Plant and fungal cells are surrounded by a cell wall rich in diverse polysaccharides and proteins.It has become apparent in recent years that the carbohydrates in the cell wall function not only to maintain cell shape and integrity,but also may serve as signals in plants(Mohnen et al.,1993).Oligogalacturonic acid(OGA),a well studied elicitor,is derived from plant cell walls(Nothnagel et al.,1983).When added to cultured plant cells,it induces an oxidative burst within minutes,releasing ROS via a pathway that involves receptor binding,activation of a G-protein,influx of Ca2+,stimulation of phospholipase C,and induction of a number of kinases(Apostol et al.,1989;Horn et al.,1989;Legendre et al.,1992;Chandra et al.,1995;Legendre et al.,1993).Purified OGAs 13 to at least 26 residues long stimulate pp34 thiophosphorylation in vitro(Philippe et al.,1995).OGAs are also involved in the induction of the jasmonate pathway during plant defense response to E.carotovora subsp.Carotovora attack(Cecilia et al.,1999).The first response observed after the addition of OGAs that is clearly involved in plant defense is the production of active oxygen species,including H2O2,and O2-.This response,termed the oxidative burst,occurs within a few minutes after the addition of OGAs to suspension-cultured soybean,tobacco,and tomato cells.Reactive oxygen species are thought to have direct(through cytotoxicity)and indirect(through signaling)roles in the plant cell death required for the HR.Reactive oxygen species induce the expression of defense related genes,and are implicated as second messengers that elicit other defense responses,including systemic acquired resistance(SAR)and the HR(Brent etal.,2001).Different elicitors are thought to activate different sets of second messengers.The two signaling events that appear to participate in the OGAs inducing plant defense include the oxidative burst and NO accumulation.Inhibitors of mammalian nitric oxide synthase reduced both OGA-induced NO ac-cumulation and NOS activity,suggesting that OGA-induced NO production occurs via a NOS-like enzyme(Hu et al.,2003). Nitric oxide(NO)is a highly reactive molecule that rapidly diffuses and permeates cell membranes.During the last few years NO has a significant role in plant resist-ance to pathogens by triggering resistance-associated cell death and by contributing to the local and systemic induction of defense genes.NO stimulates signal transduction pathways through protein ki-nases,cytosolic Ca2+mobilization and protein modification(María et al.,2004). Most of the ex-perimental data available on NO detection during plant-pathogen interactions come from studies of infections by biotrophic pathogens(María et al.,2004). Additionally,an increase in NOS activity correlated with the pathogen resistance response has been observed in resistant tobacco during TMV infection( Durner et al.,1998;Chandok et al.,2003).Here we report that OGAs induced a range of defense responses in tobacco,including oxidative burst,NO accumulation and stimulation of superoxide dismutase(SOD)activity and catalase(CAT)activity.Furthermore,we show that tobacco plant sprayed with OGAs developed a resistance against infection by tobacco mosaic virus.We also provide evidence that the defense response induced by OGAs was connected with H2O2 and NO pathway.Plants of tobacco(Nicotiana tabacum var.sam sun NN)were grown from seeds in a greenhouse and were used at the 4~6-leaf stage after 2 months in culture.The plants were kept in a growth chamber at(23±1)℃ with a photoperiod of 16 h and 70%~80%relative humidity for several days before treatments.Diphenylene iodonium(DPI),2-(N-morpholino)ethanesulfonic acid(MES),Sodium nitroprusside(SNP),catalase(CAT,from bovine liver),NG-nitro-L-arginine-methyl eater(L-NAME)and 4,5-diaminofluorescein diacetate(DAF-2 DA)were obtained from Sigma.2′,7′-dichlorofluorescin diacetate(H2DCF-DA)from Biotium.All other reagents were from Shanghai Chemical Reagent CO.,LTD,Tianjin Kermel Chemical Development Centre,or Beijing Chemical Plant.OGAs was prepared from enzymatic hydrolysis of pectin and separated with membrane according to the report(H Zhang et al.,1999).An aliquot of OGAs was dissolved in water and analyzed with a matrix-assisted laser desorption-ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometer(MALID-TOF-MS,Bruker,Germany).Tobacco mosaic virus(TMV)that came from our collection was multiplied in N.tabacum.TMV was extracted from systemic infected plants by homogenization of infected leaves in 0.05mol/LH3PO4 buffer(0.05mol/L KH2PO4,0.05 M Na2HPO4 pH 6.8)with subsequent clarification of the extract by centrifugation at 2000g for 6 min.The supernatant extract was used for mechanical inoculation.All leaves of plant were sprayed with 50μg/ml of OGAs,the control plants were sprayed with water.24h~25d after OGAs application,plants were inoculated mechanically with TMV.The lesion caused by TMV was investigated at 7d after inoculation.Results were analyzed using Duncan's multiple range test at P= 0.05.For measurements of SOD and CAT activities,tobacco leaves treated with OGAs were kept in liquid nitrogen.The enzymes in the frozen powders were extracted by adding 0.05g polyvinylpyrrolidone and 5ml 0.05mol/L sodium borate buffer at pH 8.8 and homogenized at 4℃.SOD activities were measured as described by Zhu Guanglian(Zhu Guanglian et al.,1990).CAT activity was determined using the method of Beers&Sizers(Beer et al.,1952).NO and H2O2 measurement was performed using their fluorescent indicator dye DAF-2 DA and H2DCF-DA as described previously by H.Kojima(H.Kojima et al.,1998)with slight modifications.The epidermis was peeled carefully from abaxial surface of the leaves and cut into 5-mm length.Epidermal strips were placed into Tris/KCl buffer(Tris 10 mmol/L and KCl 50mmol/L,pH 7.2)containing DAF-2 DA at a final concentration of 10μmol/L for 30min,or H2DCF-DA at 50μmol/L for 10min,at 26℃ in the dark.The epidermal sections were removed and transferred to a dish of fresh Tris/KCl buffer(without probe)to wash off excess fluorophore apart from light.Then the epidermal strips were placed in Tris/KCl buffer containing OGAs and inhibitors.Examination of peels was performed using laser scanning confocal microscopy(Leica,TCS SP2)with exciting wavelength 488 nm,emitting wavelength 505~530nm.Plants were sprayed with 0.01 and 0.1 mmol/L of sodium nitroprusside(SNP),50μg/ml of OGAs,1 mmol/L,10mmol/L and 100 mmol/L H2O2,H2O2 scavenger catalase(CAT,100unit/ml)and OGAs cotreatment,H2O2 scavenger ascorbic acid(0.1mmol/L)and OGAs cotreatment and NOS inhibitor L-NAME(1mmol/L)for 30min before OGAs respectively.The control plants were sprayed with water.In all cases,24h after OGAs and other materials applications,plants were inoculated with TMV.The lesion caused by TMV was investigated at 7d after inoculation.The effect of OGAs,SNP and H2O2 on local infection was calculated from the ratio of the number of local lesion produced on the treated leaves to that on the control leaves treated with water.The TOF-MS profiles of OGAs sample were showed in Figure 1.The mass spectrum indicated that peaks corresponding to the mass numbers of( M+ Na)+of trimer to enneamer were detected.So the sample was composed mainly of OGAs having degree of polymerization( DP)2-8.Figure 1 TOF-MS of oligochitosan sampleThe results of control effects on TMV with OGAs at different concentration(50～100μg/ml)showed that the best concentration was 50 μg/ml(data not shown).The effects of application of OGAs at different time were summarized in Table 1.It was found that tobacco leaves treated with OGAs were protected against TMV infection.When the inoculation occurred at 19d after spraying 50μg/ml OGAs on tobacco plants,the relative control effect was 53.42%.We concluded that the resistance induced by OGAs became better with the inducing time until 19d.The resistance was reduced after 19d.Dayof50μg/mlgalacturonideappliedNumberoflesioncausedbyTMVRelativecontroleffect(%)vcdsaw1d125±5814.40a?4d116±3920.55a?7d120±4217.81a10d84±3742.47ab13d97±4433.56ab16d90±3238.36ab19d68±3453.42b22d71±3451.37b25d89±3739.04bck146±51—Table 1We examined the effects of OGAs on the activity of plant resistance correlated enzymes.The results(Figure 2 and Figure 3.)indicated that OGAs increased activity of SOD and CAT compared with the H2O-treated ones.There are no distinct differences on the activity of POD and PPO of tobacco leaves treated with OGAs or water(data not shown).SOD and CAT are concerned with eliminating oxygen free radical.Within one hour,activities of CAT and SOD were induced to maximum.Figure 2 Time course of SOD activity in tobacco leaves treated by 50μg/ml OGAs or H2O as CKFigure 3 Time course of CAT activity in tobacco leaves treated by 50μg/ml OGAs or H2O as CKBecause of activity of SOD and CAT induced by OGAs and the two enzymes correlative with oxygen free radical,we examined the production of H2O2 induced by OGAs.To study the effects of OGAs on the production of H2O2 in tobacco cells,the H2O2-sensitive fluorophore H2DCF-DA were used.The results of production of H2O2 in epidermal cells of tobacco leaves induced by OGAs were shown in Figure 4.It was found that OGAs caused an increase of intracellular H2DCF-DA fluorescence in epidermal cells and guard cells of tobacco leaves,indicating the production of H2O2.Fluorescence became visible along the plasma membrane and in organelles in the epidermal cells of tobacco leaves treated with OGAs(Figure 4C),but the fluorescence was very faint in the epidermal cells only loaded with H2DCF-DA(Figure 4A).The Figure 4E and G showed that CAT and DPI could inhibit the level of H2DCF-DA fluorescence in the cells of tobacco leaves treated with OGAs.The results revealed that CAT and DPI could suppress the production of H2O2.Figure 4 Laser scanning confocal microscopy of OGA-induced production of H2O2 in epidermal cells of tobacco leaves. (A) The cells loaded with H2DCF-DA. (B) Bright field image of the cells loaded with H2DCF-DA. (C) The cells loaded with H2DCF-DA before treatment with OGA. (D)Bright field image of the cells loaded with H2DCF-DA before treatment with OGA. (E) The cells loaded with H2DCF-DA and elicited by OGA in the presence of the CAT. (F) Bright field image of the cells loaded with H2DCF-DA and elicited by OGA in the presence of the CAT. (G) The cells loaded with H2DCF-DA and elicited by OGA in the presence of the DPI. (H) Bright field image of the cells loaded with H2DCF-DA and elicited by OGA in the presence of the DPI.The NO-sensitive fluorophore DAF-2DA was used to observe NO accumulation.The observed LSCM results of OGAs-induced production of NO in epidermal cells of tobacco leaves were shown in Figure 5.It was found that OGAs could enhance the level of intracellular DAF-2DA fluorescence in epidermal cells of tobacco leaves,indicating massive production of NO.Production of NO and/or accumulation was observed in organelles and along the plasma membrane in the epidermal cells of tobacco leaves treated with OGAs(Figure 5C).However,the DAF-2DA fluorescence indicating production of NO was not observed in the epidermal cells only loaded with DAF-2DA(Figure 5A).The results also indicated that CPTIO and L-NAME could inhibit the level of H2DCF-DA fluorescence in the cells of tobacco leaves treated with OGAs(Figure 5E and G).The results representedthat CPTIO and L-NAME could suppress the production of NO.Figure 5 Laser scanning confocal microscopy of OGA-induced production of NO in epidermal cells of tobacco leaves. (A) The cells loaded with DAF-2 DA. (B) Bright field image of the cells loaded with DAF-2 DA. (C) The cells loaded with DAF-2 DA before treatment with OGA. (D) Bright field image of the cells loaded with DAF-2 DA before treatment with OGA. (E) The cells loaded with DAF-2DA and elicited by OGA in the presence of the CPTIO. (F) Bright field image of the cells loaded with DAF-2DA and elicited by OGA in the presence of the CPTIO. (G) The cells loaded with DAF-2DA and elicited by OGA in the presence of the L-NAME. (H) Bright field image of the cells loaded with DAF-2DA and elicited by OGA in the presence of the L-NAME.As H2O2 and NO appear to be a key factor associated with plant induced defense disease,it was interesting to test the effect of exogenous NO and H2O2.The effect of OGAs,NO donor SNP and H2O2 at different concentrations and some scavengers are summarized in Figure 6.It was found that treatment with OGAs,SNP and H2O2 protected tobacco leaves against TMV local infection.The least lesion was observed at the treatment of 50μg/ml OGAs among the all treatments.The inhibition effect of H2O2 showed dependence on the amount of H2O2.The lesion of co-treatment of OGAs and the H2O2 scavenger CAT or ascorbic acid on TMV infection was as high as CK.We also observed SNP inducing resistance was dose-dependent.When the tobacco plants were treated with L-NAME before OGAs,the induced resistance was depressed.Therefore,we can presume NO and H2O2 are important factors participating in OGAs inducing resistance to TMV.Figure 6 Effect of OGAs and exogenous NO and H2O2 on disease symptomPectic oligosaccharides,produced by microbial enzymes,are well-known oligosaccharins,eliciting defence responses in diseased plants(Dumville et al.,2000).A broad spectrum of OG-induced pathogenesis-related defense responses has been reported(M.T.Esquerré-Tugayé et al.,2000).Most defense and developmental responses are induced by OGAs with a degree of polymerization(DP)between 10 and 15 galacturonic acid residues.OGAs with a DP less than 8 can also trigger defense responses in plants:they induce accumulation of protease inhibitors(T.Moloshok et al.,1992),ethylene production(S.D.Simpson et al.,1998)and elicitation of genes involved in jasmonic acid metabolism in tomato(C.Norman et al.,1999).In this report,we observed the OGAs with a DP between 2~8 could induce tobacco resistance to TMV.The concentration of OGAs used was also discussed.OGAs-induced plant growth has been reported(LoSchiavo et al.,1991;Filippini et al.,1992),and the maximal effect to growth was about 10-4 M(Stephen et al.,1993).To elicit plant defense responses,OGAs concentration higher than those usually required for control developmental process.In our experiments,50μg/ml was the best concentration to induce resistance within 100μg/ml(data not shown).It showed the efficiency of the OGAs in inhibition of virus infection was not depended on the dose of OGAs.But the inhibition effect was dependent on the treatment time.We observed the inducing effect of resistance to TMV was gradually elevated before 19d,but the mechanism of this needed further study.Research showed that lag period of the induced resistance of glucohexaose was about 7days and the protection period was about 28 days(Li Hongxia et al.,2005).Furthermore,tobacco plants treated by sulfated fucan or linear β-1,3 glucan showed resistance to TMV or bacterium E.carotovora after 5 days(Olivier Klarzynski et al.,2003;2000).So far no oligosaccharides were reported to have so long time inducing effect.Therefore,OGAs have more predominance to be applied in agriculture.Experimental results also showed that NO and H2O2 played important roles in OGAs inducing tobacco resistance to TMV.NO and H2O2 as important signaling active molecules in pathogen defense reaction has been extensively studied(Levine et al.,1994;Mehdy et al.,1996;Baker et al.,1995;Jabs et al.,1996;Delledonne et al.,1998;Rout-Mayer et al.,1997?;Binet et al.,1998).First,we examine the activity of plant resistance correlated enzymes.Because the activity of PAL has been confirmed elevated by many reports(Messiaen et al.,1994;Lapous et al.,1998;Dixon et al.,1989;Tepper et al.,1990),we just mensurated the PPO,POD,SOD and CAT.This includes the activity of SOD and CAT elevated,so we estimated the extra H2O2 production.To evaluate the stimulatory effect of OGAs on tobacco cells,we measured the production of H2O2 and NO in tobacco cells.The data indicated that OGAs induced the production of H2O2 and NO in epidermal cells of tobacco within a short time.These results were in agreement with the reports by Xiangyang Hu,who claimed OGAs stimulated NO accumulation in the growth medium of ginseng suspension cultures(Hu et al.,2003).Rout-Mayer and Binet discovered respectively H2O2 production within a few minutes after the addition of OGAs to suspension-cultured tobacco cells(Rout-Mayer et al.,1997;Binet et al.,1998).Many reports show H2O2 and NO exist are correlated to plant defense.H2O2 is involved in the induction and/or execution of hypersensitive reaction(C.S.Bestwick et al.,1997).H2O2 is required for the cross-linking of plant cell wall components as a part of the structural defense response(C.Lamb et al.,1997).The production of H2O2 may also lead to the development of an antimicrobial environment within the apoplast(M.Peng et al.,1992).In many cases,H2O2 collaborate with NO to execute invading pathogens.H2O2 and NO production were induced almost at the same time by cryptogein,a fungal elicitor(Foissner et al.,2000).NOS inhibitors compromise the hypersensitive resistance response in Arabidposis and tobacco(Delledonne et al.,1998?;Huang et al.,1998).TMV infection could elevate NOS(nitric oxide synthase)activity,and NO could induce PR-1 expression(Durner et al.,1998).NO,as well as other ROS,have been shown to stimulate the accumulation of SA(Durner et al.,1999),which play a critical signaling role in the activation of plant defense responses after pathogen attack.Furthermore,to test whether OGAs functions on inducing resistance in tobacco via NO and H2O2 pathway,we examined the effects of OGAs,exogenous NO donor SNP and H2O2 on inducing resistance to TMV.It was found that all of these treatments reduced lesion caused by TMV.But co-treatment with OGAs and H2O2 scavenger CAT or ascorbic acid blocked the inducing resistance.The tobacco plants inhibited NOS activity by L-NAME were not induced resistance by OGAs.So the defense response induced by OGAs was connected with NO and H2O2 pathway.The study reported herein reveals that OGAs can induce the production of H2O2 and NO,and induce the defense response against TMV.Our understanding of OGAs induced resistance is sketchy.The mechanisms of OGAs eliciting defense responses of tobacco need further investigation.

