Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T08:35:39.920Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Implications of new technologies for seed health testing and the worldwide movement of seed

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2008

Darrell A. Maddox
Darrell A. Maddox*
Affiliation:
STA Laboratories, 630 S. Sunset Street, Longmont, CO 80501, USA
*
*[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

New techniques for the accurate and feasible detection of many seedborne pathogens have been developed over the last 25 years. These include conducive environmental incubation and identification (many seedborne fungi), liquid plating assay (seedborne bacteria), enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (seedborne viruses) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technology. Regardless of the detection methodology, the specificity, sensitivity, reliability, efficiency of the assay and an understanding of pathogen tolerance in a seedlot need to be considered before a technique is an acceptable clinical seed health test. Acceptable seed health tests are tools for disease risk-management and routinely used in seed quality assessment. Seed health issues are increasingly important in international seed trade. With the advent of free trade, many countries are redefining their phytosanitary requirements with the goal of preventing introduction of a devastating pathogen into their country. However, many phytosanitary regulations are implemented without fully understanding the economic threat of a pathogen or a complete scientific analysis of a pathogen's presence in that country. This has led to confusing regulations, unnecessary tests or inspection requirements and unjustified trade barriers. To provide a means to answer scientifically the problems encountered in the worldwide movement of seed, an international movement has emerged to standardize seed health tests and inspection practices for international seed trade. The impact of standardization on the free trade of seed and the goals of the International Seed Health Initiative (ISHI) will be discussed.

