Advertisement

The Botanical Review

, Volume 7, Issue 9, pp 458–506 | Cite as

Disease resistance in the vegetable crops

  • J. C. Walker
Article

Keywords

Disease Resistance Powdery Mildew Botanical Review Late Blight Downy Mildew 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. 1.
    Alexander, L. J. Leaf mold resistance in the tomato. Ohio Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 539. 1934.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    —————. A new tomato variety resistant to leaf mold. Phytopath.28: 1. 1938.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    —————. A new strain of the tomato leaf mold fungus,Cladosporium fulvum.30: 1. 1940.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Anderson, M. E. Fusarium resistance in Wisconsin Hollander cabbage. Jour. Agr. Res.47: 639–661. 1935.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    —————. Histological studies of Wisconsin Hollander and Wisconsin Ballhead cabbage in relation to resistance to yellows.50: 823–836. 1935.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Angell, H. R., J. C. Walker, andK. P. Link. The relation of protocatechuic acid to disease resistance in the onion. Phytopath.20: 431–439, 1930.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Atkinson, G. F. Some diseases of cotton. Ala. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 41. 1892.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bailey, R. M. Progress in breeding cucumbers resistant to scab (Cladosporium cucumerinum). Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. Proc.36 (1938): 645–646. 1939.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    —————. Breeding cucumbers resistant to scab.32(1934): 474–476. 1935.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Barrus, M. F. Variation of varieties of beans in their susceptibility to anthracnose. Phytopath.1: 190–195. 1911.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    —————. Anthracnose-resistant red kidney bean.5: 301–311. 1915.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    —————. Varietal susceptibility of beans to strains ofColletotrichum lindemuthianum (Sacc. & Magn.) B. & C.8: 589614. 1918.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bennett, L. S. Studies on the inheritance of resistance to wilt (Fusarium niveum) in watermelon. Jour. Agr. Res.53: 295–306. 1936.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Berg, A. Tomato late blight and its relation to late blight of potatoes. W. Va. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 205. 1926.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bever, W. M. Physiologic specialization inPuccinia glumarum in the United States. Phytopath.24: 686–688. 1934.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Biffen, R. H. Mendel’s laws of inheritance and wheat breeding. Jour. Agr. Sci.1: 4–48. 1905.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    —————. Studies in inheritance of disease resistance. II.,4: 421–429. 1912.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Black, W. Studies on the inheritance of resistance to wart disease (Synchytrium endobioticum (Schilb.) Perc.) in potatoes. Jour. Genet.30: 127–146. 1935.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Blank, L. M. Uniformity in pathogenicity and cultural behavior among strains of the cabbage-yellows organism. Jour. Agr. Res.48: 401–409. 1934.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    —————. Fusarium resistance in Wisconsin All Seasons cabbage.55: 497–510. 1937.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    —————. Inheritance of Fusarium resistance in brussels sprouts and kohlrabi.46: 1015–1022. 1933.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Blinn, P. K. A rust resisting cantaloupe. Col. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 104. 1905.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Blood, H. L. A method of measuring the relative resistance of varieties of tomato and bean to curly top. Utah Acad. Sci. Proc.15 (1937–8): 21–24. 1938.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bohn, G. W., and C. M. Tucker. Studies on Fusarium wilt of the tomato. I. Immunity inLycopersicon pimpinellifolium Mill. and its inheritance in hybrids. Mo. Agr. Exp. Sta. Res. Bul. 311. 1940.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bond, T. E. T. Infection experiments withCladosporium fulvum Cooke and related species. Ann. Appl. Biol.25: 277–307. 1938.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bonde, R., F. J. Stevenson, andC. F. Clark. Resistance of certain potato varieties and seedling progenies to late blight in the tubers. Phytopath.30: 733–748. 1940.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Böning, K. Ueber die Empfänglichkeit vonPhaseolus vulgaris fürColletotrichum lindemuthianum in Lichte der Rassenbildung des Krankheitserregers. Forsch. Geb. Pflanzenk. u. Immunität im Pflanzenreich2: 4–18. 1926.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    —————. Beobachtungen und Versuche zur Frage der Widerstandsfähigkeit der Kartoffelsorten gegen Schorf. Prakt. Bl. Pflanzenbau Pflanzenschutz.15: 268–279. 1938.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bordukova, M. W. Mme. Ueber die Bestimmung der Widerstandsfähigkeit der Kartoffeln gegen die Phytophthora. Obst. u. Gemüsebau Wirtsch.9: 29–32. 1937.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Budde, A. Ueber Rassenbildung parasitischer Pilze unter besonderer Berücksichtigung vonColletotrichum lindemuthianum (Sacc. et Magn.) Bri. et Cav. in Deutschland. Forsch. Geb. Pflanzenk. u. Immunität im Pflanzenreich5: 115–147. 1928.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bukasov, S. M. The problems of potato breeding. Amer. Potato Jour.13: 235–252. 1936.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Burkholder, W. H. The production of an antracnose-resistant White Marrow bean. Phytopath.8: 353–359. 1918.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    —————. The gamma strain ofColletotrichum lindemuthianum (Sacc. et Magn.) B. et C.13: 316–323. 1923.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    —————. Varietal susceptibility among beans to the bacterial blight.14: 1–7. 1924.