Rice stripe(RSV)has been known to distribute in rice areas all over the world,and it is very hard virus,transmitted by insect vectors,small brown planthopper(SBPH),Laodelphax striatellus,Fallen.Once the rice is infested,there is still no very effective measures to control,even the chemicals.The chemicals'effect is not ideal and more or less they could cause some environmental risks,so there is the common opinion in the IPM system that the rice varieties having resistance to rice stripe is one of the basic and effective measures to control this disease.In 2006 and 2007 for finding the resistant rice varieties that could be used for large scale in the field,the evaluation and screening of rice varieties were conducted in Jiaxing,Zhejiang Province.In 2006,there were 40 varieties provided for the experiement,just like Chunjiang 050,Xiushui 63,Y1,Zheda 510,Tai 03126,HZ586 and so on,and Jia 991 was set to be the control.Similar to 2006 studies,in 2007,there were 20 varieties used in 2006,and newly introduced into 17 varieties,just like Leyou 2,Jiaheyou 261,Bing 04～123,Jiashao 3.The control was still Jia 991.In 2006,the experiment was conducted in the yard of Shuangqiao Academic of Agricultural Science,Xiuzhou,Jiaxing.Last year in this plot rice was planted,and in winter no crop was planted.The water and fertilizer condition was good.The rice was seeded in 2th June,and transplanted to the field in 1st July.Randomed blocking design,and the size of every plot is 30m2,with three replications.The field management was as usual,except for no chemicals use for controlling the SBPH and RSV.In 2007,the experimental field was chose to north suburb of Jiaxing,where last year the RSV occurred hard.The experimental field condition and design were familiar with 2006,and total 111plots.Investigated Methods In 2006,after 5d from 1st July when the rice were transplanted,the investigation was conducted every 5d in field,till the diseases was stable,at that time the total rice tiller and the diseased tiller amount were recorded.Num.VarietiesDiseasepercentageinthefield(%)SSRP=0.05P=0.011Jiahe2156.03aA2Y25.33bB3Jiajing36485.24bB4Y33.9cC5Shaojing04-463.49dD6Jia991(CK)3.07eE7Yongjing04683.02efEF8Y62.88fgEFG9Tai04-42.83gFG10Xiushui032.73ghGH11Qianghu9142.73ghGH12Y102.59hiHI1336You7482.52ijHI14Xiushui092.51ijHI15ZH2512.42jkIJ16Xiushui1102.27klJK17Jingzhi202.27klJK18Y42.23lmJKL19Jia04-332.14lmnKLM20Jiahua12.11mnKLM21Xiushui632.04nLM22Jiahe2182nM23Zheda5101.99nM24Bing01-1131.74oN25R41011.69oN26Y51.59oN27Jingzhi270.94pO28Chunjiang0500.91pO29Chunjiang0510.91pO30Bing03-1230.88pO31Jiaheyou28880.87pO32Zheda5320.86pO33Y80.86pO34Y10.81pO35Ning04-450.45qP36Tai031260.44qP37HZ5860rR38Y70rR39Y90rR40JiaheyouTR0rRTable 1In 2007,after 15th May,when the seeds were seminated,the investigation was conducted periodically in seedling stage till 20th June,when the rice was transplanted,the total rice tiller and the diseased tiller amount were recorded.And in field,30th July,when the disease was stable,the same indexes were recorded.By the total rice tiller and the diseased tiller amount,the disease percentage could be got,and by DPS software the resistance of different rice varieties could be made with ANOVA method.From table 1,we could get that in 2006 the RSV occurred softly in the experimental field,the CK,Jia 991'disease percentage was just 3.07%.Shaonuo 04~46,Y3,Jiajing 3648,Y2,Jiahe 215's were higher than CK;but there were four varieties,Jiaheyou TR,Y9,Y7,HZ586,which no typical RSV was found.By ANOVA analysis,the resisstance of rice varieties were obviously different.Jiaheyou TR,Y9,Y7,HZ586,which no typical RSV was found,the resistance were the highest;the Yongjing 0468,Y6 and CK were in the same level and at P=0.01 there were no obvious difference;and Shaonuo 04～46,Y3,Jiajing 3648,Y2,Jiahe 215 resistance were weak.In 2007,in the field the RSV occurred seriously in the experimental field,the CK,Jia 991'disease percentage was 19.12%(Table 2).Disease percentage of Shi 1 and Yongjing 0468 were 27.8%and 25.65%,respectively;there were 16 varieties,for example Jia 991,the disease percentage were above 10%;and the disease percentage of HZ586,Chunjiang 051,Jiahe 218,Jiaheyou 555 and Y9 were below 2%.By ANOVA analysis,the resistance of these rice varieties were seriously different.Disease percentage of Shi 1 and Yongjing 0468 were obviously higher than CK,their resistance were weak;the disease percentage of HZ586,Chunjiang 051,Jiahe 218,Jiaheyou 555 and Y9 were far below from other variety,their resistance were high;and others resistance were in the middle level.In 2007,in the seedling field the disease percentage of Bing 04～132,Zheda532,Xiushui 09,Xiuishui 110 and Bing 05～15 were all above 5%;the disease percentage of was just 0.07%,and in the Chunjiang 051 there was no RSV found;Other varieties percentage of disease were in the middle of 5%and 0.07%(Table 2).Num.VarietiesDiseasepercentageinthefield(%)SSRP=0.05P=0.01VarietiesDiseasepercentageintheseedlingfield(%)SSRP=0.05P=0.011Shi127.8aABing04-1325.68aA2Yongjing046825.65aAZheda5325.6aA3Bing04-0819.62bBXiushui095.39aAB4Jia991(CK)19.12bBXiushui335.24abAB5Xiushui11018.5bBXiushui1104.85abcABCTable 2 Evaluation of rice varieties resistance to RSV (Jiaxing, 2007)Num.VarietiesDiseasepercentageinthefield（%）SSRP=0.05P=0.01VarietiesDiseasepercentageintheseedlingfield（%）SSRP=0.05P=0.016Bing05-1517.83bBCShi14.34abcdABCD7Bing01-11317.76bcBCJiahua14.34abcdABCD8Y517.33bcBCYongjing04684.24abcdABCDE9Jiahua116.5bcdBCBing05-154.15abcdeABCDEF10Xiushui3316.4bcdBCY53.78abcdefABCDEFG11Ning04-4516.26bcdBCBing04-083.66abcdefgABCDEFGH12Bing04-13215.75bcdBCJia991（CK）2.9bcdefghABCDEFGHI13Zheda53215.69bcdBCY22.88bcdefghABCDEFGHI14Y215.18bcdBCDBing01-1132.81bcdefghiABCDEFGHI15Shi215.06bcdBCDNing04-452.77cdefghijABCDEFGHI16Xiushui0914.99bcdBCDY12.66cdefghijABCDEFGHI17Y112.96cdeBCDEQianghu1712.52cdefghijkABCDEFGHI18Qianghu17112defCDEBing05-1142.48cdefghijkABCDEFGHI19Bing03-019.22efgDEFShi22.26defghijkBCDEFGHI20Bing04-1138.25fghEFGBing03-012.14defghijkBCDEFGHI21Jiaheyou6127.18ghiEFGHBing04-1131.69efghijkCDEFGHI22Bing03-1235.76ghijFGHJiaheyou2611.39fghijkDEFGHI23Leyou25.42ghijFGHJiaheyou6121.23ghijkDEFGHI24Jiaheyou2615.23ghijFGHBing03-1231.11hijkDEFGHI25Jiaheyou16204.76ghijFGHY71hijkEFGHI26Shaonuo04-464.36hijFGHChunjiang0500.99hijkEFGHI27Jiashao34.3hijFGHJiahe2180.94hijkFGHI28Chunjiang0503.22ijFGHLeyou20.9hijkFGHI29Y73.18ijFGHJiaheyou62230.72hijkGHI30Jiaheyou62233.1ijFGHJiaheyou5550.7hijkGHI31台031262.97ijFGHJiaheyou16200.5hijkGHI32Bing05-1142.9ijFGHY90.38hijkHI33HZ5861.83jGHHZ5860.32ijkI34Chunjiang0511.81jGHShaonuo04-460.24jkI35Jiahe2181.78jGHJiashao30.24jkI36Jiaheyou5551.53jHTai031260.07kI37Y90.94jHChunjiang0510kI续表2By ANOVA analysis,the different resistance of these rice varieties also existed.the disease percentage of Bing 04～132,Zheda532 and Xiushui 09 were higher,and their resistance were weak;the disease percentage of six varieties,Chunjiang 051,Tai 03126,HZ586,Shaonuo 04～46,Jiashao 3 and Y9,were lower,and they had comparatively high resistance.Through the rice varieties screening for resistance to rice stripe virus(RSV)in the seedlingstage and in the field in Jiaxing,in 2006 and 2007,the difference of rice varieties resistance to RSV could be found,and the resistance trends between different developmental stage and different year kept in the same trends.Chunjiang 051,Y9,Jiahe218,Jiaheyou 555,Tai 03126 and Bing 03~123,and so on,had the high resistance to RSV.Though most of the results showed that the varieties resistance behave the same in different developmental stage and different year,we also should notice that few varieties did not obey this trends,for example,Shaonuo04～46,in 2006 in the field it showed very weak resistance,but in 2007 in the seedling field it showed high resistance.This perhaps tell us that just use the index of disease percentage is not enough,and at the same time we could ignore that there is still no very clear criterion to evaluate the varieties resistance to RSV.These factors could influence our evaluation.In 2006 the RSV occurred softly in the experimental field,the CK,Jia 991 disease percentage was just 3.07%,but in 2007 the CK,Jia 991's disease percentage was 19.12%,far higher than that in 2006.That is because in 2007 we chose the field where in year before the RSV occurred seriously,and advanced the seeding date and transplanted date accordingly,which the two steps could make the optimal RSV occurring conditions.On other hands,in the same cultivated condition,the disease percentage different varieties could behave 10-folder difference,it could show us clearly that the varieties resistance could exert important role in the RSV IPM system.Research was funded by a grant from Zhejiang province Science and Technology Bureau.

