Biological Characteristics and Fungicides Screening in Laboratory of Fusarium cugenangense Causing Camellia sinensis Root Rot

doi:10.13304/j.nykjdb.2024.0419

Abstract

Abstract:

Root rot disease of tea plants often leads to the death of the entire plant， significantly impacting the sustainable development of the tea industry. To elucidate the biological characteristics of Fusarium cugenangense and to screen for safe and effective fungicides， the effects of temperature， pH， light conditions， carbon sources and nitrogen sources on mycelial growth and sporulation were determined using a crossover method and a hemocytometer counting method. The inhibitory effects of 8 commercially available fungicides on the mycelial growth of the pathogen were assessed using the mycelial growth rate method. The indoor toxicity of thiophanate-methyl and its effects on mycelial growth and sporulation at different dosages were also evaluated. The results indicated that the mycelium of Fusarium cugenangense could grow at 10~35 ℃ and pH 5~12， while spore could occur at 15~35 ℃ and pH 5~12. The optimal temperature for mycelial growth of the Fusarium cugenangense was 25 ℃， and the optimal temperature for sporulation was 30 ℃. The optimal pH for mycelial growth was 8， and for sporulation was 9. Starch was identified as the optimal carbon source for mycelial growth， while sucrose was the optimal carbon source for sporulation. Peptone was found to be the optimal nitrogen source for both mycelial growth and sporulation， and light inhibited both mycelial growth and sporulation. Additionally， the inhibition rate of mycelial growth showed that Hymexazol had the highest inhibition rate of 80.97%， with an EC₅₀ of 0.109 g·L^-1. In contrast， Chloroisobromine cyanuric acid and Fluomycetes Downomycetes exhibited lower inhibition rates of 16.79% and 9.71%， respectively. In conclusion， the external conditions such as temperature， pH， light conditions， carbon source and nitrogen source could influence the biological characteristics of Fusarium cugenangense. Furthermore， Hymexazol exhibited good indoor toxicity against Fusarium cugenangense. Above results provided a theoretical basis for effectively controlling tea root rot disease and its spread.

Key words: tea trees, root rot disease, biological characteristics, fungicides screen

摘要：

茶树根腐病常导致茶树整株枯死，极大地影响了茶产业的可持续发展。为明确茶树根腐病病原菌（Fusarium cugenangense）的生物学特性，筛选安全高效的杀菌剂，通过十字交叉法和血球计数法分别测定温度、pH、光照条件、碳源、氮源对其菌丝生长及产孢量的影响；利用菌丝生长速率法测定8种市售杀菌剂对菌丝生长的抑制作用，筛选并评估最佳抑菌药剂的室内毒力及其对菌丝生长及产孢量的影响。结果表明，Fusarium cugenangense菌丝在10~35 ℃、pH 5~12条件下均可生长，在15~35 ℃、pH 5~12条件下均可产孢。其中菌丝生长最适温度为25 ℃、产孢最适温度为30 ℃，菌丝生长最适pH为8、产孢最适pH为9，菌落生长的最适碳源为淀粉、产孢最适碳源为蔗糖，菌落生长和孢子产生的最适氮源均为蛋白胨，且光照能抑制菌丝生长及产孢量。此外，菌丝生长抑制率表明，噁霉灵的抑菌率最高，为80.97%，其有效抑制中浓度（EC₅₀）为0.109 g·L^-1，而氯溴异氰尿酸、氟菌·霜霉威抑菌率较低，分别为16.79%和9.71%。综上，温度、pH、光照条件、碳源、氮源等外界条件均能影响Fusarium cugenangense的生物学特性。此外，噁霉灵对Fusarium cugenangense具有较好的室内毒力。以上研究结果为有效控制茶树根腐病及其蔓延提供了理论依据。

关键词: 茶树, 根腐病, 生物学特性, 药剂筛选

CLC Number:

S435.711

Yishuai YANG, Lin TAN, Li NIU, Ping SHU, Zihan SHI, Jie FANG, Qiulong HU. Biological Characteristics and Fungicides Screening in Laboratory of Fusarium cugenangense Causing Camellia sinensis Root Rot[J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2025, 27(7): 133-141.

杨艺帅, 谭琳, 牛丽, 舒坪, 史子涵, 方洁, 胡秋龙. 茶树根腐病菌生物学特征及室内药剂筛选[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2025, 27(7): 133-141.

Figures/Tables 7

References 31

[1]	WEI C L, YANG H, WANG S B, et al.. Draft genome sequence of Camellia sinensis var. sinensis provides insights into the evolution of the tea genome and tea quality [J]. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 2018, 115(18):4151-4158.
[2]	黄华,张建,苏东,等.2017—2019年信阳市茶树病虫害发生种类调查及绿色防控技术探讨[J].中国植保导刊,2020,40(10):79-82.
[3]	杨艺帅,杨学宇,王玉生,等.气候变化背景下茶角胸叶甲潜在适生区预测[J].湖南农业大学学报(自然科学版),2023,49(5):581-587.
	YANG Y S, YANG X Y, WANG Y S, et al.. Prediction of the potential adaptive areas of Basilepta melanopus under climate change scenarios [J]. J. Hunan Agric. Univ. (Nat. Sci.), 2023, 49(5):581-587.
[4]	HU Y Q, ZHANG M T, LU M Q, et al.. Salicylic acid carboxyl glucosyl transferase UGT87E7 regulates disease resistance in Camellia sinensis [J]. Plant Physiol., 2021, 188(3):1507-1520.
[5]	LING H M, TANG X X, ZHENG C Q, et al.. First report of leaf spot caused by Clonostachys rosea on tea (Camellia sinensis) in China [J/OL]. Plant Dis., 2023, 107(8):2537 [2024-04-20]. .
[6]	WANG X, YIN Q X, JIANG S L, et al.. First report of Didymella bellidis causing tea leaf spot in China [J/OL]. Plant Dis., 2020, 104(4):1254 [2024-04-20]. .
[7]	YIN Q X, AN X L, WU X, et al.. First report of Alternaria longipes causing leaf spot on tea in China [J/OL]. Plant Dis., 2021, 105(12):4167 [2024-04-20]. .
[8]	BAO X T, DHARMASENA D S P, LI D X, et al.. First report of Epicoccum sorghinum causing leaf spot on tea in China [J/OL]. Plant Dis., 2019, 103(12):3282 [2024-04-20]. .
[9]	TANG Z, ZHU J, SONG Q, et al.. Identification and pathogenicity of Fusarium spp . associated with tea wilt in Zhejiang province, China [J/OL]. BMC Microbiol., 2024, 24(1):38 [2024-04-20]. .
[10]	叶正凡,张觉晚,钟世芳,等.湖南茶树病虫害防治研究的回顾与展望[J].茶叶通讯,1991(1):7-10.
[11]	张觉晚,谭济才,袁通政,等.湖南茶园病虫区系特点及区域性防治[J].茶叶通讯,1998(3):21-23.
[12]	KOLANDASAMY M, PONNUSAMY P. Expression of phenolics and defence-related enzymes in relation to red root rot disease of tea plants [J]. Arch. Phytopathol., 2013, 46(4):451-462.
[13]	MORANG P, DEVI S P, JHA D K, et al.. Tea root brown-rot fungus disease reduction and yield recovery with rhizobacteria inoculation in both nursery and field trials [J]. Rhizosphere, 2018, 6:89-97.
[14]	SINNIAH G D, SENANAYAKE P D. Microbial technologies in pest and disease management of tea (Camellia sinensis (L.) O. Kuntze) //[M]. (1st Eds). BHATT P, GANGALA S, UDAYANGA D, et al.. Microbial Technology for Sustainable Environment. Singapore: Springer, 2021:325-345.
[15]	YANG Y S, YANG X Y, ZHANG Y D, et al.. First report of Fusarium cugenangense causing root rot of tea plants (Camellia sinensis) in China [J/OL]. Plant Dis., 2024, 108(1):214 [2024-04-20]. .
[16]	CHERUIYOT H. Armillaria root rot (Armillaria mellea) of tea: biology, pathogenicity, symptoms and control [J]. Tea, 2014, 35(3):7-30.
[17]	赖宝春,姚锦爱.福建蜜柚炭疽病菌的生物学特性及高效防治药剂筛选[J].福建农业学报,2022,37(6):789-793.
	LAI B C, YAO J A. Biological characteristics of Colletotrichum gloeosporioides and fungicides for disease control on honey pomelo in Fujian [J]. Fujian J. Agric. Sci., 2022, 37(6):789-793.
[18]	黄玉凤,李菲,汪汉成,等.烟草镰刀菌根腐病病原生物学特性及其优势种的代谢表型特征[J].江苏农业科学,2024,52(7):124-132.
[19]	代毅,杨文睿,吐逊艾力·艾孜提力,等.新疆甘草根腐病病原鉴定及生物学特性测定[J].北方园艺,2021(20):111-118.
	DAI Y, YANG W R, Aizitili Tusunaili, et al.. Pathogen identification and biological characteristics of licorice root rot in Xinjiang [J]. Northern Hortic., 2021 (20):111-118.
[20]	张海珊.麦冬炭疽菌的生物学特性及有效药剂筛选[D].合肥:安徽农业大学,2009.
	ZHANG H S. Biological characteristics and effective fungicide selection of anthracnose pathogen of Ophiopogon japonicus [D]. Hefei: Anhui Agricultural University, 2009.
[21]	王美琴,陈俊美,李新凤.不同碳、氮源对番茄两种内生真菌菌丝生长的影响研究[J].山西农业科学,2008 (11):75-77.
	WANG M Q, CHEN J M, LI X F. Study on mycelia growth of two tomato endophytic fungi in different carbon and nitrogen medium [J]. J. Shanxi Agric. Sci., 2008(11):75-77.
[22]	周利,郭明明.茶园农药的合理选用和使用[J].中国茶叶,2022,44(9):1-7.
	ZHOU L, GUO M M. Rational selection and application of pesticides in tea gardens [J]. China Tea, 2022, 44(9):1-7.
[23]	LEON M E, SCHINASI L H, LEBAILLY P, et al.. Pesticide use and risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoid malignancies in agricultural cohorts from France, Norway and the USA: a pooled analysis from the AGRICOH consortium [J]. Int. J. Epidemiol., 2019, 48(5):1519-1535.
[24]	张志鹏,程庆华,谢靖康,等.小檗碱对不同茶树炭疽菌的抑菌活性及作用机制[J].茶叶科学,2022,42(3):367-375.
	ZHANG Z P, CHEN Q H, XIE J K, et al.. The antifungal effect and mechanism of berberine on different Colletotrichum species causing tea brown blight disease [J]. J. Tea Sci., 2022, 42(3):367-375.
[25]	张玉丹,谭琳,刘仲华,等.茶树炭疽病菌拮抗链霉菌的筛选及其抑菌特性研究[J].茶叶科学,2024, 44(2):283-298.
	ZHANG Y D, TAN L, LIU Z H, et al.. Identification of antagonistic Streptomycetes against anthracnose pathogen of tea plants and determination of their inhibitory properties [J]. J. Tea Sci., 2024, 44(2):283-298.
[26]	王志坤.武夷菌素对茶树主要叶部病害的控制作用[D].重庆:西南大学,2008.
	WANG Z K. Suppression effects of wuyiencin on tea foliar diseases and their pathogens [D]. Chongqing: Southwest University, 2008.
[27]	MYRESIOTIS K, KARAOGLANIDIS G S, VRYZAS Z, et al.. Evaluation of plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria, acibenzolar-S-methyl and hymexazol for integrated control of Fusarium crown and root rot on tomato [J]. Pest Manag. Sci., 2012, 68(3):404-411.
[28]	ROBERTS T R, HUSTSON D H. Metabolic pathways of agrochemicals. part 2: insecticides and fungicides [J/OL]. R. Soc. Chem. 1999, 13:75 [2024-04-20]. .
[29]	FAN Y, GAO R H, XIAO X, et al.. Inclusion complexes of hymexazol with three different cucurbit[n]uril: preparation, and physicochemical and antifungal characterization [J]. Israel J. Chem., 2018, 58:466-471.
[30]	焦鹏,贾变桃,孙颖,等.6种杀菌剂对兰花枯萎病菌抑制作用比较[J].山西农业大学学报(自然科学版),2012,32(2):154-157.
	JIAO P, YAO B T, SUN Y, et al.. Conparison of inhibition of six fungicides against Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. Cattleyae [J]. J. Shanxi Agric. Univ. (Nat. Sci.), 2012, 32(2):154-157.
[31]	李艳春,陈志鹏,林伟伟,等.茶树连作障碍形成机制及调控措施研究进展[J].生态科学,2019,38(5):225-232.
	LI Y C, CHEN Z P, LIN W W, et al.. Research advances in mechanisms and preventions of continuous cropping obstacles of tea plants [J]. Ecol. Sci., 2019, 38(5):225-232.

药剂名称Agent name	菌落直径Colony diameter/cm	抑菌率Inhibition rate/%
噁霉灵Hymexazol	1.30±0.00 e	80.97 a
氟氯氰菊酯Cyfluthrin	3.00±0.20 d	56.08 b
甲霜·噁霉灵Metalaxyl·hymexazol	3.25±0.18 cd	52.42 bc
精甲·咯·嘧菌Metalaxyl-M·fludioxonil·azoxystrobin	3.50±0.10 cd	48.76 bc
多菌灵Sanmate	4.53±0.25 c	33.63 c
宁南霉Ningnanmycin	5.37±0.21 bc	21.43 cd
氯溴异氰尿酸Chloroisobromine cyanuric acid	5.68±0.49 abc	16.79 cd
氟菌·霜霉威Fluomycetes downomycetes	6.17±0.15 ab	9.71 d
对照Control	6.83±0.15 a	—

药剂名称Agent name	菌落直径Colony diameter/cm	抑菌率Inhibition rate/%
噁霉灵Hymexazol	1.30±0.00 e	80.97 a
氟氯氰菊酯Cyfluthrin	3.00±0.20 d	56.08 b
甲霜·噁霉灵Metalaxyl·hymexazol	3.25±0.18 cd	52.42 bc
精甲·咯·嘧菌Metalaxyl-M·fludioxonil·azoxystrobin	3.50±0.10 cd	48.76 bc
多菌灵Sanmate	4.53±0.25 c	33.63 c
宁南霉Ningnanmycin	5.37±0.21 bc	21.43 cd
氯溴异氰尿酸Chloroisobromine cyanuric acid	5.68±0.49 abc	16.79 cd
氟菌·霜霉威Fluomycetes downomycetes	6.17±0.15 ab	9.71 d
对照Control	6.83±0.15 a	—

药剂名称 Agents name	剂量 Dosage/（g·L^-1）	菌落直径 Colony diameter/cm	抑菌率 Inhibition rate/%	产孢数 Sporulation count/（cell·mL^-1）	毒力回归方程 Virulence regression equation	EC₅₀/ （g·L^-1）
噁霉灵 Hymexazol	0.1	3.45±0.15	49.12	2.75×10⁷	y=0.855x+0.889	0.109
	0.2	2.88±0.09	57.52	2.23×10⁷
	0.3	2.23±0.06	67.11	1.87×10⁷
	0.4	2.13±0.09	68.58	1.26×10⁷
	0.5	1.89±0.08	72.12	5.12×10⁶
氟氯氰菊酯 Cyfluthrin	0.1	4.54±0.15	33.04	7.84×10⁷	y=0.659x+0.227	0.452
	0.2	3.94±0.27	41.89	6.85×10⁷
	0.3	3.76±0.14	44.54	5.29×10⁷
	0.4	3.54±0.25	47.79	4.99×10⁷
	0.5	3.26±0.09	51.92	3.54×10⁷
对照组Control	—	6.78±0.08	—	1.23×10⁸	—	—

药剂名称 Agents name	剂量 Dosage/（g·L^-1）	菌落直径 Colony diameter/cm	抑菌率 Inhibition rate/%	产孢数 Sporulation count/（cell·mL^-1）	毒力回归方程 Virulence regression equation	EC₅₀/ （g·L^-1）
噁霉灵 Hymexazol	0.1	3.45±0.15	49.12	2.75×10⁷	y=0.855x+0.889	0.109
	0.2	2.88±0.09	57.52	2.23×10⁷
	0.3	2.23±0.06	67.11	1.87×10⁷
	0.4	2.13±0.09	68.58	1.26×10⁷
	0.5	1.89±0.08	72.12	5.12×10⁶
氟氯氰菊酯 Cyfluthrin	0.1	4.54±0.15	33.04	7.84×10⁷	y=0.659x+0.227	0.452
	0.2	3.94±0.27	41.89	6.85×10⁷
	0.3	3.76±0.14	44.54	5.29×10⁷
	0.4	3.54±0.25	47.79	4.99×10⁷
	0.5	3.26±0.09	51.92	3.54×10⁷
对照组Control	—	6.78±0.08	—	1.23×10⁸	—	—