The Role of Xylem Vessel Size and Ray Traits in Dutch Elm Disease Frequency in Ulmaceae

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, University of Guilan, Somehsara, I.R. Iran

2 MSc. Fraduated of Silviculture and Ecology Forest, University of Guilan, Somehsara, I.R. Iran

Abstract

Dutch elm disease is one of the most destructive and common plant vascular diseases now which is
known as a global problem. The aim of this study was comparison of early- and late-wood vessels
diameter and ray dimensions. In 4 species: Ulmus carpinifolia, Zelkova carpinifolia, Ulmus glabra and
Celtis australis from Ulmaceae. Then, very thin transversal sections were prepared and after different
stages of staining, microscopic slides were prepared. The data of xylem vessel and ray attributes
measurement among disease and healthy species analysis via one-way at level of 0.01. The compare
means was done with Duncan test. The results showed that the maximum and minimum frequency of
disease belong to English elm and Hackberry respectively. There is significant difference between
xylem vessels and ray attributes of species. The results of light and electron microscopy showed that
there is a change and destruction in xylem vessels and ray structure in affected trees.

Keywords

References

[1]. Sagheb Talebi, KH., Sagedi,T., and Yazdian,F. (2004).Forests of Iran. Research Institute of Forests and Rangelands, Tehran.
[2]. Hoadley, R.B. (1990).Identifying Wood. Accurate Results with Simple Tools. The Taunton press, Inc.pp:104-105.
[3]. Niloufari, P. (1983).Wood Technology. University of Tehran Press, Tehran.
[4]. Carlquist,S. (1988).Comparative Wood Anatomy, Springer.
[5]. Iraqi, M.M., and Rahnama, K. (2007) Investigation on disease severity of Ophiostoma ulmi and Ophiostoma novo-ulmi on Ulmus parvifolia Jacq. Journal of Agricultural Sciences &Natural Resources, 14:3.164-173.
[6]. Sutherland, M.L., Pearson, S., and Brasier, C.M., (1997). The influence of temperature and light on defoliation levels of elm by Dutch elm disease. Journal of Phytopathology, 87(6): 576-581.
[7].Ghelardini, L., and Santini. A. (2009). Avoidance by early flushing: a new perspective on Dutch elm disease research. Journal of iForest-Biogeosciences and Forestry, 2:143-153.
[8]. Zimmermann, M.H. (1983). Xylem Structure and the Ascent of Sap. Springer. New York.
[9]. Lo Gullo, M. A., Salleo, S., Piaceri, E. C., and Rosso, R. (1995). Relations between vulnerability to xylem embolism and xylem conduit dimentions in young trees. Plant Cell Environment, 18: 661-669.
[10]. Solla, A., Martin, J.A., Corral, P., and Gil, L., (2005). Seasonal changes in wood formation of Ulmuspumila and its relation with Dutch elm disease. New Phytologist, 166 (3):1025-1034.
[11]. Elgersma, D. M. (1970). Length and diameter of xylem vessels as factors in resistance of elms to Ceratocystis ulmi. Netherlands Journal of Plant Pathology, 76: 179-182.
[12]. Solla, A., and Gil, L. (2002). Xylem vessel diameter as factor in resistance of Ulmus minor to Ophiostoma novo-ulmi. Forest Pathology, 32:123-134.
[13]. Parsa Pajouh,D.,and Schweingruber,F.H. (2001).Atlas des Bios du Nord de Iran: Description Anatomique et Identification Microscopique des Essences Principal (3rd ed). University of Tehran Press,Tehran.
[14]. IAWA Committee (E.A. Wheeler, P. Baas & P. Gasson, Eds). 1989. IAWA list of microscopic features for hardwood identification. Journal of the International Association of Wood Anatomists (IAWA Journal), 10: 219-332
[15]. Gartner,B.L. (1995).Patterns of xylem variation within a tree and their hydraulic consequences.In:B.L.Gartner (ed), Plant stems:Physiology and Functional Morphology. New York, Academic press, pp: 125-149.
[16]. Sinclair, W.A., Zahand, J.P., and Melching, J.B., (1975). Anatomical markers for resistance of Ulmus Americana to Ceratocystis ulmi. Journal of Phytopathology, 65: 349-359.
[17]. Oladi,R., Matini Baehzad,H., Sharifi,Z., Masomi,A. (2013). Comparing the wood anatomy of the field elms (Ulmus carpinifolia Borkh.) native to Gorgan and Komijan Iranian Journal of Natural Resources, 66(1):69-81.
[18]. Cutler, D.F., Botha,C.E.J., and Stevenson, D.W. (2007). Plant Anatomy, an Applied Approach. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.USA.
[19]. Martin, J.A., Solla,A., and Esteban, L.G. (2009). Borderd pit and ray morphology involment in elm resistance to ophiostoma novo-ulmi.Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 39(2): 420-429.
[20]. Safdari, V., and Golchinfar, M. (2011). Comparative wood anatomy of Wych Elm, English Elm, Caucasian Elm and Hackbery. Iranian Journal of Wood and Paper ScienceResearc, 26 (3):564-578.
[21]. Elgersma, D.M. (1967). Production of pectic and celluloytic enzymes by aggressive and non-aggressive strains of ophiostoma ulmi. Netherlands Journal of Plant Pathology, 82:161-172.
[22]. Woods, A.C., and Holmes, F.W. (1974). Extraction of fluid from healthy and Dutch Elm Diseased elm branches using hydraulic compression. Phytopathology, 64: 1265-1266.
[23]. Stipes, R.J., and Campana, R.J. (1981). Compendium of elm disease. The American Phytopathological Society Press.
[24]. Wilson, C.L. (1965). Ceratocystis ulmi in elm wood. Phytopathology, 55: 477-480.
Forest and Wood Products
Volume 67, Issue 3 - Serial Number 3
October 2014
Pages 453-462

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics