title: Bean common bacterial blight: pathogen epiphytic life and effect of irrigation practices.
abstract: In recent years, bean common bacterial blight (CBB) caused by Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. phaseoli (Xap) has caused serious yield losses in several countries. CBB is considered mainly a foliar disease in which symptoms initially appear as small water-soaked spots that then enlarge and become necrotic and usually bordered by a chlorotic zone. Xap epiphytic population community has a critical role in the development of the disease and subsequent epidemics. The epiphytic population of Xap in the field has two major parts; solitary cells (potentially planktonic) and biofilms which are sources for providing and refreshing the solitary cell components. Irrigation type has a significant effect on epiphytic population of Xap. The mean epiphytic population size in the field with an overhead sprinkler irrigation system is significantly higher than populations under furrow irrigation. A significant positive correlation between the epiphytic population size of Xap and disease severity has been reported in both the overhead irrigated (r=0.64) and the furrow irrigated (r= 0.44) fields.
authors.affiliation: Dept. of Plant Protection, College of Agriculture, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran ; Dept. of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Alberta, Canada.
authors.forename: Alireza
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Akhavan
authors.forename: Masoud
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Bahar
authors.forename: Homa
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Askarian
authors.forename: Mohammad Reza
authors.initials: MR
authors.lastname: Lak
authors.forename: Abolfazl
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Nazemi
authors.forename: Zahra
authors.initials: Z
authors.lastname: Zamani
keywords: Bean common Bacterial blight; Disease severity; Epiphytic life; Irrigation; Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. phaseoli
references.citation: Microbes Infect. 2004 May;6(6):623-9
references.pmid: 15158198
references.citation: Appl Environ Microbiol. 1999 Apr;65(4):1435-43
references.pmid: 10103233
references.citation: Phytopathology. 2000 Jul;90(7):677-82
references.pmid: 18944485
references.citation: Annu Rev Phytopathol. 1995;33:145-72
references.pmid: 18294082
references.citation: Appl Environ Microbiol. 2005 Apr;71(4):2008-15
references.pmid: 15812033
references.citation: Annu Rev Phytopathol. 2003;41:455-82
references.pmid: 12730390
references.citation: Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2000 Dec;64(4):847-67
references.pmid: 11104821
references.citation: Annu Rev Microbiol. 2007;61:401-22
references.pmid: 17506679
references.citation: Annu Rev Phytopathol. 2003;41:429-53
references.pmid: 12730399
references.citation: Appl Microbiol. 1967 Nov;15(6):1523-4
references.pmid: 16349789
references.citation: Phytopathology. 1999 May;89(5):353-9
references.pmid: 18944746
references.citation: Annu Rev Microbiol. 1995;49:711-45
references.pmid: 8561477
references.citation: Mol Plant Microbe Interact. 1998 Nov;11(11):1119-29
references.pmid: 9805399
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Dec 23;100(26):15977-82
references.pmid: 14665692
references.citation: Microb Ecol. 2004 Jan;47(1):87-95
references.pmid: 15259273
references.citation: Appl Environ Microbiol. 1985 Nov;50(5):1229-32
references.pmid: 16346928
references.citation: Phytopathology. 2000 Mar;90(3):208-13
references.pmid: 18944610
references.citation: Syst Appl Microbiol. 2005 Aug;28(6):494-518
references.pmid: 16104350
references.citation: Appl Environ Microbiol. 1996 Jul;62(7):2560-6
references.pmid: 16535362
references.citation: Annu Rev Phytopathol. 2000 Sep;38:145-180
references.pmid: 11701840
references.citation: Periodontol 2000. 2010 Feb;52(1):12-37
references.pmid: 20017793
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Sep 16;100(19):10995-1000
references.pmid: 12960398