Agricultural Reviews

  • Chief EditorPradeep K. Sharma

  • Print ISSN 0253-1496

  • Online ISSN 0976-0741

  • NAAS Rating 4.84

Frequency :
Quarterly (March, June, September & December)
Indexing Services :
AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Submit

Agricultural Reviews, volume 28 issue 1 (march 2007) : 42-48

INDUCED SYSTEMIC RESISTANCE (lSR) IN PLANT DISEASE MANAGEMENT-A REVIEW

K. Manonmani*, M. Jayasekhar*, C. Gailce Leo Justin**, T.Thangaselvabai*
1Krishi Vigyan Kendra, **- Horticultural Research Station-Pechiparai-629 161, India.

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Manonmani* K., Jayasekhar* M., Justin** Leo Gailce C., T.Thangaselvabai* (2024). INDUCED SYSTEMIC RESISTANCE (lSR) IN PLANT DISEASE MANAGEMENT-A REVIEW. Agricultural Reviews. 28(1): 42-48. doi: .

ABSTRACT

Disease management options currently available to farmers do not provide adequate control of plant diseases and there is a need for new disease management strategies. Induced systemic resistance (ISR) of plants against pathogens is a widespread phenomenon that has been intensively reviewed with respect to the underlying signalling pathways as well as to its potential use in plant protection. Systemic acquired resistance (SAR) is also vital plant defense system that confers broad spectrum resistance accompanied by coordinated expression of SAR genes. The present review focuses on international and indigenous research efforts in resistance induction in plants to the pathogen attack. It provides a perceptible review on the agents inducing systemic disease resistance and the mechanism underlying the induction of resistance. Recent trends in plant disease management in India cover the use of chemicals, plant extracts, cultural methods and the use of biological agents. Each and every agent posSesses inherent ability to induce resistance mechanism of the host systemically. Such hidden efficacy can be potentially utilized for plant disease management.

