Advertisement

Cereal Research Communications

, Volume 36, Supplement 6, pp 57–62 | Cite as

Resistance to Fusarium infection in oats (Avena sativa L.)

  • Åsmund BjørnstadEmail author
  • Helge Skinnes
Session 1 Host Plant Resistance and Variety Development

Abstract

This paper summarizes the impact of Fusarium in oats, with a special emphasis on resistance to infection. Oats are generally the less susceptible than the other small-grained cereals, possibly due to the panicle structure leading to single spikelet infections, but the levels of mycotoxins (most commonly DON) are more severe in oats. A number of species infect oats and the species F. langsethii appears common in Scandinavia and produces T2+HT-2 toxins. Dehulling may generally remove the toxins, but the yield impact is unknown. In field infections early decay of kernels may frequently be observed. The infection time appears wider than in wheat or barley. Genetic variation exists in the cultivated germplasm, if a wide range is tested, and very susceptible cultivars may be identified. Apparent resistance has been detected in derivatives from Avena sterilis, and its genetics is being investigated.

Keywords

Fusarium Avena oats mycotoxins 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andon, M.B., Anderson, J.W. 2008. The oatmeal-cholesterol connection: 10 years later. American J. Lifestyle Medicine 2:51–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Gavrilova, O., Gagkaeva, T., Burkin, A., Kononenko, G., Loskutov, I. 2008. Susceptibility of aot germplasm to Fusarium infection and mycotoxin accumulation in grains. Abstract V-*, Eighth International Oat Conference Minneapolis June 28–July 2. 2008-07-16Google Scholar
  3. Langevin, F., Eudes, F., Comeau, A. 2004. Effect of trichothecenes produced by Fusarium graminearum during Fusarium head blight development in six cereal species European J. Plant Pathol. 100:735–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Limonard, T. 1966. A modified blotter test for seed health. Neth.J. Pl. Pathol. 72:319–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Liu, W., Langseth, W., Skinnes, H., Elen, O., Sundheim, L. 1997. Comparison of visual head blight ratings, seed infection levels and deoxynivalenol production for assessment of resistance in cereals inoculated with Fusarium culmorum. European J. Plant Pathol. 103:589–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Mitchell Fletch, J.W., Tekauz, A., Rossnagel, B., Savard, M.E. 2008. Fusrium Head Blight of Oat: Identifying Resistant Oat Breeding Lines at AAFC-CRC. Abstract V-4, Eighth International Oat Conference Minneapolis June 28–July 2. 2008-07-16Google Scholar
  7. Parikka, P., Hietaniemi, V., Rämö, S., Jalli, H. 2008. Fusarium I nfection and Mycotoxin Contents of Oats Under Different Tillage Treatments. Sessiont V-Talk, Eighth International Oat Conference Minneapolis June 28–July 2. 2008Google Scholar
  8. Yan, W., Fregeau-Reid, J., Rioux, S., Tamburic-Ilincic, L., Martin, R., Pageau, D., Lajeunesse, J., de Haan, B., Savard, M., Xue, Allen 2008. Current Status of Oat FHB in Eastern Canada. Abstract V-9, Eighth International Oat Conference Minneapolis June 28–July 2. 2008Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2008

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Plant and Environmental SciencesNorwegian University of Life SciencesÅsNorway

Personalised recommendations