中二软占是广东省农业科学院水稻所以粳籼21为母本，长丝占为父本杂交育成的早、晚兼用常规优质稻品种，于2001年通过广东省农作物品种审定。中二软占的丰产性和适应性好，米质良好，但中感稻瘟病。作者等将中二软占品种的种子经密封后送到酒泉卫星发射基地（部分中二软占种子留在地面作为非诱变原种对照），于2003年11月3日随“中国返回式科学试验卫星”升空，经过18天的太空旅行，于11月21日返回地面。2004年早造将中二软占诱变和非诱变原种对照单株种植，采用稻瘟病菌株GD0193接种到3到3片半叶的种苗上，发病7天后调查，792株经过空间诱变的种苗，病级为0～3级的抗病植株有208株，占总数的26.3%；病级为4～5级的植株有368株，占46.5%；病级在6级以上的有216株，占27.3%；80株原种对照种苗的病级均在6级以上。试验结果表明，中二软占的种子经过返回式卫星搭载后，对稻瘟病产生抗性变异，其中抗性明显提高的占26.3%；抗性比原种提高（病级0～5级）的植株数占72.7%。对中二软占空间诱变SP2代材料的抗性分离规律进行研究。从空间诱变中二软占SP1中选取33株抗病和2株感病植株的种子作为SP2的接种材料，原种中二软占作对照，接种稻瘟病菌株采用GD0193菌株。空间诱变中二软占SP1的2个感病植株在SP2抗性没有产生分离，33个抗病植株在SP2抗性产生分离，而且各株系抗感分离的比例也不一样。对33个抗病SP2株系抗感分离的比例进行X2分析，结果表明有21个株系抗感分离比例符合理论比值3：1，说明这21个株系可能受一个位点的抗性基因控制；有8个株系抗感分离比例符合理论比值15：1，说明这8个株系可能受两个位点的抗性基因控制。另外，有4个株系抗感分离比例既不符合3：1也不符合15：1。表明这4个株系的遗传基础比较复杂。由于目前对水稻空间诱变的染色体变异的遗传机理还不是很清楚，诱变除了导致基因的位点突变以外，也可能导致染色体的缺失、重复、倒位、易位等畸变。这些畸变将影响水稻的性状，而且使其在SP2的基因的分离规律变得更复杂。从33个空间诱变中二软占抗病植株的SP3-SP4代株系中连续两造各筛选出5株农艺经济性状较好的单株，考种及抗病性鉴定结果表明，与原种中二软占比较，抗病性有不同程度的提高，而且穗长、总粒数、结实率、粒长、谷粒长宽比、千粒重等性状与原种中二软占的相比，也有不同程度的提高。将33个空间诱变中二软占抗病植株和1个感病植株的SP4代株系进行抗谱测定，采用38个不同致病型代表菌株接种结果，原种中二软占和空间诱变感病株系的抗谱分别为29.0%和34.2%，33个空间诱变抗病株系中，抗谱达到80%以上的诱变株系有32个，其中抗谱在90%以上的诱变株系有24个，抗谱在80%～90%间的诱变株系有8个。中二软占是优质但中感稻瘟病的品种，从其空间诱变后代中有望筛选出对稻瘟病抗性及农艺经济性状比原种好的株系，可为抗稻瘟病育种提供新材料及优良抗源。目前作者等正重点开展有关优质、抗病的中二软占诱变品系的抗性遗传基础分析、抗病基因标记定位、空间诱变抗性变异机理研究等。

正向（经典）遗传学是通过生物的表型来推测其遗传物质的组成、分布和传递规律等，而反向遗传学是在已知基因序列的基础上，利用现代生物理论和技术，通过核苷酸序列的定点突变、缺失和插入等创造突变体并研究突变所造成的表型效应。随着基因组测序技术、侵染性克隆的构建技术、定点突变技术和报告基因的使用等，反向遗传学技术在研究植物病毒基因功能、侵染过程和致病机理等方面的应用越来越广泛。本文报道了该技术在研究马铃薯Y病毒（PVY）HC-Pro和甘薯褪绿矮化病毒（SPCSV）P22功能方面的部分结果。PVY HC-Pro基因由本实验室提供，SPCSV的有关基因由芬兰赫尔辛基大学Valkonen教授提供，PVX201质粒由Baulcombe教授提供。突变试剂盒（Quick Change XL Site-Directed Mutagenesis Kit）购自STRATAGENE公司，大肠杆菌菌株DH5α由本实验室保存，PCR突变引物由赛百盛公司合成。Figure 1 Symptoms of Nicotiana benthamiana plants inoculated with different constructs based on PVX 201将SPCSV P22、P28和RNaseIII等基因克隆到PVX201载体上，根据接种后出现的症状判断哪个基因能增强PVX对本氏烟的致病力。将PVY HC-Pro克隆到PVX201载体上，针对HC-Pro的KITC和IGN等位点设计合适的突变引物，参考突变试剂盒（Quick Change XL Site-Directed Mutagenesis Kit）说明进行突变。通过测序证实所得突变体的准确性。大量提取法提取质粒PVX201、PVXHC或相应的突变体，摩擦法接种本氏烟（Nicotiana benthamiana），观察所致症状的差别。PVX201载体在本氏烟上引起轻微的斑驳和褪绿花叶症状，但不引起植株的死亡。SPCSV P28和RNase III等基因连接到PVX201后对症状无影响，但P22能提高PVX对本氏烟的致病力，导致了接种植株的死亡，说明P22是致病性的增强子。携带P22的PVX（PVX-p22）首先在接种叶上引起坏死斑点。坏死斑点扩展后，沿着叶脉到达茎部，引起上部组织坏死，最终导致本氏烟整株枯死。RNA沉默抑制因子HC-Pro也能提高PVX对本氏烟的致病力。表达HC-Pro的PVX（PVX-HC）在接种后7天出现严重明脉和卷曲，10～14天时首先心叶出现坏死，随后整株萎蔫死亡。但在接种叶上没有坏死斑，看不到明显的扩展迹象。KITC是HC-Pro的一个重要基序，参与病毒的蚜虫传毒、协生和抑制RNA沉默等过程。我们在测定烟草脉带花叶病毒（TVBMV）全基因组序列时发现，TVBMV（YND分离物）HC-Pro KITC基序中的K变成了R，而且也有蚜虫传毒活性。我们把PVY HC-Pro的KITC突变成RITC后，再接种本氏烟，发现该突变仍能引起本氏烟植株的死亡。把K突变为A（突变体1，K52A）后，突变体也能引起本氏烟死亡，说明HC-Pro KITC基序中的K可能不参与和PVX的协生。但把KITC基序中的C缺失后（突变体2，C55Del）就不能引起植株死亡，说明KITC基序中的C对于协生作用是不可缺少的。对于HC-Pro其他突变体的功能分析正在进行中。

沃尔巴克氏体（Wolbachia）是自然界中分布非常广泛的胞内共生菌之一，近10余年的研究表明，这类共生菌广泛存在于各类昆虫体内，甚至估计16%的昆虫均含有该菌[1]。对来自33个不同寄主的38个不同Wolbachia株系的ftsZ基因（细胞周期基因）研究表明，Wolbachia 株系间存在着很大的差异，Wolbachia 株系分为A组群和B组群[2]。Zhou等在wsp（编码Wolbachia表面蛋白）基因序列分析的基础上，将沃尔巴克氏体细分为12个亚群（Subgroup），并设计了12个亚群wsp基因诊断的PCR扩增特异引物[2]。昆虫体内是否含有Wolbachia，早期多通过DAPI染色法（用非特异性的DNA-blinding荧光染料DAPI染色，然后在荧光显微镜下观察）[4]和电镜观察[5]来判断，但20世纪90年代以来则主要依赖于对其16S rDNA、23S rDNA、ftsZ 和wsp等基因进行PCR检测与序列分析，其中wsp基因是目前报道的Wolbachia基因中进化最快的基因而被广泛用于Wolbachia的PCR检测与分子鉴别[1，3，6，7]。沃尔巴克氏体通过卵的细胞质传播并参与多种调控其寄主生殖活动的机制，包括诱导孤雌生殖（Parthenogenesis inducing，PI）[8]、雌性化Feminzation）[9]和生殖不亲和[10]，因而它很有希望被用于许多虫媒传播的重大人类疾病的基因工程防治和生物防治。灰飞虱（Laodelphax striatellus Falln）广泛分布于东亚、东南亚、欧洲和北非等地，我国以长江中下游和华北地区发生较多。灰飞虱能取食或为害水稻、小麦、大麦、玉米、高粱、甘蔗、稗草、李氏禾等多种禾本科植物，并且能传播多种病毒病，造成病害的普遍流行。因此，进行灰飞虱种群暴发成灾规律及其有效防治技术的研究，显得尤其重要和紧迫。本文采用PCR方法研究了灰飞虱体内Wolbachia的感染，以期为开辟控制灰飞虱暴发和阻断病毒病传播新途径提供依据。从河北省曲阳和容城小麦田采集灰飞虱成虫，保存在小麦苗上。每只灰飞虱为1个样本，放入离心管中冷冻，而后置于载玻片上，呈直线逐步滴1滴Ringer's solution（昆虫生理盐水），去头，放入装有预冷100μl STE 的管中，匀浆，10%SDS 5μl及蛋白酶K 2.5μl，55℃水浴1h，加酚50μl及50μl氯仿：异戊醇（24：1），剧烈震荡，12000r/min 离心5min。取上清，加入2倍体积无水乙醇及0.1体积3mol/L NaAc，-20℃沉淀过夜，离心，12000r/min。弃上清，加75%乙醇200μl洗涤2遍。55℃烘干，加入30μl无菌水溶解，-20℃冻存，待检。扩增wsp基因片段使用的引物[3]：wsp 81F(5'TGG TCC AAT AAG TGA TGA AGA AAC3')wsp 691R(5'AAA AAT TAA ACG CTA CTC CA 3').在20μl反应体积中进行PCR反应，反应体系为13.5μl ddH2O，2μl 10×Buffer，2μl 25 mmol/L MgCl2，0.5μl dNTPs（每种10mmol/L），0.5μl 20μmol/L的正向和反向引物及一个单位的Taq高温多聚酶。Taq plus及dNTP购自上海生工生物工程公司。PCR反应条件是：首先在94℃下变性3min，然后94℃下1min，55℃下1min，72℃下1min完成1个循环，共进行35次循环。72℃末轮聚合10min。反应结束后取PCR特异性扩增产物5μl，在0.8%的琼脂糖胶上进行电泳（电压40V，50min，电泳缓冲液为0.5×TBE），用BioRad凝胶成像系统检测并拍照。选择有扩增产物的样品进行大量PCR扩增，采用PCR产物回收试剂盒（上海生工生物公司产品）回收PCR扩增产物交上海生工生物工程公司进行测序，利用BLAST工具（NCBI网站）进行DNA序列检索和同源性比较。采用wsp基因通用引物81F和691R对灰飞虱DNA样品进行PCR扩增，电泳检测结果表明从灰飞虱DNA样品中可扩增出600bp大小的wsp目的基因片段，证实河北曲阳和容城田间采集的灰飞虱种群有Wolbachia 的感染（图1）。河北曲阳和容城灰飞虱种群的沃尔巴克氏体感染率分别为85.6%和88.4%，而且雌雄个体感染率无差别。将扩增的wsp基因片段进行基因序列测定，结果表明，从所检测的样品中扩增出的Wolbachia的wsp基因片段长度为601～603bp。用NCBI网站提供的BLAST分析工具进行基因序列同源性分析，表明灰飞虱体内感染的Wolbachia wsp基因与Wolbachia pipientis 的wFur、wStri 2个品系的wsp基因的同源性为100%，与Wolbachia sp.的wJapo、wFur、wStri 3个品系的wsp基因的同源性也达到100%（表1）。图1 灰飞虱体内沃尔巴克氏体wsp基因片段的扩增Wolbachia品系同源性注册号宿主来源WolbachiapipientisisolatewFur100%AF481185.1白背飞虱Kittayapong等，2003WolbachiapipientisisolatewStri100%AF481175.1灰飞虱Kittayapong等，2003Wolbachiasp.Wstri100%AF020080.1灰飞虱Zhou等，1998Wolbachiasp.wJapo100%AB039283.1ElenchusjaponicusNoda等，2001Wolbachiasp.wFur100%AB039043.1白背飞虱Noda等，2001Wolbachiasp.Wstri100%AB039042.1灰飞虱Noda等，2001表1 灰飞虱感染Wolbachia的wsp基因序列的同源性Wolbachia是自然界分布较广的共生菌，在双翅目、膜翅目和鳞翅目等许多昆虫体内均有感染。甘波谊等以PCR方法检测了来自不同地域稻田的3种稻飞虱，发现灰飞虱、褐飞虱（Nilaparvata lugens）、白背飞虱（Sogatella furciera）均被Wolbachia所感染，对wsp的RFLP分析证实了这些飞虱为单一沃尔巴克氏体感染[11]。但不同地区灰飞虱体内沃尔巴克氏体的感染率不同，在我国形成了周边地区感染率高（如辽宁、北京、上海和云南），而内陆地区感染率低（如四川），或是未被感染（如宁夏）的格局[11]。在日本采集的9个灰飞虱种群被Wolbachia感染的比率随纬度降低而增加[12]。这些不同可能与不同地区的地形、气候、寄主条件及Wolbachia的传播效率等因素有关，其原因有待研究证实。本文研究结果表明，河北曲阳和容城灰飞虱种群沃尔巴克氏体感染率较高，与前人的报道一致。通过对基因序列的同源性分析表明，河北的2个灰飞虱种群感染的Wolbachia与来自白背飞虱的wFur品系、灰飞虱的wStri品系亲缘关系较近，同属于Wolbachia B大组Con组。这些表明灰飞虱可能会被同一组的Wolbachia感染。灰飞虱是多种病毒的传播介体，灰飞虱的暴发流行常造成玉米粗缩病、水稻条纹叶枯病等病毒病的严重流行。沃尔巴克氏体是灰飞虱的胞内共生菌，能够通过多种机制调控其寄主的生殖活动[13]，但是，近年灰飞虱种群暴发成灾与Wolbachia 感染的关系有待进一步研究证实。同时，沃尔巴克氏体影响灰飞虱传毒能力的作用及利用媒介昆虫—共生菌技术阻断病毒的传播将是今后研究的重点，对于开辟病毒病防治新途径具有重要的意义。

洋葱伯克霍尔德菌（Burkholderia cepacia）是一种广泛存在于水、土壤、植物和人体中的革兰氏阴性细菌。1949年美国植物病理学家Burkholder首次发现B.cepacia可以引起洋葱酸皮病[1]。随后在20世纪50年代人们从第一例由B.cepacia引起的心内膜炎开始，发现该菌广泛存在于医院，并且可以使人类患上多种疾病，尤其是囊性肺纤维化（Cystic fibrosis，简称CF）病人的易感细菌之一，严重的会因此患“洋葱伯克霍尔德菌综合症”致死。最近研究表明，该菌致人死亡的一个原因要归咎于它含有脂多糖（Lipopolysaccharide）分子[2]。在进行医学研究的同时，发现该菌在工业和农业上有生物降解、生物防治等功效，对农业生产和环境保护起着重要的作用，具有广泛的应用前景。近年来，随着细菌分类技术的发展，洋葱伯克霍尔德菌已不仅只是作为一个种，而是一组基因型不同、表型相近的复合物，称为洋葱伯克霍尔德菌复合型（Burkholderia cepacia complex，简称Bcc）[3]。本文将在农业、分类地位等方面对Bcc的研究进展做一综述，以达到全面了解该菌的目的。人类第一次发现伯克霍尔德菌是由于它导致了洋葱酸皮病，该病菌主要分布在土壤和灌溉水中，在洋葱鳞茎形成后，从其因收割等原因造成的伤口侵入，或者是黏在叶部的菌被水冲刷进入组织内引起鳞茎腐烂。Ulrich在1975年研究表明[1]，该病原菌在低pH值环境下可以产生一种内多聚半乳糖醛酸酶，使洋葱组织软化，利于病原菌的入侵和扩展。后来郭道森等人研究表明，该菌与松材线虫共同侵染黑松和马尾松，导致松林大面积死亡[4]，在后续的研究中发现，松材线虫的分泌物及死虫体均可促进该菌株的生长繁殖和致病作用，且活线虫的促进作用比死虫体更加显著，这可能是由于松材线虫提供给该菌株某些重要的营养物质[5]。2005年，意大利西西里东部地区种植的天堂鸟（Strelitzia reginae Aiton）幼苗（苗龄2～3个月）发生新病害，鉴定发现致病菌为唐菖蒲伯克霍尔德菌（Burkholderia gladioli），这是关于该菌导致天堂鸟叶斑病及枯萎病的首次报道。在植物体上广泛存在着一些细菌，它们都具有诱发植物体内水分结冰的作用，称为冰核细菌。在没有冰核细菌存在的植物能耐-7～-8℃的低温而不发生霜冻，但是在一些B.cepacia 细菌存在的情况下，同样条件的植物在-2～-3℃可诱发多种植物细胞水结冰而发生霜冻。张耀东等从菠菜上分离到一株具有冰核活性的Bcc菌株[6]。1.3.1 对有毒物质的降解 一些工业排放物中含有大量的有害芳香烃类物质，随着工业化进程的加快，残留于自然环境中的芳香烃类物质含量急剧增加，如何解决这类物质造成的危害，成为研究者要解决的问题，而利用微生物降解是消除其危害的重要途径之一。洋葱伯克霍尔德菌可以利用多种物质为唯一碳源，这意味着其能够以土壤和地下水污染的有毒且难降解的物质（邻苯二甲酸盐、除草剂和氯代烃类化合物等）为碳源并将其降解[7]。例如，Bcc的一个菌株G4可通过由苯酚诱导的芳香族途径将三氯乙烯降解，由于苯酚是环境优先污染物之一，因而不宜被推广使用；但该菌株的突变体G45223 PR1可以不利用任何诱导物而直接降解三氯乙烯[8]。另外，许多芳香烃化合物在降解过程中都会形成中间产物邻苯二酚，细菌可以通过邻位裂解和间位裂解两种途径继续降解邻苯二酚[9]。刘涛等[10]从炼油厂废水中分离筛选到一株苯酚高效降解的洋葱伯克霍尔德菌L68，该菌株可产生邻苯二酚2，3-双加氧酶[11]，而邻苯二酚2，3-双加氧酶是降解芳香族化合物的关键酶，在间位降解途径中，该酶可以催化邻苯二酚的苯环裂解，转化为2-羟黏糠酸半醛。因此，洋葱伯克霍尔德菌对消除芳香烃类化合物的污染具有重要作用。另外，洋葱伯克霍尔德菌对化学农药也有很强的降解作用。如，Sarfraz Hussain 等人研究发现，在pH值为8.0，温度为30℃时，该菌对α-硫丹和β-硫丹的降解率达90%以上，从而减少了杀虫剂硫丹（Endosulfan）对土壤和地下水的污染[12]。1.3.2 对油脂的降解 洋葱伯克霍尔德菌降解油脂的特性在国外已有研究，Pooja Rathi，Hustavova等人报道了该菌产脂肪酶应用于催化酯化水解反应等研究[13]，洋葱伯克霍尔德菌能在降解利用油脂的同时还分泌出一定量的胞外脂肪酶，同时通过所产生的脂肪酶等降解酶系作用于油脂，将其分解氧化为低级脂肪酸、甘油、醇类等低分子有机物，最后降解为H2O、CO2等代谢产物[14]。徐保成[15]等人对该菌所需的降解工艺条件进行优化研究，结果表明在优化的油脂降解条件下（pH值7.0，30℃，溶解氧3.0mg/L），处理初始油脂浓度1000mg/L废水，24h后其油脂降解率达到90%以上，COD（Chemical Oxygen Demand）去除达到92%。B.cepacia产生的脂酶可以催化拆分外消旋化学农药，使其变为光学活性农药，从而成倍地提高了药效，而且减轻了生物体内的积累与毒副作用，避免了不必要的环境污染[16]。洋葱伯克霍尔德菌可以防治多种植物病害，如从樱桃果实表面和伤口上分离获得的洋葱伯克霍尔德菌对甜樱桃褐腐病表现出显著的抑制效果[17]；郑维等从堆肥样本中分离的洋葱伯克霍尔德菌株CF-66具有广谱抗菌活性，并初步鉴定该菌属于洋葱伯克霍尔德菌基因型Ⅴ[18]；李纪顺等对伯克霍尔德菌B418进行了研究，表明该菌对小麦纹枯病、小麦全蚀病和番茄南方根结线虫病有很好的防治效果[19]。陈京元等从湿地松苗根际分离得到1株B.cepacia C23菌株，对引起湿地松猝倒病的立枯丝核菌（Rhizoctonia solani）、链格孢菌（Alternaria alternata）有明显的抑制效果。洋葱伯克霍尔德菌的防病机制主要为其能产生多种具有抗菌活性的代谢产物，如铁载体（Pyochenlin、Pyoverdine）、吩嗪、硝吡咯菌素、苯基吡咯、单萜生物碱、Cepaciamide A（B）、Cepacidine A（B）、Cepacin A（B）；菌株H111 能够有效杀死线虫Caenorhabditis elegans，其作用机理主要是由该细菌产生的细胞外毒素所致死[20]。B.cepacia AMMDR1可以抑制由瓜果腐霉病菌（Pythium aphanidermatum）和根腐丝囊菌（Aphanomyces euteiches）引起的豌豆和甜玉米苗猝倒病，作用机理主要是该菌抑制游动芽孢的裂解，阻止孢囊的萌发而影响病原菌的生长[21]。在不断的研究中发现，该菌可以与杀菌剂共同使用，如I.Omar等人发现，在对大豆根腐霉病菌（Fusarium oxysporum）引起的番茄冠根腐病的研究中，B.cepacia菌株C91与低浓度杀菌剂混合使用，相比单独使用高浓度杀菌剂，杀菌效果提高了20%[22]。这不但减少了杀菌剂的使用，同时减少了杀菌剂对环境的污染。美国环保署（EPA）已经批准了两种以洋葱伯克霍尔德菌为主要成分的生防菌剂的生产，其商品名为Deny和Intercept，Deny用于防止Rhizoctonia spp.、Pythium spp.、Fusarium spp.和线虫引起的病害，而Intercept则用于防治Rhizoctonia solani、Fusarium spp.、Pythium spp.引起的病害[23]。具有拮抗作用的细菌往往与植物的生长有很大的关系，这些细菌都可产生一些抑制真菌生长的物质，如：铁载体（Siderophores），细胞溶酶的分泌物，抗生素等。对真菌生长的抑制就可以直接促使植物生长[24]。B.cepacia可以产生铁载体，一方面根际促生菌铁载体的产生很快耗尽了病原菌生存所需要的铁，从而使病原菌的繁衍和侵染能力大大下降；另一方面根际促生菌通过铁载体向植物提供铁营养，从而使植物获益[25]；另外，B.cepacia还可以产生抗生素有效地抑制周围其他微生物的繁衍。同时，B.cepacia的一些菌株具有固氮和产生吲哚乙酸（IAA）的作用，有助于植物对营养物质的吸收[26]。Bcc菌株具有较强的溶解磷酸盐的能力，推动植物对释放的磷的吸收，促进植物生长，Babu-Khan等克隆到其溶解磷酸盐的基因[27]。另一方面其通过对病原微生物的生物防治，减轻或抑制有害的根围微生物，从而间接的促进植物生长。例如，玉米种子被Bcc菌株MCI7包衣后，其植株感染病原镰刀菌的几率大大降低，且植株鲜重和株高均显著增加[28]。B.cepacia 原名Pseudomonas cepacia，1950 年首次被Burkholder报道可引起洋葱酸皮病[29]。该菌的其他名字还包括eugonic oxidizers group 1，Pseudomonas kingii和Pseudomonasmultivorans[30]，但是相关研究明确指出这些命名是P.cepacia的同义词，而且P.cepacia具有命名的优先权[31]。因此，这些命名没有被写入细菌手册，直到1981年，Palleroni 和Holmes才重新找到依据区分这些命名的不同[32]。