KEYWORDS

    REFERENCES

    1. Abbasi, P.A et al.(2001). Phytopathology, 91: 5 54.
    2. Abbasi, P.A et al.(2002b). Plant Dis., 86: 232-236.
    3. Abbasi, P.A. et al.(2002a). Plant Dis., 86: 156-161.
    4. Agostini, J. P. et al.(2003). Plant Dis., 87: 69-74.
    5. M-Dahmani, J. H. eta/.(1998). Phytopathology, 88: 53.
    6. Al-Dahmani, J.H. et al. (2003). Plant Dis., 87 : 913-919.
    7. Ali, G.5. et a/. (2003). PI Molecular Bioi, 51 : 803-815.
    8. Alvarez, A.M. and Mizumoto, C.Y. (2001). PhytopathoJogy, 91: 53.
    9. Apostol, I. et al.(1989). Plant Physiol., 90: 109-116.
    10. Bargabus, RL. et al. (2001). Phytopathology, 91 : 55.
    11. Bargabus, RL. et al. (2002). Phytopathology, 92 : 56.
    12. Benhamou, N. et al. (1996). Plant Physiol., 112 : 919-929.
    13. Bowler, C.M. et al. (1992). Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. BioI., 43: 83-116.
    14. Carr, J.P. and Kiessig, D.F.(1989). In: Genetic Engineering Principles and Methods. Vol-II (Setlow J.K.ed) Plenum Press, NewYork, : 64-109.
    15. Chandra, A. et al. (2001). Indian phytopath., 54: 284-287.
    16. Chandrasekaran, A. and Rajappan, K. (2001). J. Mycol. PI Pathol., 31: 350-352.
    17. Chen, C. et al. (2000). Physiol. Mol. Plant Pathol., 56: 13-23.
    18. Chen, Z. et al. (1993). Science, 262 :1883-1886.
    19. Chen,C. eta/. (1998). EuropeanJ. Plant Pathol., 104: 877-886.
    20. Davis, D. etal. (1993). Phytochemistry, 32: 607-611.
    21. Delaney, P. (1997). Plant Physiol., 113: 5-12.
    22. Dixon, R A. and Paiva, N. L. (1995). Plant Cell, 7: 1085-1097.
    23. 48 AGRICULTURAL REVIEWS Dong, X. etal. (1991). Plant Cell, 3: 61-72.
    24. Dube, H.C. (2001). J. Mycol. Pl. Pathol., 31 : 9-2l.
    25. Fry, S. C. (1986). Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol., 37 : 165-186.
    26. Graham, J. H., et al. (2002). Phytopathology, 92 : 531.
    27. Gross, G. G. (1980). Adv. Bot. Research, 8: 25-63.
    28. Hammerschmidt, R. and Kuc, J. (1995). Dordrecht: Kluwer, p:182.
    29. Han, D.Y. et al. (2000). Phytopathology, 90: 327-332.
    30. Hiraga, S. et al. (2001). Plant cell Physiol., 42 : 462 - 468.
    31. Howell, C. R. et al. (2000). Phytopathology, 90: 248-252.
    32. Howell, C.R. (2003). Plant Disease, 87 : 4-10.
    33. Jakobek, J. L. and Undgren, P. B. (1993). Plant Cell, 5 : 49-56.
    34. Joosten, M. H. A. J. and De wit, P. J. G. M. (1989). Plant physiol., 89 : 945-95l.
    35. Katoch, R. et al. (2002). Indian J. Plant Physiol.,7 : 388-39l.
    36. Keen, N.T. (1990). Annu. Rev. Genet., 24: 447-463.
    37. Kloepper, J. W. et al. (1992). Biocontrol Sci. Technol., 2 : 349-35l.
    38. Kuc, J. (1995). Annu. Rev. Phytopathol., 33 : 275-297.
    39. Levine, A. et a/. (1994). Cell, 6: 427-437.
    40. Unthorst, H. J. M. (1991). Crit. Rev. Plant Sci., 10: 123-150.
    41. Uu, L.. et a/. (1993). Phytopathology, 83: 1340.
    42. Louws, F. J. (1998). Phytopathology, 88:555.
    43. Lozano, J.C. and Sequeira, L.(1970). Phytopathology, 60 : 875-879.
    44. Manonmani .(2004).Ph. D Thesis. Tamil Nadu Agricultural University. Coimbatore, India.
    45. Manonmani et al. (2006b). In: Prc Third All India Conference of Scott Research Forum, Nagercoll, Tamil Nadu, India, Vol III: 22-23.
    46. Maurhofer, M. et a/. (1994). Phytopathology, 84: 139-146.
    47. Meena, B. et al. (2001). J. Myco/. PI. Patho/., 31 : 139-145.
    48. Mistry, D. et a/. (2002). J. Mycol. PI. Pathol., 32:379.
    49. Moshe, I. etal. (1998). J. of Chemical Ecology, 24: 135-149.
    50. Murray, D. C. and Walters, D. R. (1992). New Phytol., 120: 235-242.
    51. Nayar, K. (1996). Ph.D.Thesis, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, coimbatore, India, p.186.
    52. Paulilz, C. and Belanger, R. (2001). Annu, Rev Phytopathol., 39: 103-133.
    53. Pharand, B. eta/. (2002). Phytopathology, 92: 424-438.
    54. Pieterse, C.M.J. et al. (1996). Plant Cell, 8 : 1225-1237.
    55. Rajappan, K. et a/. (1995). Plant Dis. Res., 10 : 142-145.
    56. Ramanathan, A. and Vidhyasekaran, P. (2002). Indian Phytopath., 55: 70-72.
    57. Reuveni, R. et al. (1996). Eur. J. Plant Pathol., 102 : 339-348.
    58. Reuveni, R. etal. (1998). Crop Prot., 17: 111-118.
    59. . Schneider, S. and Ullrich, W. R. (1991). Physio/. Mol. Plant Pathol., 45 : 291-30l.
    60. Slusarenko, A. J. eta/. (1991). In: Biochemistry and Molecular Biology OfHost-Pathogen Interactions. (Smith, C.J.ed.) Oxford University press.
    61. Smith, J. A. et al. (1991). Physiol. and Mol. Plant Pathol., 38 : 223-235.
    62. Solorzano, E. et a/. (1996). Revta. Prot. Veg., 11 : 29-32
    63. Staskawicz, B. J. et al. (1995). Science, 268 : 661-667.
    64. Szczech, M. etal. (2002). Phytopathologia Polonica, 24: 57-66.
    65. Thangavelu, R. et a/. (2003). Biologica P/antarum, 46: 107-112.
    66. Ton, J. et al. (2002). Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact., 15: 27-34.
    67. Uknes, S. eta/. (1992). Plant cell, 4: 645-656.
    68. Urs, R. R. N. V. and Dunleavy, J. (1975). Phytopathology, 65: 689 - 690.
    69. Van Loon, L. C. and Van Kammen, A. (1970). Virology, 40 : 199-21l.
    70. Van Loon, L.C. (1999). In: Pathogenesis-related Proteins in Plants. (Datta, S. K, Muthukrishnan, S. eds). CRC Press, Boca Raton: 1-19.
    71. Van Peer, R. eta/. (1991). Phytopathology, 81: 728-734.
    72. Van Wees, S. C. M. et al. (2000). Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 97 : 8711-8716.
    73. Vidhyasekaran, P. (1993).In: Genetic Engineering, Molecular Biology and TIssue Culture for Crop Pest and Disease Management. Daya Publishing House, Delhi, :17-30.
    74. Wanner, L. A. et a/. (1993). Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact., 6: 582-59l.
    75. Ward, E. R. et al. (1991). Plant Cell, 3: 1085-1094.
    76. Wojstaszek, P. (1997). Biochem. J., 322: 681-692.
    77. Yedidia, I. et a/. (2000). Plant Physiol. Biochem., 38: 863-873.
    78. Yedidia, I. et a/. (2001). Plant Soil, 235 : 235-242.
    Reviewed By

    Download Article
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us

      Editorial Board

      View all (0)