium scitamineum in Mainland China Revealed by RAPD and SRAP Markers" Plant Disease, vol. 96, no. 10, pp. 1519–1525, 2012.
  9. ↑ Martin JP, Abbot EV, Hughes CG. (1961). Sugarcane diseases of the world, Vol. 1, Elsevier Pugl. Pub. Company, Amsterdam, 542p.
  10. ↑ Riley, T. F. Jubb, et al. (1999). First outbreak of sugarcane smut in Australia. Proceedings of the XXIII ISSCT Congress, New Delhi, India, 2226 February 1999. Volume 2: 333337. New Delhi, Sugar Technologists' Association of India.
  11. ↑ M. Lao, A. D. Arencibia, E. R. Carmona et al."Differential expression analysis by cDNA-AFLP of Saccharum spp. after inoculation with the host pathogen Sporisorium scitamineum" Plant Cell Reports, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 1103–1111, 2008.
  12. ↑ M. Lao, A. D. Arencibia, E. R. Carmona et al."Differential expression analysis by cDNA-AFLP of Saccharum spp. after inoculation with the host pathogen Sporisorium scitamineum" Plant Cell Reports, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 1103–1111, 2008.
  13. ↑ L. N. Thokoane and R. S. Rutherford, "cDNA-AFLP differential display of sugarcane (Saccharum spp, hybrids) genes induced by challenge with the fungal pathogen Ustilago scitaminea (sugarcane smut)," Proceedings of the South African Sugar Technologists Association, vol. 75, pp. 104–107, 2001.
  14. ↑ B. H. Orlando, B. P. Thomma, E. Carmona et al., "Identification of sugarcane genes induced in disease-resistant somaclones upon inoculation with Ustilago scitaminea or Bipolaris sacchari," Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, vol. 43, no. 12, pp. 1115–1121, 2005.
  15. ↑ M. LaO, A. D. Arencibia, E. R. Carmona et al., "Differential expression analysis by cDNA-AFLP of Saccharum spp. after inoculation with the host pathogen Sporisorium scitamineum," Plant Cell Reports, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 1103–1111, 2008.
  16. ↑ Que Youxiong, Yang Zhixia, Xu Liping and Chen Rukai. "Isolation and identification of differentially expressed genes in sugarcane infected by Ustilago scitaminea," Acta Agronomica Sinica, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 452–458, 2009.
  17. ↑ Que Youxiong, Lin Jianwei, Song Xianxian, Xu Liping and Chen Rukai. "Differential Gene Expression in Sugarcane in Response to Challenge by Fungal Pathogen Ustilago scitaminea Revealed by cDNA-AFLP," Journal of Biomedicine and Biotechnology, vol. 2011, Article ID 160934, 10 pages, 2011. doi : 10.1155/2011/160934
  18. ↑ L. N. Thokoane and R. S. Rutherford, "cDNA-AFLP differential display of sugarcane (Saccharum spp, hybrids) genes induced by challenge with the fungal pathogen Ustilago scitaminea (sugarcane smut)," Proceedings of the South African Sugar Technologists Association, vol. 75, pp. 104–107, 2001.
  19. ↑ Que Youxiong, Xu Liping, Lin Jianwei, Ruan Miaohong, Zhang Muqing and Chen Rukai. "Differential Protein Expression in Sugarcane during Sugarcane-Sporisorium Scitamineum Interaction Revealed by 2-DE and MALDI-TOF-TOF/MS." Comparative and Functional Genomic (2011): 1–10. Web. 26 October 2011.
  20. ↑ D. Piñon, R. de Armas, C. Vicente, and M. E. Legaz, "Role of polyamines in the infection of sugarcane buds by Ustilago scitaminea spores," Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 57–64, 1999.
  21. ↑ R. de Armas, R. Santiago, M. E. Legaz, and C. Vicente, "Levels of phenolic compounds and enzyme activity can be used to screen for resistance of sugarcane to smut (Ustilago scitaminea)," Australasian Plant Pathology, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 32–38, 2007.
  22. ↑ Comstock JC (2000) Smut. In ‘A guide to sugarcane diseases’. (Eds P Rott, RA Bailey, JC Comstock, BJ Croft and AS Saumtally) pp.181–185. (CIRAD and ISSCT: Montpellier, France)
  23. ↑ Comstock, Jack C., Stephen A. Ferreira, and Thomas L. Tew. "Hawaii's Approach to Control of Sugarcane Smut." Plant Disease 67.4 (1983): 452–57. Hawaiian Sugar Planters' Association. Web. 20 October 2011.
  24. ↑ "Smut Outbreak a Serious Test for Sugar Cane Industry." Sugarcane Smut. Australian Cane Farmers Association, 2000. Web. 25 October 2011. <http://www.acfa.com.au/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&layout=item&id=63&Itemid=76>.
  25. ↑ "Information Sheet ISO6052." BSES Sugarcane for the Future. Queensland Government: Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries, 2006. Web. 5 October 2011. < "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 27 February 2011. Retrieved 26 October 2011.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)>.
  26. ↑ Nzioki, H. S. and Jamoza J.E. Assessment of Yield Loss Due to Sugarcane Smut (Ustilago Scitaminea) Infection In Kenya: Plant Cane. KESREF Technical Bulletin No. 1 (December 2006). <http://www.kesref.org/UserFiles/File/technicalbulletin.pdf>.
  27. ↑ Baucum, L. E., R. W. Rice, and T. J. Schueneman. "AnOverview of Florida Sugarcane." Science Daily: News & Articles in Science, Health, Environment & Technology. University of Florida. Web. 10 December 2011. <https://www.sciencedaily.com/articles/s/sugarcane.htm>.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.