American Potato Journal

, Volume 68, Issue 6, pp 363–372 | Cite as

Insect transmission of the bacterial ring rot pathogen

  • R. D. Christie
  • A. C. Sumalde
  • J. T. Schulz
  • N. C. Gudmestad


Three species of potato-infesting insects were evaluated under laboratory and field conditions for their capability to transmitCorynebacterium sepedonicum (Spieck. & Kotth.) Skapt. & Burkh., the bacterial ring rot (BRR) pathogen of potatoes. Laboratory and field studies confirmed the vector capability of the Colorado potato beetle (CPB),Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Say) (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) and the green peach aphid (GPA),Myzus persicae (Sulzer) (Homoptera: Aphididae). Both adults and larvae of the CPB proved to be vectors of the pathogen. Only adult GPA were evaluated. Bacterial transmission was most likely mechanical: analyses of the CPB mouthparts stained by the indirect immunofluorescence antibody staining (IFAS) procedure confirmed the presence of the bacterium after the beetles were exposed to infected plant tissue. Eggs, haemolymph, feces, regurgitations, and macerates of the digestive tract failed to show the presence of the bacterium. The aster leafhopper,Macrosteles fascifrons (St∮al) (Homoptera: Cicadellidae) failed to acquire and transmitCorynebacterium sepedonicum.

Additional Key Words

Green peach aphid Colorado potato beetle aster leaf-hopper indirect immunofluorescence antibody staining (IFAS) 


Se evaluaron bajo condiciones de laboratorio y de campo tres especies de insectos que infestan a la papa para determinar su capacidad para transmitirCorynebacterium sepedonicum (Spieck. & Kotth.) Skapt. & Burkh., la bacteria patógena de la pudrición anular (BRR) de la papa. Los estudios de laboratorio y de campo confirmaron la capacidad del escarabajo de la papa de Colorado (CPB),Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Say) (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) y del áfido verde del melocotonero (GPA),Myzus persicae (Sulzer) (Homoptera: Aphididae). Tanto adultos como larvas del CPB mostraron ser vectores del patógeno. Se evaluaron solamente los adultos del GPA. La transmisión de la bacteria en su mayor parte fue posiblemente mecánica: análisis de las piezas bucales del CPB teñidas mediante el método de tinción de anticuerpos por inmunofluorescencia indirecta (IFAS) confirmó la presencia de la bacteria después que los escarabajos fueron expuestos para infector los tejidos de las plantas.

No se detectó la presencia de la bacteria en huevos, hemolinfa, excrementos, regurgitaciones, y maceraciones del tracto digestivo. La cigarrita del aster,Macrosteles fascifrons (Stal) (Homoptera: Cicadellidae) fracasó en adquirir y transmitirCorynebacterium sepedonicum.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. 1.
    Anon. 1987. North Dakota Seed Potato Certification. Rules, regulations and tolerances. Bull 49: 1–12.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bonde, R. 1939. Bacterial wilt and soft-rot of the potato. Am Potato J 16: 109–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brentzel, W.E. and J.A. Munro. 1940. Bacterial ring rot of the potato. Investigation on possible dissemination by grasshoppers. North Dakota Agr Exp Sta Bull 295: 1–8.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    De Boer, S.H. and M.E. McNaughton. 1986. Evaluation of immunofluorescence with monoclonal antibodies for detecting latent bacterial ring rot infections. Am Potato J 63: 533–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    De Boer, S.H. and M. McCann. 1989. Determination of population densities ofCorynebacterium sepedonicum in potato stems during the growing season. Phytopathology 79: 946–951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    De Boer, S.H. and S.A. Slack. 1984. Current status and prospects for detecting and controlling bacterial ring rot of potatoes in North America. Plant Dis 68: 841–844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    De Boer, S.H. and A. Wieczorek. 1984. Production of monoclonal antibodies toCorynebacterium sepedonicum. Phytopathology 74: 1431–1433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Duncan, J., et H. Généreux. 1960. La transmission par les insectes deCorynebacterium sepedonkum (Spieck. & Kotth.) Skaptason et Burkholder. Can J Plant Sei 40: 110–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dykstra, T.P. 1942. Compilation of results in control of potato ring rot in 1941. Am Potato J 19: 175–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gudmestad, N.C. 1987. Recommendations of the national task force for the eradication of bacterial ring rot. Am Potato J 64: 695–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hurst, G.W. 1975. Meterology and the Colorado potato beetle. Technical note 137. World Meterological Organization. Geneva, Switzerland. 51 pp.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jensen, R.E. and J.R. Wallin. 1965. Weather and aphids: a review. Technical note 5-AGMET — 1. Washington, D.C. 16 pp.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    List, G.M. and W.A. Kreutzer. 1942. Transmission of the causal agent of the ring rot disease of potatoes by insects. J Econ Entomol 35: 455–456.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    May, M.L. and S. Ahmad. 1983. Host location in Colorado potato beetle: searching mechanisms in relation to oligophagy. Herbivorous Insects. 6: 173–199.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Metzger, C.H. and A.M. Binkley. 1940. Some evidence on the spread of bacterial wilt. Am Potato J 17: 199–201.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Secor, G.A., N.C. Gudmestad and H.A. Lamey. 1986. Ring rot of potatoes. Extension circular PP-507 revised. North Dakota State University, N.D. 2 pp.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tyner, L.E. 1947. Studies on ring-rot of potatoes caused byCarynebacterium sepedonicum. Sci Agr 27: 81–85.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. D. Christie
    • 1
  • A. C. Sumalde
    • 3
  • J. T. Schulz
  • N. C. Gudmestad
    • 2
  1. 1.Dept. of EntomologyNorth Dakota State UniversityFargo
  2. 2.Dept. of Plant PathologyNorth Dakota State UniversityFargo
  3. 3.Dept. of EntomologyU. of Philippines at Los Baños CollegeLagunaPhilippines

Personalised recommendations