Puccinia graminis (stem rust of cereals)
Identity
- Preferred Scientific Name
- Puccinia graminis Pers.
- Preferred Common Name
- stem rust of cereals
- Other Scientific Names
- Puccinia albigensis Mayor
- Puccinia anthistiriae Barclay
- Puccinia anthoxanthi Fuckel
- Puccinia avenae-pubescentis Bubák
- Puccinia brizae-maximi T. S. Ramakr.
- Puccinia cerealis H. Mart.
- Puccinia culmicola Dietel
- Puccinia dactylidis Gaüm.
- Puccinia elymina Miura
- Puccinia favargeri Mayor
- Puccinia graminis f. agropyri P. R. Mehta & R. Prasada
- Puccinia graminis f. macrospora Baudys
- Puccinia graminis f.sp. avenae
- Puccinia graminis f.sp. secalis
- Puccinia graminis f.sp. tritici
- Puccinia graminis subsp. graminicola Urban
- Puccinia graminis subsp. graminis Pers.
- Puccinia graminis subsp. lolii W. L. Waterh.
- Puccinia graminis subsp. major A. L. Goyot, Massenot & Saccas
- Puccinia graminis subsp. media A. L. Goyot, Massenot & Saccas
- Puccinia graminis subsp. minor A. L. Goyot, Massenot & Saccas
- Puccinia graminis var. calamagrostidi A. L. Goyot, Massenot & Saccas
- Puccinia graminis var. erikssonii A. L. Goyot, Massenot & Saccas
- Puccinia graminis var. graminis
- Puccinia graminis var. lolii A. L. Goyot, Massenot & Saccas
- Puccinia graminis var. phlei-pratensis (Erikss. & Henning) Stakman & Piem.
- Puccinia graminis var. stakmanii A. L. Goyot, Massenot & Saccas ex Z. Urb.
- Puccinia graminis var. tritici A. L. Goyot, Massenot & Saccas
- Puccinia graminis var. vulpiae A. L. Goyot, Massenot & Saccas
- Puccinia heimerliana Bubák
- Puccinia jubata Ellis & Barthol
- Puccinia linearis Röhl.
- Puccinia megalopotamica Speg.
- Puccinia phlei-pratensis Erikss. & Henn.
- Puccinia seslerie-coerulae E. Fisch.
- Puccinia subandina Speg.
- Puccinia vilis Arthur
- Uredo deschampsiae-caespitosae Y. C. Wang
- International Common Names
- Englishbarley stem rustblack rustblack rust of cerealsblack stem rustblack stem rust of cerealsoat stem rustrye stem ruststem rustUg99wheat rustwheat stem rust
- Spanishpolville de la cañaroya del talloroya del trigoroya negra
- Frenchroulle noire des céréales
- Arabicsadaa
- Chineseshiao mai gan shiou bing
- Portugueseferrugen do colmo
- Local Common Names
- GermanySchwartzrost
- Indiakala ratua
- Italyruggine lineare del grano
- Japankurosabi-byo
- Netherlandszwarteroest
- EPPO code
- PUCCGM (Puccinia graminis subsp. graminicola)
- EPPO code
- PUCCGR (Puccinia graminis)
Pictures
Distribution
Host Plants and Other Plants Affected
Host | Host status | References |
---|---|---|
Avena fatua (wild oat) | Unknown | Fetch (2009) Fetch (2008) |
Avena sativa (oats) | Main | Jin (2005) Fetch (2009) Fetch (2008) |
Berberis glaucocarpa | Wild host | |
Berberis vulgaris (European barberry) | Wild host | Tomoshevich et al. (2013) Peterson et al. (2005) Jin (2005) |
Bromus (bromegrasses) | Unknown | Michael et al. (2020) |
Dactylis glomerata (cocksfoot) | Main | Han et al. (2019) |
Elymus repens (quackgrass) | Wild host | |
Festuca arundinacea (tall fescue) | Main | |
Hordeum jubatum | Unknown | Fetch et al. (2011) Fetch (2009) Fetch (2008) |
Hordeum vulgare (barley) | Main | Boshoff et al. (2002) Jin (2005) Fetch et al. (2011) Fetch (2009) Fetch (2008) |
Lolium multiflorum (Italian ryegrass) | Wild host | |
Lolium perenne (perennial ryegrass) | Main | |
Phleum pratense (timothy grass) | Main | |
Poa pratensis (smooth meadow-grass) | Main | |
Secale cereale (rye) | Main | |
Triticum (wheat) | Unknown | Akcİ and Karakaya (2017) Woldeab et al. (2009) |
Triticum aestivum (wheat) | Main | Admassu et al. (2009) Wanyera et al. (2009) Hale et al. (2013) Fetch et al. (2016) Akcİ and Karakaya (2017) Patpour et al. (2020) Wolday et al. (2011) Hei et al. (2020) |
Triticum turgidum (durum wheat) | Main |
Symptoms
Uredinial StageThe uredinia may occur on leaves, stems, leaf sheaths, spikes, glumes, awns and occasionally on grains of their grassy hosts; stems and leaf sheaths are the main tissues affected. On stems, the uredinia are elongated and reddish-brown; loose epidermal tissue is conspicuous at the margins of the uredinia, giving a roughened feel to the stem surface. The uredinia coalesce to cover large areas of the host tissue in heavy infection. Since the urediniospores are dehiscent, they are released as powdery masses from the uredinia.Telial StageThe telial stage occurs in the same tissue as the uredinial stage, but becomes shiny-black. The teliospores are sessile, and the telial tissue is, therefore, firmer than the uredinial tissue; no spores are released.Pycnial StageThe pycnial stage occurs on the young leaves of the alternate host, mainly Berberis vulgaris. Pycnial infections initially appear as light, chlorotic areas on the adaxial leaf surface, then become light orange-brown lesions, consisting of individual small cone-shaped eruptions (the pycnia), often occurring in clusters.Aecial StageThe aecia develop on the abaxial surfaces of the leaves of the alternate host. When mature, they appear as bright-orange, closely-packed, raised clusters of individual aecia. The aecia are cylindrical in shape and flare out at their apices, appearing as a grouping of rings within the aecial cluster.
List of Symptoms/Signs
Symptom or sign | Life stages | Sign or diagnosis |
---|---|---|
Plants/Inflorescence/lesions on glumes | ||
Plants/Leaves/fungal growth | ||
Plants/Seeds/lesions on seeds | ||
Plants/Stems/mould growth on lesion |
Prevention and Control
Introduction
The production of small grain cereals other than rice in most cereal-producing areas of the world would be seriously jeopardized by stem rust if the disease were not controlled. There has been extensive research on the control of rust. Quarantine methods are largely ineffective because of the long distance and airborne nature of rust fungal inoculum (urediniospores). However, quarantine against movement of susceptible Berberis species has been useful in reducing the variability in pathogen populations. There are three main methods of controlling P. graminis: the use of resistant cultivars, chemical control and cultural control.
Host-Plant Resistance
Genetic resistance is the most effective, least expensive and most environmentally safe means of control. When adequate genetic resistance to stem rust is achieved, no other control methods are necessary. However, achieving and maintaining adequate resistance is difficult. For further information on rust resistance see reviews by CIMMYT (1988), Dyck and Kerber (1985), Johnson (1981), Knott (1989), Mundt and Browning (1985), Parlevliet (1985) and Roelfs et al. (1992). Genes for resistance, and their usefulness, have been summarized for wheat by McIntosh et al. (1995) and Roelfs et al. (1992), for oat by Martens (1985) and for barley by Jin et al. (1994). Virulence in East Africa for a widely used resistance gene, Sr31, is currently of concern (Pretorius et al., 2000; Jin and Singh, 2006). According to FAO (2007), it is estimated that up to 80% of all wheat varieties planted in Asia and Africa are susceptible to the new virulent strain Ug99.The ineffectiveness of specific gene resistance for rust control is often reported. There may be several reasons for this ineffectiveness: - resistance may have been selected empirically without adequate knowledge of pathogen virulence, thus inappropriate resistance genes have been used;- only single resistance genes may have been used in any one cultivar;- new virulences rapidly evolved in the pathogen.
Chemical Control
A number of fungicides are highly effective against stem rust and have been used to successfully control the disease. Chemical control of stem rust has been reviewed by Buchenauer (1982) and Rowell (1985).Fungicides have not, however, been widely used for the control of cereal rust. Reasons for this include:- the cost of fungicides is high and is a direct cost to the producer. Chemical control is usually only considered where losses are expected to be very high but may also be feasible where grain prices are highly subsidised and yields are high. Repeat applications of fungicide are necessary under heavy epidemic conditions, increasing costs further;- rust epidemics are difficult to predict and it is not feasible to maintain large inventories of chemicals, which may have limited shelf-lives, to spray large areas;- there may be environmental hazards involved in the use of fungicides;- the pathogen may develop resistance to the fungicides.