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    —————. Varietal susceptibility of beans to an American and a European strain ofPhytomonas medicaginis var.phaseolicola, and a comparison of the strains in culture.22: 85–94. 1932.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Butler, E. J. The bearing of Mendelism on the susceptibility of wheat to rust. Jour. Agr. Sci.1: 361–363. 1905.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Cartwright, K. On the nature of the resistance of the patato to the wart disease. Ann. Bot.40: 391–395. 1926.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Christensen, C. J. Tiltraekning af kaalroeformer med saerlig modstandsevne mod kaalbroksvamp. Tidsskr. for. Planteavl24: 68–82. 1917.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Bobb, N. A. Contributions to an economic knowledge of the Australian rusts (Uredineae). Agr. Gaz. N.S. Wales1: 185–214, 1890;3: 44–68, 181–212, 1892.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Cochran, F. D. Breeding cucumbers for resistance to downy mildew. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. Proc.35(1937): 541–543. 1938.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Collins, E. J. The problem of immunity to wart disease (Synchytrium endobioticum (Schilb.) Perc.) in the potato. Ann. Bot.49: 479–491. 1935.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Cook, H. T. Powdery mildew disease of snap beans. Va. Truck Exp. Sta. Bul.74: 931–940. 1931.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    —————. Watermelon wilt and resistant varieties for its control. Va. Truck Exp. Sta. Bul.97: 1513–1525. 1937.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Clark, C. F., W. P. Raleigh, andF. J. Stevenson. Breeding for resistance to common scab in the potato. Amer. Potato Jour.13: 256–259. 1936.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    —————. The inheritance of scab resistance in certain crosses and selfed lines of potatoes. Phytopath.28: 878–890. 1938.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    -----,W. Stuart, and F. J. Stevenson. The Katahdin and Chippewa potatoes. U. S. Dept. Agr. Cir. 276. 1933.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Dana, B. F. Resistance and susceptibility to curly top in varieties of squash,Cucurbita maxima. Phytopath.28: 649–656. 1938.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Darling, H. M. A study of scab resistance in the potato. Jour. Agr. Res.54: 305–317. 1937.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    DeBary, A. Untersuchungen über die Brandpilze und die durch sie verursachten Krankheiten der Pflanzen mit Rücksicht auf das Getreide und andere Nutzpflanzen. 1853.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    DeBruyn, Helena L. G. Onderzoekingen over enkele Actinomyceten, welke Aardppelschurft verwekken. Tijdschr. over Plantenziekten45: 133–156. 1939.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Delwiche, E. J., F. L. Musbach, Emil Truog, J. C. Walker, and H. F. Wilson. Canning peas in Wisconsin. Wis. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 444. 1939.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Doolittle, S. P. Comparative susceptibility of European and American varieties of cucumbers to bacterial wilt. Phytopath.12: 143–146. 1922.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    —————. A hybrid cucumber resistant to bacterial wilt.29: 996–998. 1939.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Doornkat-Koolman, H. ten. Die Brennfleckenkrankheit der Gartenbohne im Lichte Vererbung. Versuche zur Immunitszüchtung beiPhaseolus vulgaris gegenüberColletotrichum lindemuthianum (Sacc. & Magn.) und seinen Biotypen. Forsch. Geb. Pflanzenk. u. Immunität in Pflanzenreich4: 112–237. 1927.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Dundas, B. Inheritance of resistance to powdery mildew in beans. Hilgardia10: 243–253. 1936.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    ————— Inheritance of resistance to powdery mildew in runner beans (Phaseolus coccineus), tepary beans (P. acutifolius), yard long beans (Vigna sesquipedalis) and cowpeas (Vigna sinensis). Phytopath.29: 824. 1939.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    —————. Physiologic strains of bean rust.29: 820–821. 1939.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Edgerton, C. W., and C. C. Moreland. Tests of the wilt resistance of different tomato varieties. La. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 184. 1921.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Elmer, O. H. A mosaic resistant variety of cucumbers. Phytopath.17: 48. 1927.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Ericksson, J. Ueber die Spezialisierung des Parasitismus bei den Getreiderostpilzen. Ber. Deut. Bot. Ges.12: 292–331. 1894.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Essary, S. H. Notes on tomato diseases with results of selection for resistance. Tenn. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 95. 1912.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Evans, I. B. Pole. South African cereal rusts, with observations on the problem of breeding rust-resistant wheats. Jour. Agr. Sci.4: 95–104. 1911.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Evans, R. I. Cytological studies on the parasitic relationship ofUrocystis cepulae to the onion. Amer. Jour. Bot.20: 255–268. 1933.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    —————. Cytological studies on the parasitic relationship ofUrocystis cepulae toAllium fistulosum.24: 214–218. 1937.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Felix, E. L. Disease resistance inAllium fistulosum L. Phytopath.23: 109–110. 1933.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Fromme, F. D., and S. A. Wingard. Bean rust: its control through the use of resistant varieties. Va. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 220. 1918.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    —————. Varietal susceptibility of beans to rust. Jour. Agr. Res.21: 385–404. 1921.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Gibson, C. M. Notes on infection experiments with various Uredineae. New Phytol.3: 184–191. 1904.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Giddings, N. J., andA. Berg. A comparison of the late blights of tomato and potato. A preliminary report. Phytopath.9: 209–210. 1919.Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Glynne, M. D. Infectivity of summer sporangia of potato wart disease in incipient infections on varieties immune in the field. Nature134: 253. 1934.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Guba, E. F. A red forcing tomato resistant toCladosporium leaf mold. Phytopath.29: 9. 1939.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Harter, L. L., C. F. Andrus, andW. J. Zaumeyer. Studies on bean rust caused byUromyces phaseoli typica. Jour. Agr. Res.50: 737–759. 1935.Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    -----,and J. L. Weimer. A monographic study of sweet potato diseases and their control. U. S. Dept. Agr. Tech. Bul. 99. 1929.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    —————. The comparative susceptibility of sweet potato varieties to stem rot. Jour. Agr. Res.34: 915–919. 1927.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Hawkins, L. A., andR. B. Harvey. Physiological study of the parasitism ofPythum debaryanum Hesse on the potato tuber.18: 275–297. 1919.Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Haymaker, H. H. Pathogenicity of two strains of the tomato-wilt fungus,Fusarium lycopersici Sacc.36: 675–695. 1928.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Henderson, W. J. Yellow dwarf a virus disease of onions, and its control. Iowa Agr. Exp. Sta. Res. Bul.188: 211–255. 1935.Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Hoggan, Ismé A. Some viruses affecting spinach and certain aspects of insect transmission. Phytopath.23: 446–474. 1933.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Holmes, F. O. Inheritance of resistance to tobacco-mosaic disease in the pepper.27: 637–642. 1937.Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Huber, G. A., andC. D. Schwartze. Resistance in the red raspberry to the mosaic vectorAmphorophora rubi Kalt. Jour. Agr. Res.57: 623–633. 1938.Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Huelsen, W. A. Wilt-resistant tomato varieties released by the Illinois Station. Ill. Agr. Exp. Sta. Cir. 490. 1939.Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Jagger, I. C. Brown blight of lettuce. Phytopath.30: 53–64. 1940.Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    -----,and G. W. Scott. Development of powdery mildew resistant cantaloup No. 45. U. S. Dept. Agr. Cir. 441. 1937.Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    —————. The inheritance of immunity from mildew (Bremia lactucae) in lettuce. Phytopath.30: 427–433. 1940.Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    —————. Inheritance inCucumis melo of resistance to powdery mildew (Erysiphe cichoracearum).28: 671. 1938.Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    —————. A new biologic form of powdery mildew on muskmelons in the Imperial Valley of California. Plant Dis. Rptr.22: 275–276. 1938.Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Johnson, B. Specificity to penetration of the epidermis of a plant by the hyphae of a pathogenic fungus. Amer. Jour. Bot.19: 12–31. 1932.Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Johnson, J. Relation of water-soaked tissues to infection byBacterium angulatum andBact. tabacum and other organisms. Jour. Agr. Res.55: 599–618. 1937.Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Jones, H. A. Vegetable breeding at the University of California. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. Proc.29 (1932): 572–581. 1933.Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Jones, L. K., C. L. Vincent, andE. F. Burk. The resistance of progeny of Katahdin potatoes to viroses. Jour. Agr. Res.60: 631–644. 1940.Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Jones, L. R. Disease resistance of potatoes. U. S. Dept. Agr. Bur. Pl. Ind. Bul. 87. 1905.Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    -----,and J. C. Gilman. The control of cabbage yellows through disease resistance. Wis. Agr. Exp. Sta. Res. Bul. 38. 1915.Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    -----,J. C. Walker, and W. B. Tisdale. Fusarium resistant cabbage. Wis. Agr. Exp. Sta. Res. Bul. 48. 1920.Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Kendrick, J. B. Kale yellows in California, caused byFusarium conglutinans Wollenw. Hilgardia5: 1–15. 1930.Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Köhler, E. Ueber das Verhalten vonSynchytrium endobioticum auf anfälligen und widerstandsfähigen Kartoffelsorten. Biol. Reichsanst. Land u. Forstw. Arb.19: 263–285. 1931.Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Kotte, W. Zur Kenntnis der “Fettfleckenkrankheit” der Bohne. Ztschr. Pflanzenkr.41: 12–19. 1931.Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Kühn, J. G. Die Krankheiten der Kulturgewächse, ihre Ursachen und ihre Verhütung. 1858.Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Langford, A. N. The parasitism ofCladosporium fulvum Cooke and the genetics of resistance to it. Canad. Jour. Res. (Sect. C)15: 108–128. 1937.Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Lauritzen, J. I. A strain of Yellow Jersey sweet potato resistant to surface rot (Fusarium oxysporum W. & C.). Jour. Agr. Res.33: 1091–1094. 1926.Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Layton, D. V. The parasitism ofColletotrichum lagenarium (Pass.) Ell. and Halst. Iowa Agr. Exp. Sta. Res. Bul.223: 37–67. 1937.Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Leach, J. G. The parasitism ofColletotrichum lindemuthianum. Minn. Agr. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bul. 14. 1923.Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    -----,and T. M. Currence. Fusarium wilt of muskmelons in Minnesota. Minn. Agr. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bul. 129. 1938.Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    —————. Pathogenic races ofActinomyces scabies in relation to scab resistance. Phytopath.29: 204–209. 1939.Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    —————. The measurement and inheritance of scab resistance in selfed and hybrid progenies of potatoes. Jour. Agr. Res.56: 843–853. 1938.Google Scholar
  105. 105.