1992年Yabuuchi 等正式将该菌及其他6个属于rRNAⅡ群的假单胞菌（P.solanacearum，P.pickettii，P.gladioli，P.mallei，P.pseudomallei 和P.caryophylli）归为一个新属，即伯克霍尔德菌属（Burkholderia）。与Pseudomonas属不同的是，该属被归为变形菌门（Proteobacteria）[33]。当Burkholderia属的分类地位被确定以后，该属已包括超过30个不同的种：B.cepacia（典型种），B.caryophylli，B.mallei，B.pseudomallei，B.gladioli，B.plantarii，B.glumae，B.vietnamiensis，B.andropogonis，B.multivorans，B.glathei，B.pyrrocinia，B.thailandensis，B.graminis，B.phenazinium，B.caribensis，B.kururiensis，B.ubonensis，B.caledonica，B.fungorum，B.stabilis，B.ambifaria，B.hospital，B.terricola，B.sacchari，B.tropicalis，B.brasilensis，B.anthina，B.dolosa，B.cenocepacia，B.xenovorans，B.tuberum，B.phymatum。通过研究得知B.caryophylli，B plantarii，B.glumae，B.andropogonis是植物的致病病原菌，能够使不同种属的植物患上根腐、叶斑、条斑等病害。在不同植物中分离得到的B.vietnamiensis，B.kururiensis，B.tropicalis，B.brasilensis，B.tuberum，B.phymatum，B.caribensis有促进根瘤形成，增强固氮的能力，同时促进植物根的生长。B.mallei和 B.pseudomallei则能够引起人和动物的鼻疽病。对于B.glathei，B.graminis，B.phenazinium，B.caribensis，B.caledonica，B.hospital，B.terricola，B.sacchari在环境、生态中所起的作用还不是很清楚。同时，还有一些具有多重作用，可以是植物致病菌，植物有益菌或是人类的机会致病菌，例如：Burkholderia cepacia complex，Burkholderia gladioli 和 Burkholderia fungorum[34]。从20世纪90年代中期开始，一些研究者发现来源于各种环境的Bcc分离物具有明显的遗传异质性，1996年，有报道说利用分子鉴定和临床观察，发现伯克霍尔德菌至少有3个不同的基因型是CF病症的致病菌[35]。直到1997年，Vandamme等运用多相分类研究方法对从CF病人中分离到的致病菌进行研究，才发现所设定的B.cepacia种中，至少存在5种不同的基因型[36]。包括B.vietnamiensis（基因型V）、B.multivorans（基因型II）、基因型I，III和 IV。这5种基因型被统称为伯克霍尔德菌复合型（B.cepacia complex）。利用不同的方法从医学和环境微生物的角度对伯克霍尔德菌复合型进行了探索研究，其中包括使用不同的选择性培养基。结果发现，农业研究中利用的培养基，能从土壤和植物根际附近发现大量的伯克霍尔德菌复合型的族群[37]；在医学研究中，几乎无法从自然界中发现伯克霍尔德菌复合型的存在[38]。直到伯克霍尔德菌分类的又一次改变，才使这些固有的不同有机的联系起来，一些研究者发现基因型IV与Bcc中的其他基因型有明显的差异，于是被归类B.stabilis[39]。接着从美国和英国的CF致病菌中分离出基因型VI，它除了与B.multivorans没有差异外，与其他基因型均有差异[40]。从人类致病菌与环境中都能分离B.ambifaria（基因型VII），因此它也具有生防菌的特征。最近，发现B.pyrrocinia（基因型Ⅸ）也属于B.cepacia complex[41]。因此，已报道的洋葱伯克霍尔德菌复合型由9个不同基因型组成，分别是B.cepacia（基因型Ⅰ）、B.multivorans（基因型Ⅱ）、B.cenocepacia（基因型Ⅲ）、B.stabilis（基因型Ⅳ）、B.vietnamiensis（基因型Ⅴ）、B.dolosa（基因型Ⅵ）、B.ambifaria（基因型Ⅶ）、B.anthina（基因型Ⅷ）、B.pyrrocinia（基因型Ⅸ）。后来，Yabuuchi E等人在泰国某地的表层土中分离得到的B.thailandensis的一株，被重新归类为Burkholderia ubonensis，经过鉴定初步断定也归类为B.cepacia complex[42]。各基因型间DNA-DNA同源性为30%～50%，其16S rRNA 和recA 基因序列相似性很高，分别为98%～99%和94%～95%[43]。直到目前，对Bcc的基因型组成仍在研究中，Zhang L等人在玉蜀黍和水稻的根际发现了大量的Bcc菌株，并且通过Bcc recA基因的同源性的分析，发现分离所得的Bcc R456菌株可能属于一种新的基因型[44]。虽然能从不同的环境条件下分离获得大量的Bcc，但却不清楚Bcc株系主要的存活环境。事实上，只有很少的研究涉及环境中Bcc的生态特征，一些研究者也仅仅是对Bcc的一个或几个基因型进行研究[45]。现有的伯克霍尔德菌复合型中有许多有生防效果或是作为植物促生剂，现今生产B.cepacia生物农药的菌株都来源于环境，但问题是，对这些菌株是否是非致病菌也无法区分，因为除了Bcc基因型Ⅵ只能从CF病人中分离到，基因型Ⅸ只从土壤中分离到以外，其他所有基因型的B.cepacia均可从环境和医院中分离[46]。同样，无法很清楚的在菌株基因型或是表现型方面来区分环境菌和人类致病菌。同时，每年都可以从CF的致病菌中获得新的Bcc株系，并且也能够从自然环境中获得这些菌株[47]。因此，如何区分环境菌和人体致病菌以及其是否具有致病性，对应用于农业上的Bcc菌株进行风险评估是必要的，也将是今后的研究难点和热点之一。目前，对细菌的鉴定一般都先选择合适的选择性培养基培养分离出的样本，然后利用生理生化手段检测分离到的菌株，接着利用SDS-PAGE技术，全细胞蛋白电泳，16S rDNA序列分析手段鉴定出分离所得样本的属，最后配合RFLP探针技术或AFLP探针技术以确定菌株的基因型。现有的伯克霍尔德菌复合型由9个不同的基因型构成，各个基因型在形态上非常相近，这就需要非常便利的生物化学的鉴定手段和具有针对性的分子鉴定方法对各个基因型进行精确的区分[48]。利用16S rDNA测序、recA-RFLP分析、recA 基因特异引物PCR检测、DNA-DNA 同源性分析以及全细胞蛋白电泳（PAGE）方法可区分Bcc中的一些种，但还没有一种技术可以针对性的区分出每个基因型。因此，寻找一种简单可行可靠的鉴定技术是今后研究的热点之一[49]。Bcc致病毒力因子包括脂肪酶、蛋白酶、溶血素、脂多糖、过氧化氢酶、内毒素等，以紫花苜蓿作为植物模型研究Bcc的毒力，发现9个基因型中除了B.multivorans 和B.stabilis外，其余都可以从发病的紫花苜蓿上分离获得[50]。但植物与人类病原菌存在着差异，如革兰氏阴性人体条件致病菌绿脓杆菌（Pseudomonas aeruginosa）和植物病原菌丁香假单胞菌（P.syringae）均存在Ⅲ型蛋白分泌系统，但后者对人和动物不致病，表明致病因子存在并不能充分说明其能致病。为了确定细菌致病性毒力的决定因子，Chung J W等人利用蛋白质组学描述来比较两种B.cenocepacia在老鼠肺上的存在状态，发现临床分离所得的C1394 很快被致死，C1394mp2依然存活。利用Two-dimensional（2D）凝胶电泳发现从易感病寄主上得到的C1394mp2，缺少烷基氢过氧化物还原酶亚基C（AhpC）蛋白位点，反之增加了鞭毛蛋白，这使C1394mp2增强了在高温和低pH值条件下的氧化应激能力。这揭示了B.cenocepacia致病毒力在易感模型上出现不同的表现与应激能力的内在原因[51]。对于使用易感动物作为模型进行研究是一个进步，但是对于动物模型的选择、如何利用等都受到时间、道德等原因的制约，寻找合适的动物模型仍是今后需要解决的问题之一。洋葱伯克霍尔德菌对于人本身来讲，是一种可怕的致病菌，不但污染医院的药品和器具，而且引起可怕的“洋葱伯克霍尔德菌综合征”。对于整个人类来讲，有好也有坏。它是自然界中一些植物的病原菌又是一种重要的生防、环保以及工业用菌，减少了对环境的危害，不少国家把它作为生物农药和环保制剂使用。如何区分哪些是人体致病菌、哪些是植物致病菌、哪些是生防或环保菌，成了一个令人困扰的问题。这有赖于对其生态多样性、致病机制以及分类学的全面了解。只有确定Bcc生防或降解菌株对人体不致病，或者该菌株为单独一个种而不是人体致病菌一员时，才能将其安全的应用于农业生产上，使其为人类造福。现在已经有许多研究者从不同的方面入手来进行研究，但仍有未涉及或很少涉及的领域，如该菌在自然界的分布及多样性研究，其基因型的详细鉴定及针对性的鉴定方法，这些都是需要注意的问题。因此，在今后的研究中，要广泛地参考结合各学科领域的研究进展，充分地认识了解该菌的生物学特性及在不同方面的风险性测试评价，以期更好地使其为人类服务。

川成都植物病害是由植物—病原—环境三者在一定适宜条件下，引起植物体发病，构成对植物正常生长发育和新陈代谢的干扰与破坏，最终造成植物的生物产量和经济产量减产，品质降低，给人类的农业、林业生产造成重大损失。植物病害的病原物是指能寄生于植物体并导致侵染性病害发生的生物。植物病害分成菌物（真菌）性病害、细菌性病害、病毒类病害、线虫类病害以及其他因素引起的植物病害。植物细菌性病害是植物病害中发生为害较重、发病规律比较难以掌握、防治技术要求高、防治效果很难凑效的一类病害。植物病原细菌是属于原核生物中的一个生物类群，它与真核生物在细胞结构及组成成分方面存在着较大的差异，正是这种细胞结构和组分上的差异，导致了细菌性病害比真菌性病害更难以防治。植物细菌性病害中比较著名的病害有：水稻细菌性条斑病、水稻白叶枯病、白菜软腐病、番茄青枯病、玉米细菌性枯萎病、柑橘溃疡病、梨火疫病、马铃薯环腐病。还有近年来被国际柑橘病毒学家确认的柑橘黄龙病等，这些植物细菌性病害给我国农业、林业生产带来了巨大的影响和危害。本文将对植物细菌性病害做了以下6个方面的初步探讨。早在2000多年前我国《诗经》中已经将生物划分成了植物、动物和蕈类三大类。1593年李时珍在《本草纲目》中将生物分成了植物、动物和人类三大类。在近代科学发展史上，以林奈为代表的生物分类学家将生物分成两界（即动物界Animaliae和植物界Plantae），这两界系统被人类科技界沿用了200多年。16～18世纪，随着显微镜发明和细胞学说的建立，人类才发现了单细胞生物——细菌。对于细菌在生物进化过程中，专家们普遍认为：细菌的出现应该是在植物和动物出现之前就已经存在了。1969年魏泰克将生物界分成五界系统，即：（1）以细菌为主的原核生物界；（2）以单细胞原生动物和藻类为主的原生生物界；（3）多细胞生物中以光合作用制造营养的植物界；（4）以多细胞为主吸收营养的真菌界；（5）多细胞生物中以摄取食物为营养来源的动物界。