Quantitative resistance differences between and within natural populations of Solanum chilense against the oomycete pathogen Phytophthora infestans

7Citations
Citations of this article
24Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The wild tomato species Solanum chilense is divided into geographically and genetically distinct populations that show signs of defense gene selection and differential phenotypes when challenged with several phytopathogens, including the oomycete causal agent of late blight Phytophthora infestans. To better understand the phenotypic diversity of this disease resistance in S. chilense and to assess the effect of plant genotype versus pathogen isolate, respectively, we evaluated infection frequency in a systematic approach and with large sample sizes. We studied 85 genetically distinct individuals representing nine geographically separated populations of S. chilense. This showed that differences in quantitative resistance can be observed between but also within populations at the level of individual plants. Our data also did not reveal complete immunity in any of the genotypes. We further evaluated the resistance of a subset of the plants against P. infestans isolates with diverse virulence properties. This confirmed that the relative differences in resistance phenotypes between individuals were mainly determined by the plant genotype under consideration with modest effects of pathogen isolate used in the study. Thus, our report suggests that the observed quantitative resistance against P. infestans in natural populations of a wild tomato species S. chilense is the result of basal defense responses that depend on the host genotype and are pathogen isolate-unspecific.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kahlon, P. S., Verin, M., Hückelhoven, R., & Stam, R. (2021). Quantitative resistance differences between and within natural populations of Solanum chilense against the oomycete pathogen Phytophthora infestans. Ecology and Evolution, 11(12), 7768–7778. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.7610

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free