    Lehmann, H. Ein weiterer Beitrag zum Problem der physiologischen Spezialisierung vonPhytophthora infestans deBary, dem Erreger der Kartoffelkrautfäule. Phytopath. Ztschr.11: 121–154. 1938.Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Lehmann, H. Das heutige Ausgangsmaterial für die ZüchtungPhytophthora-widerstandsfähiger Kartoffeln. Züchter9: 29–35. 1937.Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Lemmerzahl, J. Zur Methodik der Krebsprüfung von Kartoffelstämmen.3: 138–152. 1931.Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Lesley, J. W., andJ. M. Wallace. Acquired tolerance to curly top in the tomato. Phytopath.28: 548–553. 1938.Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Linford, M. B. A Fusarium wilt of peas in Wisconsin. Wis. Agr. Exp. Sta. Res. Bul. 85. 1928.Google Scholar
  110. 110.
    ————— Studies of pathogenesis and resistance in pea wilt caused byFusarium orthoceras var.pisi. Phytopath.21: 797–826. 1931.Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    ————— Wound inoculation in relation to resistance in the Fusarium wilt of peas.21: 827–833. 1931.Google Scholar
  112. 112.
    Link, K. P., H. R. Angell, andJ. C. Walker. The isolation of protocatechuic acid from pigmented onion scales and its significance in relation to disease resistance in onions. Jour. Biol. Chem.81: 369–375. 1929.Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    —————. Further observations on the occurrence of protocatechuic acid in pigmented onion scales and its relation to disease resistance in the onion.84: 719–725. 1929.Google Scholar
  114. 114.
    —————. The isolation of catechol from pigmented onion scales and its significance in relation to disease resistance in onions.100: 379–383. 1933.Google Scholar
  115. 115.
    Lunden, A. P., andI. Jørstad. Investigations on the inheritance of immunity to wart disease (Synchytrium endobioticum (Schilb.) Perc.) in the potato. Jour. Genet.29: 375–385. 1934.Google Scholar
  116. 116.
    MacDonald, J. A. Plant pathology. Scot. Jour. Agr.18: 164–167. 1935.Google Scholar
  117. 117.
    Malabanan, D. B. Anthracnose of pepper. Philippine Agr.14: 491–502. 1926.Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    Manns, T. F., andJ. F. Adams. Department of plant pathology. Del. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 152 (Ann. Rpt. 1927): 40–51. 1927.Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    Mayer, A. E. Ueber die Mosaikkrankheit des Tabaks. Landw. Ver. Sta.32: 451–467. 1886.Google Scholar
  120. 120.
    Melchers, L. E., and J. H. Parker. Another strain ofPuccinia graminis. Kans. Agr. Exp. Sta. Cir. 68. 1918.Google Scholar
  121. 121.
    McRostie, G. P. Inheritance of disease resistance in the common bean. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron.13: 15–32. 1921.Google Scholar
  122. 122.
    Mills, W. R. Adaptive parasitism ofPhytophthora infestans. Phytopath.30: 17. 1940.Google Scholar
  123. 123.
    —————Phytophthora infestans on tomato.30: 830–839. 1940.Google Scholar
  124. 124.
    Moore, W. D. Powdery mildew (Erysiphe polygoni) on garden snap beans.26: 1135–1141. 1936.Google Scholar
  125. 125.
    Muller, H. R. A. Physiologic forms ofColletotrichum lindemuthianum (Sacc. et Mag.) Bri. et Cav. in the Netherlands.16: 369. 1926.Google Scholar
  126. 126.
    Müller, K. O. Ueber diePhytophthora-resistenz der Kartoffel und ihre Vererbung. (Zugleich ein Beitrag zur Frage der Polyploidie bei der Kartoffel). Ang. Bot.12: 299–324. 1930.Google Scholar
  127. 127.
    ————— Die Variabilität der Virulenz und der biologischen Spezialization bei dem Erreger der Kartoffelkrautfäule,Phytophthora infestans. Naturwissen.24: 552–557. 1936.Google Scholar
  128. 128.
    Murphy, D. M. A great northern bean resistant to curly-top and common bean-mosaic viruses. Phytopath.30: 779–784. 1940.Google Scholar
  129. 129.
    —————. Common mosaic of garden pea,Pisum sativum.27: 710–721. 1936.Google Scholar
  130. 130.
    —————. A mosaic resistant small red bean.28: 270–273. 1938.Google Scholar
  131. 131.
    Nelson, R., G. H. Coons, and L. C. Cochran. The Fusarium yellows disease of celery (Apium graveolens L. var.dulce D. C.). Mich. Agr. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bul. 155. 1937.Google Scholar
  132. 132.
    Nilsson-Ehle, H. Resistenz gegen Gelbrost beim Weisen. Kreuzungsuntersuchungen an Hafer und Weisen. II. Lund’s Univ. Arsskr. n. f. afd. 2,7: 57–82. 1911.Google Scholar
  133. 133.
    Norton, J. B. Methods used in breeding asparagus for rust resistance. U. S. Dept. Agr. Bur. Pl. Ind. Bul. 263. 1913.Google Scholar
  134. 134.
    -----. Washington asparagus: information and suggestions for growers of new pedigreed rust-resistant strains. U. S. Dept. Agr. Cotton, Truck, and Forage Crop Dis. Cir. 7. 1919.Google Scholar
  135. 135.
