Mikrobiol. Z. 2019; 81(3):68-83. Ukrainian.
doi: https://doi.org/10.15407/microbiolj81.03.068

Soybean Diseases Caused by Genus Pseudomonas Phytopathenes Bacteria

Hnatiuk T.T.1, Zhitkevich N.V.1, Petrychenko V.F.2, Kalinichenko A.V.3, Patyka V.P.1

1Zabolotny Institute of Microbiology and Virology, NAS of Ukraine
154 Akad. Zabolotny Str., Kyiv, 03143, Ukraine

2Institute of Forage and Agriculture of Podillya, NAAN of Ukraine
16 Yunosty Prosp., Vinnytsia, 21100, Ukraine

3University of Opole
7-9 Dmowskiego Str., Opole, 45-365, Poland

Objective. The rationale and experimental confirmation of the role of the bacteria of the Pseudomonas genus in the pathogenesis of soybean, and the investigation of the biological properties of the main causative agent Pseudomonas savastanoi pv. glycines. Methods. Theoretical generalization, laboratory-model research, phytopathological, microbiological, physiological, biochemical and genetic methods. Results. The largest group of pathogens in different soil-climatic zones of Ukraine consists of bacteria of the genus Pseudomonas was established. Their biological properties have been investigated and the methods for identification of the dominant type of phytopathogenic bacteria causing bacterial blight of soybean, Pseudomonas savastanoi pv. glycinea, have been proposed. Conclusions. Long-term soybean crops monitoring of regionalized varieties in different soil-climatic zones of Ukraine has showm that the one of the dominant bacterial pathogens is Pseudomonas savastanoi pv. glycinea in the range of bacterial pathogens of this plant. A database of BOX-fragments profiles for P. savastanoi pv. glycinea, P. syringae pv. syringae, P. savastanoi pv. phaseolicola, Pseudomonas syringae pv. tabaci collections strains was created. The BOX-PCR method allows identification phytopathogenic pseudomonads to the species level, but not to the pathovar. Was shown that for Pseudomonas soybean bacteriosis identification should be used symptomatology and polyphase taxonomy methods.

Keywords: phytopathogenic bacteria, soybean, bacterial blight of soybean, biological properties, polymerase chain reaction.

Full text (PDF, in Ukrainian)

  1. Petrichenko VF, Likhchvor VV, Ivanyuk SV, Korniychuk OV, Kolisnik S.I., Kobak S.Y., et al. Soya. Vinnitsa: Dilo; 2016. Ukrainian.
  2. Patyka VP, Petrichenko VF, Pasichnyk LA, Zhytkevych NV, Gulyaeva GB, Tokovenko IP, Gnatyuk TT, et al. Diseases of soybean: monitoring, diagnostics, protection. Patyka VP, Petrychenko VF, editors. Vinnytsia: Vindruk; 2018. Ukrainian.
  3. Zhitkevich NV, Zhmurko LG. [Distribution of bacterial diseases of soy in the Kiev region]. Visnik Odessa National University. Biology. 2005; 10(7):244-248. Ukrainian.
  4. Fartushniak AT., Fartushniak G B. Raspostronenie bolezeyi v lesostepi Ukraine i zadachi selekcii na imunitet. Nauchno-tehn. boil. SOVASHNIL. 1987; 29:38-42. Ukrainian.
  5. Patyka V, Buletsa N, Pasichnyk L, Zhitkevich N, Kalinichenko A, Gnatiuk T, et al. [Specifics of pesticides effects on the phytopathogenic bacteria]. Ecological Chemistry and Engineering. 2016; 23(2):311-331. Ukrainian. https://doi.org/10.1515/eces-2016-0022
  6. Gvozdak RI, Pasichnik LA, Yakovleva LM, Moroz SM., Litvinchuk OO, Zhitkevich NV, et al. Phitopatogenni bakterii. In: Patyka VP, editor. Kyiv: Scientific-Production Enterprise InterService Ltd.; 2011. Ukrainian.
  7. Patyka V, Gvozdiak R, Dankevich L, Zhytkevych N. Diagnosis of bacteria of the genus Pseudomonas - pathogens of bacterial diseases of legumes. Methodical recommendations. Kyiv; 2007. Ukrainian.
  8. Dankevych LA, [Phenotypical and genotypical characteristics of the pathogen in lupine bacterial brown spottiness]. Mikrobiol Z. 2006; 68(6):20-27. Ukrainian.
  9. Patyka VP, Pasichnyk LA, Dankevich LA, Moroz SM, Butsenko LM, Zhytkevych NV Diagnostika phitopatogennih bakteriy. In: Patyka VP, editor. Kyiv; 2014. Ukrainian.
  10. Shkalikov VA, et al. Protection of plants from diseases. Moscow: Kolos; 2004.
  11. Patyka VP, Pasichnyk LA., Gvozdiak RI., Petrichenko VF, Korniychuk OV, Kalinichenko AV, et al. Phytopathogenic bacteria. Methods of research. In: Patyka VP, editor. Vinnitsa: Windroek LLC; 2017; 2:432. Ukrainian.
  12. Klement Z, Rudollf K, Sands D. Methods in phytobacteriology. Budapest: Academia Kiado; 1990.
  13. Bergey's manual of systematic bacteriology. In: DR Boore, RW Castenholz, GM Garrity, editors. 2nd ed. New York, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2005; 2(B):1106.
  14. http://www.galartdiag.ru/files/diatom_dna_prep_200.pdf
  15. http://meyerinst.com/imaging-software/image-pro/gel/index.htm
  16. Dijkshoorn L, Towner KJ, Struelens M. New approaches for the generation and analysis of microbial typing data. Amsterdam: Elzevier, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-044450740-2/50000-9
  17. http://genomes.urv.cat/UPGMA/
  18. Hwang MS, Morgan RL, Sarkar SF, et al. Phylogenetic characterization of virulence and resistance phenotypes of Pseudomonas syringae. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2005; 71(9):5182-5191. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.71.9.5182-5191.2005
  19. Kalinichenko A, Havrysh V, Perebyynis V. Evaluation of biogas production and usuge potential. Ecological Chemistry and Engineering. 2016; 23(3):387-400. https://doi.org/10.1515/eces-2016-0027