Cultural Control
Several cultural methods can be used to reduce the intensity of an epidemic or provide long-term partial control. The timing of an epidemic is critical to the amount of damage that is sustained. The date of disease onset is directly related to the development of an epidemic (Hamilton and Stakman, 1967) and is probably the most important single factor in the determining the severity of the epidemic (Roelfs, 1985a). Planting as late as possible in the autumn or as early as possible in the spring using early-maturing cultivars help to reduce the time of exposure of the crop to the pathogen. The success or practicality of this approach depends on a detailed knowledge of the epidemiology of the rust in a particular area. It is only feasible where inoculum is exogenous and arrives well into the cropping season.Another factor affecting the severity of an epidemic is the initial concentration of inoculum (Roelfs et al., 1972). Zadoks and Bouwman (1985) emphasised the importance of 'green bridges' in carrying inoculum from one crop to the next. The green bridge may consist of volunteer plants, crops grown successively in one area, or wild accessory hosts. Removal or avoidance of these bridges is helpful where the inoculum is endogenous. In this respect, knowledge of the formae speciales of endemic rusts, their host ranges and movement of inoculum is important, particularly if cereals and forages are planted in proximity.Programmes to eradicate the alternate hosts (Berberis) have had major effects in limiting stem rust epidemics in North America (Roelfs, 1982) and in Europe (Hermansen, 1968; Hinke, 1964). However, the alternate hosts are currently only an important factor in parts of eastern Europe, Eurasia and the north-western USA. In areas where Berberis is a factor, and in the absence of general eradication programmes, growers should be alert for the presence of Berberis plants on or near their land, and remove them. On an individual field basis, this can have a dramatic effect on delaying the onset of infection and reducing the ultimate severity of the disease.
Biological Control
Darluca filum is one of the more aggressive hyperparasites which are capable of infecting a range of rust fungi. However, this and other hyperparasites appear to offer little promise as biological control agents, mainly because of the wide and rapid dispersion of the rusts, but also because it is not possible to accumulate the hyperparasite in sufficient numbers under field conditions. For further information, see Buchenauer (1982).
Disease Monitoring and Prediction
The use of monitoring and prediction systems for the control of cereal rust diseases has not been very widely practised; the almost universal use of resistant cultivars has reduced the need for such systems. However, under an extreme threat of breakdown of resistance, accurate prediction is useful to devise counter measures.For example, in North America a very heavy accumulation of inoculum along the Gulf Coast in favourable weather conditions would indicate the potential of heavy disease pressure further north. No formalized system of monitoring and prediction exists for North America, although the rust situation reports for the USA, generated bi-weekly during the spring and summer by the USDA Cereal Rust Laboratory in St. Paul, Minnesota, could fulfil this function. More elaborate monitoring and prediction systems, including bioclimatic models and remote sensing, have been developed for use in India (Nagarajan and Joshi, 1985).
Impact
Historically, stem rust has caused major devastation to wheat crops in most of the wheat-growing areas of the world (Roelfs et al., 1992). In ancient Rome, and probably a wide area around the city, damage to crops, mainly caused by stem rust, was so severe that a number of ancient authors referred to the problem. Rites and processions were organized to appease the numen (spirit), Robigo (Zadoks, 1985).
Globally, stem rust was the most important disease of wheat until the late 1950s, when the use of resistant cultivars became more widespread (Saari and Prescott, 1985). Epidemics of stem rust can be spectacular, reducing an apparently healthy crop to a tangle of blackened stems and shrivelled grain within a few weeks. Widespread epidemics occur relatively infrequently, but disease within a region or in individual fields is frequently severe, often completely destroying the crop. Widespread epidemics have been documented for Australia (Luig, 1985), Europe (Zadoks and Bouwman, 1985) and North America (Roelfs, 1985a).
Epidemics also occur regularly in Africa, China and Asia (Saari and Prescott, 1985). Accurate assessment of losses is difficult and, as a result, losses are often poorly documented. Losses in North Dakota, during the severe epidemics of 1935 and 1954, were estimated at US $356 million and US $260 million, respectively, based on wheat prices in late 1995 (Roelfs, 1978).