    Ogilvie, L., andC. J. Hickman. Progress report on vegetable diseases. IX. Bristol Univ., Agr. and Hort. Res. Sta. Ann. Rpt. 1937: 96–109. 1938.Google Scholar
  136. 136.
    Olsson, P. A. Svalöfs Majrova. En Rovsort, speciellt för odlingsområden där klumprotsjukan härjar. Sevriges Utsädesför. Tidskr.48: 471–476. 1939.Google Scholar
  137. 137.
    Orton, W. A. A study of disease resistance in watermelons. Science25: 288. 1907.Google Scholar
  138. 138.
    ————— The development of farm crops resistant to disease. U. S. Dept. Agr. Yearbook 1908: 453–464. 1909.Google Scholar
  139. 139.
    Parker, M. C. Inheritance of resistance to the common mosaic virus in the bean. Jour. Agr. Res.52: 895–915. 1936.Google Scholar
  140. 140.
    Parris, G. K. The reactions of introduced bean varieties to rust (Uromyces phaseoli typica) in Hawaii. Plant Dis. Rptr.22: 424–428. 1938.Google Scholar
  141. 141.
    Peuser, H. Fortgesetzte Untersuchungen über das Verkommen biologischer Rassen vonColletotrichum lindemuth. (Sacc. et Mgn.) Bri. et Cav. Phytopath. Ztschr.4: 83–112. 1931.Google Scholar
  142. 142.
    Pierce, W. H. Viruses of the bean. Phytopath.24: 87–115. 1934.Google Scholar
  143. 143.
    ————— Resistance to common bean mosaic in the Great Northern field bean. Jour. Agr. Res.49: 183–188. 1934.Google Scholar
  144. 144.
    ————— The inheritance of resistance to the common bean mosaic in field and garden beans. Phytopath.25: 875–883. 1935.Google Scholar
  145. 145.
    —————. The development of mosaic resistant Refugee beans. Canner77 (26): 7–9. 1933.Google Scholar
  146. 146.
    Porte, W. S., S. P. Doolittle, andF. L. Wellman. Hybridization of a mosaic-tolerant, wilt-resistantLycopersicon hirsutum withLycopersicon esculentum. Phytopath.29: 757–759. 1939.Google Scholar
  147. 147.
    Porter, D. R. Breeding high-quality wilt-resistant watermelons. Calif. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 614. 1937.Google Scholar
  148. 148.
    —————. Resistance of some of the cultivated species ofAllium to pink root (Phoma terrestris). Phytopath.23: 290–298. 1933.Google Scholar
  149. 149.
    —————. The pathogencity ofFusarium niveum E.F.S. and the development of wilt resistant strains ofCitrullus vulgaris (Schrad.). Iowa Agr. Exp. Sta. Res. Bul. 149: 124–184. 1932.Google Scholar
  150. 150.
    Porter, R. H. The reaction of cucumbers to types of mosaic. Iowa State Col. Jour. Sci.6: 95–120. 1931.Google Scholar
  151. 151.
    Prévost, B. Mémoire sur la cause immédiate de la carie ou Charbon des blés et de plusieurs autres maladies des plantes, et sur les préservatifs de la carie. 1807. [English translation by G. W. Keitt, Phytopathological Classics6, 1939.]Google Scholar
  152. 152.
    Price, W. C. Local lesions on bean leaves inoculated with tobacco mosaic virus. Amer. Jour. Bot.17: 694–702. 1930.Google Scholar
  153. 153.
    Pritchard, F. J. Development of wilt-resistant tomatoes. U. S. Dept. Agr. Bul. 1015. 1922.Google Scholar
  154. 154.
    Rands, R. D., andW. Brotherton. Bean varietal tests for disease resistance. Jour. Agr. Res.31: 101–154. 1925.Google Scholar
  155. 155.
    Reddick, D. Blight immune, drought tolerant potatoes. Amer. Potato Jour.14: 205–210. 1937.Google Scholar
  156. 156.
    ————— Scab immunity.16: 71–74, 76. 1939.Google Scholar
  157. 157.
    —————. Biological specialization inPhytophthora infestans.10: 129–134. 1933.Google Scholar
  158. 158.
    —————. Building up virulence inPhytophthora infestans.15: 29–34. 1938.Google Scholar
  159. 159.
    —————. Blight immune versus blight resistant potatoes.16: 220–224. 1939.Google Scholar
  160. 160.
    —————. Varieties of beans susceptible to mosaic. Phytopath.8: 530–534. 1918.Google Scholar
  161. 161.
    —————. Additional varieties of beans susceptible to mosaic.9: 149–152. 1919.Google Scholar
  162. 162.
    Rieman, G. H. Genetic factors for pigmentation in the onion and their relation to disease resistance. Jour. Agr. Res.42: 251–278. 1931.Google Scholar
  163. 163.
    Rochlin, E. Zur Frage der Widerstandsfähigkeit der Cruciferen gegen die Kohlhernie (Plasmodiophora brassicae Wor.). Phytopath. Ztschr.5: 381–406. 1932.Google Scholar
  164. 164.
    Roque, A. New cucumbers strains resistant to downy mildew are high yielders. Puerto Rico Agr. Exp. Sta. Ann. Rpt. 1938–39: 61. 1939.Google Scholar
  165. 165.
    -----,and J. Adsuar. New cucumber varieties resistant to the downy mildew.Ibid. 1937–38: 45–46. 1939.Google Scholar
  166. 166.
    -----,and -----. The development of new varieties of eggplant resistant to bacterial wilt.Ibid. 1937–38: 44–45. 1939.Google Scholar
  167. 167.
    -----,and -----. Pepper mosaic, a serious disease in Puerto Rico, may be controlled by breeding resistant varieties.Ibid. 1938–39: 62. 1939.Google Scholar
  168. 168.
    Rosenbaum, J., andC. E. Sando. Correlation between size of the fruit and the resistance of the tomato skin to puncture and its relation to infection withMacrosporium tomato Cooke. Amer. Jour. Bot.7: 78–82. 1920.Google Scholar
  169. 169.
    Ryker, T. C. Fusarium yellows of celery. Phytopath.25: 578–600. 1935.Google Scholar
  170. 170.
    Salaman, R. N. Potato variety production: a new departure. Gard. Chron.102: 326–327. 1937.Google Scholar
  171. 171.
    —————. Genetic studies in potatoes: the inheritance of immunity to wart disease. Jour. Genet.13: 177–186. 1923.Google Scholar
  172. 172.
    Schick, R. Ueber das Verhalten vonSolanum demissum, Solanum tuberosum und ihrer Bastarden gegenüber verschiedenen Herkunfter vonPhytophthora infestans. Züchter4: 233–237. 1932.Google Scholar
  173. 173.
    —————. Zur physiologischen Specialisierung vonPhytophthora infestans de Bary. Zugleich ein Beitrag zur Methodik der Züchtung kräutfaulewiderstandsfähiger Kartoffeln.8: 34–46. 1936.Google Scholar
  174. 174.
    —————. Das Verhalten von verschiedenen Formen vonSolanum demissum gegenüber 4 verschiedenen Linien derPhytophthora infestans.8: 102–104. 1936.Google Scholar
  175. 175.
    Schlumberger, O. Kartoffelsorten—Prüfung auf Schorfwiderstandsfähigkeit. Mitt. Landw.52: 52–53, 1937;53: 99, 1938.Google Scholar
  176. 176.
    Schreiber, F. Resistenzüchtung beiPhaseolus vulgaris. Phytopath. Ztschr.4: 415–454. 1932.Google Scholar
  177. 177.
    ————— Resistenz-Züchtung bei Buschbonen. Kühn-Archiv.38: 287–292. 1933.Google Scholar
  178. 178.
    Schultz, E. S., C. F. Clark, R. Bonde, W. P. Raleigh, andF. J. Stevenson. Resistance of potato to mosaic and other virus diseases. Phytopath.24: 116–132. 1934.Google Scholar
  179. 179.
    —————. Recent developments in potato breeding for resistance to virus diseases.27: 190–197. 1937.Google Scholar
  180. 180.
    Schultz, H. Untersuchungen über das Verhalten von Gurkensorten bei künstlicher Infection mitCladosporium cucumerinum Ell. et Arth. sowie einige morphologische Eigenschaft des Pilzes. Gartenbauwiss.13: 505–618. 1939.Google Scholar
  181. 181.
    —————. Die Anfälligkeit verschiedener Varietäten und Sorten von Salat (Lactuca sativa L. undLactuca scariola L.) gegen den falschen Meltau (Bremia lactucae Regel). Züchter10: 185–194. 1938.Google Scholar
  182. 182.
    —————. Freilandbeobachtungen über die Anfälligkeit von Gurken (Cucumis sativus L.) gegen Krätze, Blattbraune und Mehltau. Gartenbäuwiss.13: 169–183. 1939.Google Scholar
  183. 183.
    Sengbusch, R. v., andN. Loschakowa-Hasenbusch. Immunitätszuchtung bei Tomaten. Vorläufige über die Züchtung gegen die Braunfleckenkrankheit (Cladosporium fulvum Cooke.) resistenter Sorten. Züchter4: 257–264. 1932.Google Scholar
  184. 184.
    Shapovalov, M., andJ. W. Lesley. Wilt resistance of the Riverside variety of tomato to both Fusarium and Verticillium wilts. Phytopath.30: 760–768. 1940.Google Scholar
  185. 185.
    Sidorov, F. F. Züchtung phytophthorawiderstandfähiger Kartoffelsorten..27: 211–241. 1937.Google Scholar
  186. 186.
    Silayan, H. S. Philippine Dept. Agr. and Nat. Resources. Bur. Plant Indus. Ann. Rpt.1937: 21. 1938.Google Scholar
  187. 187.
    Sleeth, B. Fusarium niveum, the cause of watermelon wilt. W. Va. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 257. 1934.Google Scholar
  188. 188.
    Smith, E. F. The fungous infestation of agricultural soils in the United States. Sci. Amer. Sup.48: 19981–19982. 1899.Google Scholar
  189. 189.
    Smith, F. L., and W. B. Hewitt. Varietal susceptibility to common bean mosaic and transmission through seed. Calif. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 621. 1938.Google Scholar
  190. 190.
    Smith, L. B. Breeding mosaic resistant spinach and notes on malnutrition. Va. Truck Exp. Sta. Bul.135: 31–32. 1920.Google Scholar
  191. 191.
    Smith, Rose, andJ. C. Walker. A cytological study of cabbage plants in strains susceptible or resistant to yellows. Jour. Agr. Res.41: 17–35. 1930.Google Scholar
  192. 192.