Keywords

phytosanitary certificationseedborne diseaseseed health assayseed pathology
Type
Research Papers
Information
Seed Science Research , Volume 8 , Issue 2 , June 1998 , pp. 277 - 284
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agarwal, V K and Sinclair, J B (1987) Principles of seed pathology. Boca Raton, Florida, CRC Press.Google Scholar
Alvarez, E, Braun, E J and McGee, D C (1995) New assays for detection of Pseudomonas syringae pv. glycinea in soybean seed. Plant Disease 79, 12–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Condon, M (1997) Implications of plant pathogens to international trading of seeds. pp 17–30in D.C., McGee (Ed.) Plant pathogens and the worldwide movement of seeds. St Paul, Minnesota, APS Press.Google Scholar
Falk, B W and Purcifull, D E (1983) Development and application of an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) test to index lettuce seeds for lettuce mosaic virus in Florida. Plant Disease 67, 413–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fatmi, M and Schaad, N W (1988) Semiselective agar medium for isolation of Clavibacter michiganense subsp. michiganense from tomato seed. Phytopathology 78, 121–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franken, A.A.J.M., Kamminga, G C, Snijders, W, Van der Zouwen, P S and Birnbaum, Y E (1993) Detection of Clavibacter michiganensis ssp. michiganensis in tomato seeds by immunofluorescence microscopy and dilution plating. Netherlands Journal of Plant Pathology 99, 125–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geng, S, Campbell, R N, Carter, M and Hills, F J (1983) Quality control programs for seedborne pathogens. Plant Disease 67, 236–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grogan, R G (1980) Control of lettuce mosaic with virus-free seed. Plant Disease 64, 446–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopkins, D, Kucharek, T, Stall, R, Gay, D, Gitaitis, R, Cook, W, Keinath, A and Latin, R (1996) Guidelines for control of bacterial fruit blotch of watermelon. Morven, Georgia, National Watermelon Association Inc.Google Scholar
Jafarpour, B, Shepard, R J and Grogan, R G (1979) Serologic detection of bean common and lettuce mosaic viruses in seed. Phytopathology 69, 1125–1129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kimble, K A, Grogan, R G, Greathead, A S, Paulus, A O and House, J K (1975) Development, application and comparison of methods for indexing lettuce seed for mosaic virus in California. Plant Disease Reporter 59, 461–464.Google Scholar
Kulik, M M (1984) New techniques for the detection of seed-borne pathogenic viruses, viroids, bacteria and fungi. Seed Science and Technology 12, 831–840.Google Scholar
Latin, R X and Hopkins, D L (1995) Bacterial fruit blotch of watermelon: the hypothetical exam question becomes reality. Plant Disease 79, 761–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latin, R, Tikhonova, I and Rane, K (1995) Factors affecting the survival and spread of Acidovorax avenae subsp. citrulli in watermelon transplant production facilities. Phytopathology 85, 1413–1417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddox, D A (1997) Regulatory needs for standardized seed health tests. pp 81–92in McGee, D C (Ed.) Plant pathogens and the worldwide movement of seeds. St Paul, Minnesota, APS Press.Google Scholar
McGee, D C (1997) World phytosanitary system: problems and solutions. pp 67–80 in McGee, D C (Ed.) Plant pathogens and the worldwide movement of seeds. St Paul, Minnesota, APS Press.Google Scholar
McGuire, J D, Gabrielson, R L, Mulanax, M W and Russell, T S (1978) Factors affecting the sensitivity of 2,4-D assays of crucifer seed for Phoma lingam. Seed Science and Technology 6, 915–924.Google Scholar
Meijerink, G and van Bruekelen, W (1995) International initiative standardizes test protocols. pp 58–65in Prophyta Annual 1995. The Netherlands, Misset Publishing.Google Scholar
Minsavage, G V, Hoover, R J, Kucharek, T A and Stall, R E (1995) Detection of the watermelon fruit blotch pathogen on seeds with the polymerase chain reaction. Phytopathology 85, 1162.Google Scholar
Nolan, P A and Campbell, R N (1984) Squash mosaic virus detection in individual seeds and seed lots of cucurbits by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Plant Disease 68, 971–975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patterson, C L, Grogan, R C and Campbell, R N (1986) Economically important diseases of lettuce. Plant Disease 70, 982–987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Randhawa, P S and Schaad, N W (1984) Selective isolation of Xanthomonas campestris pv. campestris from crucifer seeds. Phytopathology 74, 268–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rane, K K and Latin, R X (1992) Bacterial fruit blotch of watermelon: association of the pathogen with seed. Plant Disease 76, 509–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, M L (1990) An annotated list of seed-borne diseases, 4th edn. Zurich, International Seed Testing Association.Google Scholar
Saettler, A W (1989) The need for detection assay. pp 1–2in Saettler, A W, Schaad, N W and Roth, D A (Eds) Detection of bacteria in seed and other planting material. St Paul, Minnesota, APS Press.Google Scholar
Santos, S M and Cruz, L (1997) A rapid and sensitive detection of Clavibacter michiganensis subsp. michiganensis in tomato seed by polymerase chain reaction. Seed Science and Technology 25, 581–584.Google Scholar
Schaad, N W (1982) Working Sheet No. 50. ISTA handbook on seed health testing. Zurich, International Seed Testing Association.Google Scholar
Schaad, N W and Donaldson, R C (1980) Comparison of two methods for detection of Xanthomonas campestris in infected crucifer seeds. Seed Science and Technology 8, 383–391.Google Scholar
Schaad, N W, Sitterly, W R and Humaydan, H (1980) Relationship of incidence of seedborne Xanthomonas campestris to black rot of crucifers. Plant Disease 64, 91–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaad, N W, Cheong, S S, Tamaki, S, Hatziloukas, E and Panapoulos, N J (1995) A combined biological and enzymatic amplification (BIO-PCR) technique to detect Pseudomonas syringae pv phaseolicola in bean seed extracts. Phytopathology 85, 243–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sowell, G and Schaad, N W (1979) Pseudomonas pseudoalcaligenes subsp. citrulli on watermelon: seed transmission and resistance of plant introductions. Plant Disease Reporter 63, 437–441.Google Scholar
Taylor, J L (1993) A simple, sensitive, and rapid method for detecting seed contaminated with highly virulent Leptosphaeria maculans. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 59, 3681–3685.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Vuurde, J W L (1997) Immunofluorescence colony-staining (IFC) as a tool for sample indexing and for the determination of field thresholds for pathogenic seedborne bacteria. in Hutchins, J D, Reeves, J C (Eds) Seed health testing: progress towards the 21st century. Wallingford, UK, CAB International.Google Scholar
Van Vuurde, J W L and Van der Wolf, J M (1995) Immunofluorescence colony-staining. pp 1–19in Akkermans, A D L, van Elsas, J D, de Bruijn, F J (Eds) Molecular microbial ecology manual 4.1.3. The Netherlands, Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
Venette, J R, Lampa, R S, Albaugh, D A and Nayes, J B (1987) Presumptive procedure (dome test) for detection of seedborne bacterial pathogens in dry beans. Plant Disease 71, 984–990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, R E and Goth, H W (1965) A serious bacterium isolated from watermelon. Plant Disease Reporter 42, 818–821.Google Scholar
Williams, P H (1980) Black rot caused by Xanthomonas campestris: A continuing threat to world crucifers. Plant Disease 64, 736–742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar