Skip to main content
ARS Home » Plains Area » Fargo, North Dakota » Edward T. Schafer Agricultural Research Center » Sugarbeet and Potato Research » Research » Publications at this Location » Publication #313962

Research Project: Physiological and Genetic Approaches to Improving Extractable Sugar Yield in Sugarbeet

Location: Sugarbeet and Potato Research

Title: Potential of host-plant resistance as an alternative control measure for sugarbeet root maggot

Author
item Campbell, Larry

Submitted to: American Society of Sugar Beet Technologists
Publication Type: Proceedings
Publication Acceptance Date: 2/6/2015
Publication Date: 6/1/2015
Citation: Campbell, L.G. 2015. Potential of host-plant resistance as an alternative control measure for sugarbeet root maggot. American Society of Sugar Beet Technologists. Proceedings from the 38th Biennial Meeting. Available: http://assbt-proceedings.org/ASSBT2015Proceedings/Section%20C/campbell,%20L.pdf.

Interpretive Summary: Sugarbeet lines with sugarbeet root maggot (SBRM) resistance have been available since 1996. The SBRM feeding damage observed on these lines (F1015, F1016, and F1024) is similar to that observed on susceptible commercial hybrids combined with recommended registered insecticides. Two previous trials have indicated that hybrids with a SBRM resistant pollinator and an elite susceptible CMS line would provide a substantial reduction in losses due to root maggot feeding. Two resistant germplasm lines, F1015 and F1016, and a susceptible germplasm line, F1010, crossed with three susceptible CMS lines (L53cms, FC504cms, and SP69550-01) were evaluated at a site with heavy SBRM pressure in 2013 and 2014. The difference between the two-year average root yield of hybrids with F1015 and F1016 as pollinators (37.9 and 36.8 Mg ha-1, respectively) was not significant but both exceeded the average root yield (30.2 Mg ha-1) of the three hybrids with F1010 as the pollen parent. Average SBRM damage ratings (0 = no scaring to 9 = more than 75% of root surface covered with feeding scars) for hybrids with F1015, F1016, and F1010 as pollinators were 4.3, 3.8, and 5.3, respectively. PI 179180, a line with red globe-shaped roots, was identified as SBRM by North Dakota State University in 1973. Two lines selected from a cross between PI 179180 and a susceptible California sugarbeet line, C564, have high levels of resistance and are being increased with the intent to release one or both as a unique source of SBRM resistance. In 2013 and 2014 evaluations, these lines had average damage ratings of 2.4 and 2.5, compared to ratings of 1.8, 6.2, and 6.0 for F1024 (resistant germplasm), F1010 (susceptible line), and Beta-1301 (commercial hybrid), respectively.

Technical Abstract: Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris L.) Germplasm lines with sugarbeet root maggot (Tetanops myopaeformis von Röder) (SBRM) resistance have been available since 1996. Two resistant germplasm lines, F1015 and F1016, and a susceptible germplasm line, F1010, crossed with three susceptible CMS lines (L53cms, FC504cms, and SP69550-01) were evaluated at a site with heavy SBRM pressure in 2013 and 2014. The difference between the two-year average root yield of hybrids with F1015 and F1016 as pollinators (37.9 and 36.8 Mg ha-1, respectively) was not significant but both exceeded the average root yield (30.2 Mg ha-1) of the three hybrids with F1010 as the pollen parent. Pollinator X CMS-line interactions were not significant. Average SBRM damage ratings (0 = no scaring to 9 = more than 75% of root surface covered with feeding scars) for hybrids with F1015, F1016, and F1010 as pollinators were 4.3, 3.8, and 5.3, respectively. PI 179180, a line with red globe-shaped roots, was identified as SBRM by North Dakota State University in 1973. Two lines selected from a cross between PI 179180 and a susceptible California sugarbeet line, C564, have high levels of resistance and are being increased with the intent to release one or both as a unique source of SBRM resistance. In 2013 and 2014 evaluations, these lines had average damage ratings of 2.4 and 2.5, compared to ratings of 1.8, 6.2, and 6.0 for F1024 (resistant germplasm), F1010 (susceptible line), and Beta-1301 (commercial hybrid), respectively.