The annual value of stem rust resistance for eastern Saskatchewan and Manitoba, Canada, was estimated at $217 million (in 1977 Canadian dollars), based on the annual acreage yield loss (25%) expected if susceptible cultivars were grown in this area (Green and Campbell, 1979). The value relates to about $307 million at late 1995 US $ prices for wheat.
Wheat losses to stem rust in Chile, monitored over a 30-year period (1960-90), averaged about 0.25% (Hacke, 1992). Losses in southern Europe, mainly in Portugal, Spain, France, Italy, southern Germany, Romania and Bulgaria can average 10%, but losses as high as 60-80% have been reported (Santiago, 1961). Stem rust on wheat is, at present, largely under control worldwide. Even with the widespread use of resistant cultivars, P. graminis remains ubiquitous and heavy localized losses are possible.
The major loss due to stem rust currently is the costs incurred to find, incorporate and evaluate resistance in new cultivars. The need is constantly demonstrated by the appearance of new pathogen virulences. In recent years Enkoy rusted in Ethiopia, Sr24 in South Africa (LeRoux, 1985), Sr31 in Uganda (Pretorius, 2000) and the Rpg-1 barley cultivars in North America (Roelfs et al., 1997).
Globally, stem rust was the most important disease of wheat until the late 1950s, when the use of resistant cultivars became more widespread (Saari and Prescott, 1985). Epidemics of stem rust can be spectacular, reducing an apparently healthy crop to a tangle of blackened stems and shrivelled grain within a few weeks. Widespread epidemics occur relatively infrequently, but disease within a region or in individual fields is frequently severe, often completely destroying the crop. Widespread epidemics have been documented for Australia (Luig, 1985), Europe (Zadoks and Bouwman, 1985) and North America (Roelfs, 1985a).
Epidemics also occur regularly in Africa, China and Asia (Saari and Prescott, 1985). Accurate assessment of losses is difficult and, as a result, losses are often poorly documented. Losses in North Dakota, during the severe epidemics of 1935 and 1954, were estimated at US $356 million and US $260 million, respectively, based on wheat prices in late 1995 (Roelfs, 1978).
The annual value of stem rust resistance for eastern Saskatchewan and Manitoba, Canada, was estimated at $217 million (in 1977 Canadian dollars), based on the annual acreage yield loss (25%) expected if susceptible cultivars were grown in this area (Green and Campbell, 1979). The value relates to about $307 million at late 1995 US $ prices for wheat.
Wheat losses to stem rust in Chile, monitored over a 30-year period (1960-90), averaged about 0.25% (Hacke, 1992). Losses in southern Europe, mainly in Portugal, Spain, France, Italy, southern Germany, Romania and Bulgaria can average 10%, but losses as high as 60-80% have been reported (Santiago, 1961). Stem rust on wheat is, at present, largely under control worldwide. Even with the widespread use of resistant cultivars, P. graminis remains ubiquitous and heavy localized losses are possible.
The major loss due to stem rust currently is the costs incurred to find, incorporate and evaluate resistance in new cultivars. The need is constantly demonstrated by the appearance of new pathogen virulences. In recent years Enkoy rusted in Ethiopia, Sr24 in South Africa (LeRoux, 1985), Sr31 in Uganda (Pretorius, 2000) and the Rpg-1 barley cultivars in North America (Roelfs et al., 1997).
The economic impact of stem rust has been reduced mainly through the breeding of cultivars with resistance to wheat stem rust. However, resistance in cultivars must continue to be improved to keep up with pathogen evolution (McIntosh and Brown, 1997). In most years, 10-20% of the cost of cultivar development is related to stem rust resistance. A novel stem race in Africa now is of great concern. Records of yield losses caused by cereal rust diseases in the USA have been maintained by the USDA since the early twentieth century (Roelfs, 1978) (see the USDA Cereal Disease website for information from recent years). Losses in dollars are difficult to estimate as rust reduces the quantity of grain, which in turn increases the price. Stem rust also reduces the quality of grain, resulting in a lower price. The USDA data only estimates the reduction of quantity.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
Copyright © CABI. CABI is a registered EU trademark. This article is published under a Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)
History
Published online: 19 September 2022
Language
English
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
SCITE_
Citations
Export citation
Select the format you want to export the citations of this publication.
EXPORT CITATIONSExport Citation
View Options
View options
Get Access
Login Options
Check if you access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.