1974年黎德勒认为：取消原生生物界，将生物化分成四界系统，即：原核生物界、真菌界、植物界和动物界。1977年我国科学家陈世骧提出了生物学界的三总界构成六界系统，即：无细胞总界——（病毒界）；原核生物总界——（细菌界、蓝藻界）；真核生物总界——（真菌界、植物界、动物界）。1988～1989年（Cavalier-Smith），将生物学界划分成：两个总界组成的八界系统，即：一、细菌总界：①真细菌界；②古细菌界；二、真核总界：③古菌界；④原生动物界；⑤植物界；⑥动物界；⑦真菌界；⑧藻界。到2003年，他取消了古细菌界和古菌界，改为二总界六界学说。许志刚教授在2005年正式提出三域七界的最新分类体系，即无细胞生物域的病毒界；原核生物域的细菌界；真核生物域的原生生物界、真菌界、藻物界、植物界和动物界。反映了当前人们的认识水平。从上述分类系统可以看出，细菌的分类始终处于原核生物界内，它与真核生物在细胞结构及其组成成分上存在着许多本质上的差异。原核生物是以单位膜为界的，细胞核质无核膜包围，呈原核状态。含肽聚糖的细胞壁有或无；核糖体在细胞质内70S。染色体的数目为1。细菌的质粒DNA游离于细胞质中。细菌都是单细胞生物，它们的细胞膜外都有一层主要由肽聚糖（革兰氏阳性细菌）或脂多糖（革兰氏阴性细菌）构成的坚韧细胞壁。真核生物：具有以单位膜为界的细胞器，细胞壁不含肽聚糖。细胞核有核膜包围，呈真核状态，核糖体80S，在细胞器内的核糖体70S。细胞内有内质网、高尔基体、溶酶体、叶绿体有或无、有微管系统。染色体中有组蛋白；有核仁；要发生有丝分裂；细胞器有DNA（如线粒体）；配子能够融合；DNA不单向转移形成部分二倍体。最典型的是真核生物具有真正的细胞核以及其他细胞器组成成分。核是细胞的控制中心，它由核膜包着与核外的细胞质分开。核膜内有核仁和核质。植物病理学家们长期以来将植物细菌性病原种与对寄主的致病性作为一个非常重要的因素，同时要依据病原细菌的生理生化性状和血清学性状等指标来综合确定植物病原细菌的种。在《伯杰氏细菌学手册》第七版出版时已经命名的植物病原细菌种有200多种。根据生物学命名中优先命名权不能侵犯的原则，确定每一个新种必须查阅大量文献，以避免同物异名的出现。在《伯杰氏细菌学手册》第八版中将植物病原细菌种由原来的200多种削减为几十种，以保证所有种都可以用生化试验来进行鉴定并尽量保证能在实验室条件下可以重复实验，使之更具有科学性和重复性。1994年，根据《伯杰氏细菌学手册》第九版的系统分类：将细菌分成了四大类35个群。2000年以后，《伯杰氏细菌学手册》第二版分五卷陆续出版发行，该版本的最新分类体系中将细菌界包括了16门、26组、27纲、62目、163科、814属，共计4727种。植物病原细菌属于细菌界中普罗特斯门、放线菌门和厚壁菌门。普罗特斯门细菌细胞壁主要由脂多糖组成，肽聚糖含量较少，因而革兰氏染色阴性。放线菌门细菌的细胞壁中肽聚糖含量高，革兰氏染色阳性。厚壁菌门中的病原生物包括植原体（Phytoplasma）和螺原体（Spiroplasma）。已经描述的引起植物病害的原核生物有28个属。植物细菌性病害的病原菌主要分成五大类别。第一类：黄单胞菌属（Xanthomonas）。黄单胞菌属是细菌中的特殊类群，目前文献中描述的黄单胞菌属的种几乎都是植物病原细菌。它可以为害120多种单子叶植物和270多种双子叶植物。黄单胞菌引起许多重要植物病害，比较典型的病害有：（1）甘蓝黑腐黄单胞菌（X.campestris pv.campestris）；（2）水稻白叶枯病（X.oryzae pv.oryzae）；（3）水稻细菌性条斑病（X.oryzae pv.oryzicda）；（4）柑橘溃疡病（X.campestris pv.citri）。由黄单胞菌属细菌引起的植物病害大多数症状为叶枯、坏死、萎蔫等症状。第二类：假单胞菌属（Pseudomonas）。假单胞菌属细菌大多数都是土壤、水、其他基质上的腐生菌，有些是植物病原细菌。它的生态适应性广，表型差异大，是一个非常异质的组群。丁香假单胞菌（Pseudomonas syringae）是重要的植物病原细菌，能为害多种植物。在《伯杰氏细菌学手册》第九版中正式命名的植物病原细菌有7个种。第三类：欧文氏菌属（Erwinia）。欧氏菌属细菌是人类第一个发现的植物病原细菌。有史以来所发现的欧氏菌属细菌一部分是植物病原细菌，最常见的是各种植物的软腐病，也有萎蔫和坏死。典型的病害有：梨火疫病（E.amylovora）；玉米细菌性枯萎病（E.stewartii）；马铃薯和大白菜的软腐病等。由欧氏菌引起的细菌性软腐病在全世界均有发生分布。第四类：土壤杆菌属（Agrobacterium）。土壤杆菌属细菌是一类习居于土壤的细菌，在土壤中广泛的分布。常见的致病性细菌种有根癌土壤杆菌和发根土壤杆菌。根癌土壤杆菌（A.tumefaciens）能为害多种双子叶植物，在近土根茎部形成恶性肿癌。发根土壤杆菌（A.rhizogens），在侵染双子叶植物幼根后形成丛生的毛发状根群，称之为发根。第五类：棒形杆菌属（Clavibacter）。它是从棒状杆菌属（Corynebacterium）中分列出来的一个新属。国内发现的植物病原棒形杆菌属细菌中，最典型的病害有马铃薯环腐病菌（C.m.pv.sepeadonicum）在国内马铃薯产区均有分布。由于该病菌是以种薯传带的，所以在调运马铃薯种薯时必须要实施检疫。小麦蜜穗病菌（C.tritici）在国内华北冬麦区、山东、安徽、江苏、浙江、贵州等省已有发生。植物病原细菌从植物的气孔、皮孔、蜜腺等自然孔口以及伤口侵入寄主。植物细菌性病害主要见于高等被子植物和栽培植物上较多。植物病害的症状包括病状和病症两个方面。所谓病状：是指感病植物的外部特征，主要表现有：（1）变色：指整个植株、叶片或叶片部分变色。（2）坏死：指植物体局部细胞和组织的死亡。（3）腐烂：整个植物的组织和细胞被破坏和消解。（4）萎蔫：植物病害中的萎蔫是指植物的输导系统被病原物毒害或病组织的产物阻塞而造成不可逆转性的萎蔫。（5）畸形：感病植物组织和器官所发生的皱缩、卷曲、萎缩、丛枝、发根、肿瘤，花器和种子变态。所谓病症：是指病原物在病株发病部位上所表现的特征。主要表现有：（1）霉状物。（2）粉状物。（3）锈状物。（4）粒状物。（5）根状菌索。（6）菌脓。菌脓：是指发病部位产生的胶黏脓状物，干燥后形成白色的薄膜或黄褐色的胶粒。菌脓是细菌性病害在田间特有的病症。从多年田间病害症状诊断的实践环节看，植物细菌性病害田间症状诊断上着重注意几点：细菌性病害往往会出现局部坏死斑点，如柑橘溃疡病的病斑。腐烂：很多蔬菜类作物上出现的软腐病、马铃薯环腐病等。萎蔫：作物上出现的青枯病，全株性萎蔫。菌脓：如水稻细菌性条斑病病叶上出现的胶黏脓状物。细菌性病害往往不会出现整株变色、叶片上不会出现霉状物、粉状物、丛枝、萎缩等症状。细菌性病害会出现发根和肿瘤等症状。这个问题是一个非常复杂的问题，要回答好这个问题并非易事。从理论上探讨，所有植物病原细菌都可以通过种子传带。细菌附着在种子表面，也可以存活于种皮内，以及块茎组织内部。细菌在植物种子上一般存活1～2年。植物病原细菌一般产生胞外多糖，且一般具有鞭毛结构。因而，雨水的溅射和细菌自身在水中的游动可导致其传播。此外，随着灌溉水的流动，细菌可以在田块间传播。在20世纪60～70年代，水稻白叶枯病在四川省水稻产区流行蔓延，造成水稻产量严重减产，损失惨重。植物病原细菌可以通过苗木、接穗传播。嫁接工具、人为操作不当的行为均可以传播植物细菌性病害。柑橘溃疡病在我国柑橘主产省区均有不同程度地发生为害。狂风暴雨夹带雨滴是沿海岸线柑橘产区柑橘溃疡病蔓延猖獗的主要环境因素。通过媒介昆虫可以传带细菌性病害。柑橘黄龙病传毒主要媒介是柑橘木虱。要使柑橘黄龙病发生蔓延的几大因素是：一是要有柑橘黄龙病病树存在；二是要有传毒的媒介昆虫；三是要有感病的寄主。同时，昆虫的越冬寄主枳壳、九里香等存在为病菌的越冬和第二年的病菌的侵染循环创造了条件。如何掌握植物细菌性病害发病规律，作者认为应该注意以下几点：（1）植物的种子、苗木、接穗等一切繁殖材料均有可能携带植物细菌性病害的病原，并能在植物体表或表皮内较长时期的存活，是远距离传播植物细菌性病害的主要原因。（2）由于植物病原细菌的细胞有胞外多糖，在有水膜存在下可以加快细菌侵染速度，为害程度由点到片逐步加重。在雨季、大风、甚至飓风条件下加快了点片发生与为害的程度。（3）有灌溉水存在的条件下可以加快植物细菌性病害的流行蔓延，是大面积造成为害损失的主要诱因。（4）有媒介昆虫的发生、越冬寄主的存在，为植物细菌性病害的再次侵染循环奠定了基础和创造了条件。（5）嫁接工具、农事活动操作不当均可以造成寄主大量伤口，有利于病原细菌的侵入，导致田间植物细菌性病害近距离传播为害。（6）适宜的温湿度条件，加速了植物细菌性病害的侵染循环。根据植物细菌性病害发病的诱因和发病基本规律可以看出：种子、苗木可以带菌；细菌繁殖速度快、侵染途径多；远距离传播与近距离扩散相辅相成，加快了细菌性病害点、片发生，具有暴发成灾、损失严重的特点。植物细菌性病害很难防治，药剂防治效果很难奏效。四川省在防治水稻白叶枯病、水稻细菌性条斑病、柑橘溃疡病、柑橘黄龙病等细菌性病害中都不是单一地采用药剂防治。药剂防治只能作为综合治理植物细菌性病害技术环节中的一个重要环节，特别是柑橘溃疡病防治技术中，国内外至今尚未见到仅仅依靠药剂防治来完全控制其为害蔓延的成功范例。柑橘黄龙病的综合治理更是如此。（1）建立无病虫种子、苗木繁殖基地，生产健康无检疫性病虫的种子苗木。（2）种子苗木调运前实施田间产地检疫和抽样实验室检验相结合，保证调出种子苗木是无病的。（3）调入地尽量集中成片种植，播种前进行种子消毒处理，有利于生产管理和病虫害综合治理。（4）加强田间病虫害预测预报，发现细菌性病害点、片发生时，及时拔除病株销毁，并用药剂对周围植株进行保护性防治。（5）严格对发病田块的肥水管理，防止有病田块流水串灌或漫灌。（6）对较大面积发生细菌性病害的发病区要及时隔离，防止上游流水继续向下游流传，造成更大面积的细菌性病害流行。同时对发病区要进行较大规模的药剂防治。（7）及时换种、加强轮作换茬，防止细菌性病害在田间菌量的不断积累和再次暴发成灾。（8）注意嫁接工具的消毒，防止农事活动中人为的传播感染。

Previous studies indicate that the plant genus Allium,including bulb onion(A.cepa L.),can be infected by at least seven species of Botrytis at the stages of growth and/or storage(Nielsen et al.,2002).Of these Botrytis species,three,namely B.aclada,B.allii,and B.byssoidea,were reported to be most commonly associated with neck rot of onion(Nielsen et al.,2002).B.aclada was regarded as synonymous with B.allii until 2003,when Yohalem et al.(2003)suggested that both B.aclada and B.allii are valid names.Further analysis showed that B.allii is a hybrid of B.aclada and B.byssoidea(Nielsen and Yohalem,2001)and the hybrid status of B.allii was confirmed in a molecular phylogenetic study conducted by Staats et al.(2005).In China,B.allii was reported to cause brown rot of onion bulbs(Tan et al.,1997),whereas rot of onion bulbs caused by B.aclada has not been documented in this country.In spring of 2006,a kind of rot disease was observed among sold onion bulbs in the supermarket near the campus of Huazhong Agricultural University,Wuhan,China.Surveys of five randomly-selected stacks of onion bulbs in that market indicated that the percentage of diseased bulbs varied from 6 to 50%.Diseased onion bulbs became soft rotten and abundant conidia were produced on the surface of diseased bulb tissues of onion showing a grey powdery appearance.Eight fungal isolates were obtained from 8 diseased bulbs of onion showing the grey mould symptoms.They were individually incubated on potato dextrose agar(PDA)at 20℃ and identified on the basis of cultural and morphological characteristics.Results showed that all of these isolates produced abundant grey-brownish,ovoid-or oblong-shaped conidia,which were budded from terminal ampullae formed on dichotomously-branching conidiophores.The size of conidia for these isolates varied from 7.6 to 10.4 μm in length and from 4.2 to 5.6 μm in width.No sclerotia were produced by these isolates on PDA even after incubation for 30 days.These characteristics of the investigated fungal isolates are similar to those described for B.aclada by Yohalem et al.(2003).One of the eight fungal isolates,OnionBc-15,was used for further identification using molecular methods.Genomic DNA(gDNA)was extracted from mycelia of OnionBc-15 and used as template for amplification of certain DNA regions.The first targeted DNA region is the internal transcribed spacer(ITS)of the ribosomal RNA gene.It was amplified with the universal primer pair ITS1 and ITS4(Nielsen et al.,2002).A 539-bp DNA fragment was generated,cloned and sequenced(GenBank Acc.No.EU093077).The sequence contained two SphI restriction sites and was 99%identical in nucleotides to that of B.aclada strain PRI006(GenBank Acc.No.AJ716295).It is different from B.allii and B.byssoidea,which have only one SphI restriction site for the ITS1/ITS4-amplified DNA sequence(Nielsen et al.,2002).The second targeted DNA region is the L45-550 sequence(Nielsen&Yohalem,2001).It was amplified with the Botrytis-specific primer pair BA2f and BA1r(Nielsen et al.,2002).A 413-bp DNA fragment was generated,cloned and sequenced.Sequencing analysis showed that the 413-bp DNA fragment did not contain any ApoI restriction sites.This is also similar to B.aclada,but different from B.allii and B.byssoidea,which have one ApoI restriction site in the BA2f/BA1r-amplified DNA sequence(Nielsen et al.,2002).Additionally,three house-keeping genes encoding glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase(G3PDH),heat-shock protein 60(HSP60)and DNA-dependent RNA polymerase subunit II(RPB2)were amplified from the gDNA of OnionBC-15 with the specific primer pairs reported by Staats et al.(2005).The generated DNA fragments were 886 bp for G3PDH,977 bp for HSP60 and 1093 bp for RPB2,which were cloned and sequenced.They were assigned with GenBank accession numbers as EU100386,EU100387 and EU093078,respectively.Phylogenetic trees were established on the basis of the sequence information of G3PDH,HSP60 or RPB2 cloned from OnionBC-15 in this study and from the 22 species of Botrytis reported by Staats et al.(2005)using the neighbor-joining(NJ)method implemented in the MEGA3.1 package.Each phylogenetic tree was tested with bootstrap(1000 replicates).Results showed that OnionBc-15 was more closely related to B.aclada and B.allii than to other species of Botrytis in each phylogenetic tree.Therefore,it is appropriate to identify the strain OnionBC-15 as B.aclada.This research was funded by the Natural Science Foundation of China(Grant No.30570079).[1]Nielsen K,Yohalem DS.Origin of a polyploid Botrytis pathogen through interspecific hybridization between Botrytis aclada and B.byssoidea.Mycologia,2001,93:264~271.[2]Nielsen K,Yohalem DS,Jensen DF.PCR detection and RFLP differentiation of Botrytis species associated with neck rot of onion.Plant Disease,2002,86:682~686.[3]Staats M,van Baarlen P,van Kan JAL.Molecular phylogeny of the plant pathogenic genus Botrytis and the evolution of host specificity.Molecular Biology and Evolution,2005,22:333~346.[4]Tan WZ,Wang XY,Zhang LX.Two newly recorded fungal diseases of Allium in Yunnan province,China.J.Southwest Agri.Univ.,1997,19:165~167.[5]Yohalem DS,Nielsen K,Nicolaisen M.Taxonomic and nomenclatural clarification of the onion neck rotting Botrytis species.Mycotaxon,2003,85:175~182.