    Snell, John. Ormskirk potato trials. Annual report, 1918. Jour. Bd. Agr. [Gt. Britain] Suppl.18: 68–102. 1919.Google Scholar
  193. 193.
    Snyder, W. C. Variability of the pea-wilt organism,Fusarium orthoceras var.pisi. Jour. Agr. Res.47: 65–88. 1933.Google Scholar
  194. 194.
    —————. Verticillium wilt of pepper,Capsicum annum. Phytopath.29: 359–362. 1939.Google Scholar
  195. 195.
    —————. Fusarium near-wilt of pea. Zentbl. Bakt. [etc.] Abt. II,41: 355–378. 1935.Google Scholar
  196. 196.
    Stakman, E. C. The genetics of pathogenic organisms. Publ. Amer. Assoc. Adv. Sci. 12. 1940.Google Scholar
  197. 197.
    —————. A new strain ofPuccinia graminis. Phytopath.7: 73. 1917.Google Scholar
  198. 198.
    Stapp, C., andH. Hahne. Zur Frage der Resistenz von Buschbohnensorten gegen den Erreger der FettfleckenkrankheitPseudomonas medicaginis var.phaseolicola Burkh. Ang. Bot.18: 249–262. 1936.Google Scholar
  199. 199.
    Stevenson, F. J., and C. F. Clark. The Sebago potato, a new variety resistant to late blight. U. S. Dept. Agr. Cir. 503. 1938.Google Scholar
  200. 200.
    —————. Inheritance of immunity from virus X (latent mosaic) in the potato. Phytopath.29: 362–365. 1939.Google Scholar
  201. 201.
    —— —— ——. Breeding for resistance to late blight in the potato..27: 1059–1070. 1937.Google Scholar
  202. 202.
    —— —— ——. Breeding for resistance to late blight in the potato. Amer. Potato Jour.13: 205–218. 1936.Google Scholar
  203. 203.
    Straib, W. Untersuchungen zur Genetik der Gelbrostresistenz des Weizens. Phytopath. Ztschr.7: 427–477. 1934.Google Scholar
  204. 204.
    —————. Die Untersuchungsergebnisse zur Frage der biologischen Specialisierung des Gelbrostes (Puccinia glumarum) und ihre Bedeutung für die Pflanzenzüchtung. Züchter5: 118–129. 1937.Google Scholar
  205. 205.
    Strong, (Mrs.) M. C. A new Fusarium-wilt-resistant tomato. Mich. Agr. Exp. Sta. Quart. Bul.21: 164–169. 1939.Google Scholar
  206. 206.
    Stuart, Wm. Disease resistance of potatoes. Vt. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul.122: 107–136. 1906.Google Scholar
  207. 207.
    Stubbs, M. W. Certain viroses of the garden pea,Pisum sativum. Phytopath.27: 242–266. 1937.Google Scholar
  208. 208.
    Tims, E. C. On the nature of resistance of cabbage yellows. Jour. Agr. Res.32: 183–199. 1926.Google Scholar
  209. 209.
    Townsend, G. R. Reactions of varieties of snap beans to rust. Plant Dis. Rptr.22: 2–4. 1938.Google Scholar
  210. 210.
    Tulasne, L. R., andCharles. Mémoire sur les Ustilaginées comparées aux Urédinées. Ann. Sci. Nat., III.7: 12–127. 1847.Google Scholar
  211. 211.
    Virgin, W. J. The Chilean tomato,Lycopersicon chilense, found resistant to curly top. Phytopath.30: 280. 1940.Google Scholar
  212. 212.
    —————. Relation of temperature and moisture to near-wilt of pea. Jour. Agr. Res.59: 591–600. 1939.Google Scholar
  213. 213.
    —————. Relation of near-wilt fungus to the pea plant.60: 241–248. 1940.Google Scholar
  214. 214.
    Wade, B. L. The inheritance of Fusarium wilt resistance in canning peas. Wis. Agr. Exp. Sta. Res. Bul. 97. 1929.Google Scholar
  215. 215.
    —————. Varietal reaction of pea to a virus from alsike clover. Phytopath.28: 505–511. 1938.Google Scholar
  216. 216.
    -----,and --. U. S. No. 5 Refugee, a new mosaicresistant Refugee bean. U. S. Dept. Agr. Cir. 500. 1938.Google Scholar
  217. 217.
    —————. Genetic studies of resistance to alfalfa mosaic virus and of stringiness inPhaseolus vulgaris. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron.32: 127–134. 1940.Google Scholar
  218. 218.
    -----, --,and L. L. Harter. Variety studies in relation to Fusarium wilt of peas. U. S. Dept. Agr. Cir. 473. 1938.Google Scholar
  219. 219.
    Walker, J. C. Onion smudge. Jour. Agr. Res.20: 685–721. 1921.Google Scholar
  220. 220.
    —————. Disease resistance to onion smudge.24: 1019–1040. 1923.Google Scholar
  221. 221.
    —————. Studies upon the inheritance of Fusarium resistance in cabbage. Phytopath.16: 87. 1926.Google Scholar
  222. 222.
    -----. Resistance to Fusarium wilt in garden, canning and field peas. Wis. Agr. Exp. Sta. Res. Bul. 107. 1931.Google Scholar
  223. 223.
    —————. Inheritance of Fusarium resistance in cabbage. Jour. Agr. Res.40: 721–745. 1930.Google Scholar
  224. 224.
