𝔖 Bobbio Scriptorium
✦   LIBER   ✦

Scanning electron microscopy applied to seed-borne fungi examination

✍ Scribed by Marcelo De Carvalho Alves; Edson Ampélio Pozza


Publisher
John Wiley and Sons
Year
2009
Tongue
English
Weight
778 KB
Volume
72
Category
Article
ISSN
1059-910X

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

✦ Synopsis


Abstract

The aim of this study was to test the standard scanning electron microscopy (SEM) as a potential alternative to study seed‐borne fungi in seeds, by two different conditions of blotter test and water restriction treatment. In the blotter test, seeds were subjected to conditions that enabled pathogen growth and expression, whereas the water restriction method consisted in preventing seed germination during the incubation period, resulting in the artificial inoculation of fungi. In the first condition, seeds of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), maize (Zea mays L.), and cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) were submitted to the standard blotter test and then prepared and observed with SEM. In the second condition, seeds of cotton (G. hirsutum), soybean (Glycine max L.), and common bean (P. vulgaris L.) were, respectively, inoculated with Colletotrichum gossypii var. cephalosporioides, Colletotrichum truncatum, and Colletotrichum lindemuthianum by the water restriction technique, followed by preparation and observation with SEM. The standard SEM methodology was adopted to prepare the specimens. Considering the seeds submitted to the blotter test, it was possible to identify Fusarium sp. on maize, C. gossypii var. cephalosporioides, and Fusarium oxysporum on cotton, Aspergillus flavus, Penicillium sp., Rhizopus sp., and Mucor sp. on common bean. Structures of C. gossypii var. cephalosporioides, C. truncatum, and C. lindemuthianum were observed in the surface of inoculated seeds. Microsc. Res. Tech., 2009. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.


📜 SIMILAR VOLUMES


Comparison of environmental scanning ele
✍ McKinlay, Karen J. ;Allison, Francis J. ;Scotchford, Colin A. ;Grant, David M. ; 📂 Article 📅 2004 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English ⚖ 352 KB

## Abstract The efficacy of conventional high vacuum scanning electron microscopy (SEM), environmental SEM (ESEM), and confocal laser scanning microscopy techniques in the assessment of cell–material interactions is compared. Specific attention is given to the application of these techniques in the