    —————. Yellows-resistant lines of Jersey Wakefield cabbage.46: 639–648. 1933.Google Scholar
  225. 225.
    —————. A study of resistance to Fusarium wilt in Alaska peas. Amer. Jour. Bot.22: 849–857. 1935.Google Scholar
  226. 226.
    —————. Resistance to club root in Brassica. Phytopath.26: 112. 1936.Google Scholar
  227. 227.
    -----. Diseases of cabbage and related plants. U. S. Dept. Agr. Farmers’ Bul. 1439. 1927. (Rev. 1938.)Google Scholar
  228. 228.
    —————. Resistance to clubroot in varieties of turnip and rutabaga. Jour. Agr. Res.59: 815–827. 1939.Google Scholar
  229. 229.
    —————. Disease resistant pea varieties. Canner88 (12, pt. 2): 89. 1939.Google Scholar
  230. 230.
    —————. Results of planting tests with Wisconsin Refugee and Idaho Refugee beans. Canner80(12): 7–8, 22. 1935.Google Scholar
  231. 231.
    —————. Fusarium-resistant Danish Ballhead cabbage. Jour. Agr. Res.49: 983–989. 1934.Google Scholar
  232. 232.
    —————. Yellow dwarf of potato in Wisconsin.59: 259–280. 1939.Google Scholar
  233. 233.
    —— ——. Studies of resistance to potato scab in Wisconsin. Amer. Potato Jour.15: 246–252. 1938.Google Scholar
  234. 234.
    —————. Further studies on the relation of onion scale pigmentation to disease resistance. Jour. Agr. Res.29: 507–514. 1924.Google Scholar
  235. 235.
    —— ——. Further studies on the toxicity of juice extracted from succulent onion scales.30: 175–187. 1925.Google Scholar
  236. 236.
    —————. Toxicity of phenolic compounds to certain onion bulb parasites. Bot. Gaz.99: 468–484. 1935.Google Scholar
  237. 237.
    —— ——. Find no relation between clubroot resistance and volatile oil content of plants. Wis. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul.435: 102–103. 1936.Google Scholar
  238. 238.
    —————. Development of three midseason varieties of cabbage resistant to yellow (Fusarium conglutinans Woll.). Jour. Agr. Res.35: 785–809. 1927.Google Scholar
  239. 239.
    —————. Effect of environmental factors upon the resistance of cabbage to yellows.41: 1–15. 1930.Google Scholar
  240. 240.
    -----,and W. C. Snyder. Pea wilt and root rots. Wis. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 424. 1933.Google Scholar
  241. 241.
    —————. A survey of the resistance of subspecies ofBrassica oleracea to yellows (Fusarium conglutinans). Jour. Agr. Res.37: 233–241. 1928.Google Scholar
  242. 242.
    Walker, M. N. A wilt-resistant watermelon for Florida. Fla. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 288. 1936.Google Scholar
  243. 243.
    Wallace, J. W. Evidence of passive immunization of tobacco, Nicotiana tabacum, from the virus of curly top. Phytopath.30: 673–679. 1940.Google Scholar
  244. 244.
    Ward, H. M. On the relations between host and parasite in the bromes and their brown rust,P. dispersa Erikss. Ann. Bot.16: 233–315. 1902.Google Scholar
  245. 245.
    Weber, G. F. Nailhead spot of tomato caused byAlternaria tomato (Cke.) n. comb. Fla. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 332. 1939.Google Scholar
  246. 246.
    Wei, C. T. Rust resistance in the garden bean. Phytopath.27: 1090–1105. 1937.Google Scholar
  247. 247.
    Weiss, F., C. R. Orton, and R. E. Hartman. Investigations of potato wart. U. S. Dept. Agr. Bul. 1156. 1923.Google Scholar
  248. 248.
    Wellman, F. L. A technique for studying host resistance and pathogenicity in tomato Fusarium wilt. Phytopath.29: 945–946. 1939.Google Scholar
  249. 249.
    Wellman, F. L., and Dorothy J. Blaisdell. Differences in growth characters and pathogenicity of Fusarium wilt isolations tested on three tomato varieties. U. S. Dept. Agr. Tech. Bul. 705. 1940.Google Scholar
  250. 250.
    White, R. P. Tomato wilt investigations. Kans. Agr. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bul. 20. 1926.Google Scholar
  251. 251.
    Wilson, J. J. The pathological relationship between the host and parasite in varieties and strains of watermelons resistant toFusarium niveum E.F.S. Iowa Agr. Exp. Sta. Res. Bul.195: 107–152. 1936.Google Scholar
  252. 252.
    Wingard, S. A. The development of rust-resistant beans by hybridization. Va. Agr. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bul. 51. 1933.Google Scholar
  253. 253.
    Zaumeyer, W. J. The bacterial blight of beans caused byBacterium phaseoli. U. S. Dept. Agr. Tech. Bul. 186. 1930.Google Scholar
  254. 254.
    —————. Three previously undescribed mosaic diseases of pea. Jour. Agr. Res.60: 433–452. 1940.Google Scholar
  255. 255.
    —————. Varietal reaction of pea to pea-streak virus 1. Phytopath.27: 1009–1013. 1937.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The New York Botanical Garden 1941

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. C. Walker
    • 1
  1. 1.University of WisconsinUSA

Personalised recommendations