president’s message inside this issue · 1. there shall be 2 travel awards given an-nually by the...

VOL. 43, NO. 4 DECEMBER 1999

Inside this issue:

Book Review .......................................................65Call for Nominations: 2000 Awards ................59Canadian Workshop on FHB: 2 Reports .. 67-69Contact the Editor .............................................63Editorial: Pathological Gender Bias? ........ 70-72First International Powdery Mildew Conference, Avignon ......................................62Grad Student Travel Award.............................60Membership Renewal Form .............................74Membership Survey ..........................................73People ............................................................58, 63Plum Pox Potyvirus in Pennsylvania ...............66President’s Message ..........................................57Regional Report from BC .................................64

President’s MessageZamir K. Punja

http://res.agr.ca/lond/pmrc/cps/cpshome.html

The year 2000 and Beyond - A Time for Reflection

In what may end up being the shortest Presiden-tial message in recorded history, I would like toconvey my best wishes to each CPS member forthe upcoming year. The CPS committees con-tinue to work toward addressing the various is-sues facing our Society and I shall update you ontheir progress in the March, 2000 issue ofCPS-SCP News.

As we approach the new Millennium, this is anappropriate time to reflect back to where we havebeen and where we are heading - as individuals,as professionals and as a Society. We have muchto be thankful for in our professional lives, and Ihope you will take the time to reflect upon yourpersonalachieve-ments,contribu-tions, goalsand ideals.I wish youand yourfamilies agreat holi-day seasonand NewYear andlook for-ward toworkingwith you inthe year2000.

IncomingBoard(left toright):RogerRimmer,VikramBisht,GeorgeLazarovits,LoneBuchwaldt,ZamirPunja,Tim Paulitz,PeterSholberg,GregBoland,and TonySturz

CPS-SCP News 43 (3) - 58

Les Présidentsde SCP/CPS(left to right):Robin Morrall (1994),Zamir Punja (2000),Verna Higgins (1990),George Lazarovits (1999),Blair MacNeil (1968),Ron Howard (1998),Don Harder (1997)

Meilleurs des Présidentsde SCP/CPS(left to right):

Chuji Hiruki (1991),Wally Sackston (1961),

Andy Tekauz (1995)

Une autre des Présidents de SCP/CPS (right):Michèle Heath (1996). She is the 1999 recipientof the Award for Outstanding Research.Also pictured: David Kaminski (newslettereditor) and Miriam & George Lazarovits


Beyond the words Au-delà des mots

A translation service for your technical and scientific documentsspecifically in the field of biological sciencesUn service de traduction pour vos documents techniques etscientifiques dans le domaine des sciences biologiques

Les Traductions scientifiques PaRi

Jean-Guy Parent, Ph.D. Claude Richard, Ph.D.

1906, rue Notre-Dame, L’Ancienne-Lorette (Québec) G2E 3C9418-656-0050 418-872-6025 Fax : 418-656-6750 Internet : [email protected]

CALL FOR NOMINATIONS: 2000 CPS AWARDS

The CPS Awards represent an importantmeans of acknowledging the contributionsof our members to our society, to the sci-ence of plant pathology and to the commu-nity in which we live. Please take time toconsider and discuss with your CPS col-leagues worthy candidates for the awardslisted below. A list of previous recipients ofthese awards is displayed on page iv of theMembership Directory.

Awards Committee members: Luc Couture(Chair), Sue Boyetchko, Verna Higgins, RonKnox and Khalid Rashid.

1. Honorary Member

The nominee can be any person who has ren-dered eminent service to plant pathology andshall normally not be a member of the Soci-ety.

2. Fellow

Nominees shall be regular members of theSociety who have rendered outstanding serv-ice to the Society and to the profession ofplant pathology.

3. Award for Outstanding Research

This award is intended to recognize outstand-ing research in plant pathology in Canada.As the Society’s most prestigious award, con-sideration is given to research involving newconcepts, the discovery of new phenomena,or principles in plant pathology or novel ap-

plication of existing principles.

4. Gordon J. Green Outstanding YoungScientist Award

The award is intended to recognize the con-tribution of a junior scientist, judged to havehad a major impact on plant pathology inCanada. Nominees for this award must beunder 45 years of age throughout the calen-dar year in which the award is both an-nounced and made. Nominees need not bemembers of the Society, nor need they bedomiciled in Canada. Recipients shall bejudged to have made an outstanding contri-bution to plant pathology in Canada on thebasis, not only of demonstrated competence,but also of one or more of the following spe-cial criteria:

1) superior research accomplishment, ei-ther as a single contribution or as a series ofassociated endeavours, in plant pathology orin a related field,

2) meritorious contribution to plant pa-thology scholarship or literature, whether ornot this is based upon the recipient’s ownoriginal research, and whether or not it bebased upon predominantly Canadian mate-rial,

3) unusually valuable practical applica-tion of scientific or technological expertise,and

4) significant leadership in plant pathol-ogy.


5. Graduate Student Travel Award

This is a new award initiated by the currentboard in 1999. The purpose of this award isto provide reimbursement to selected gradu-ate students to attend the Annual Meetingof the CPS.

Instructions

If you wish to nominate someone for theGraduate Student Travel Award, please readthe terms of reference for this award [nextitem] in this issue of CPS-SCP News. If youwish to nominate someone for any otheraward, please send me 5 copies of:

1) a short letter of nomination indicatingwhy this candidate should be considered forthe award,

2) a citation prepared according to thestyle of previously published citations in theCanadian Journal of Plant Pathology, and

3) a recent curriculum vitae of the nomi-nee before March 15, 2000 deadline. If youdo not receive confirmation that I have re-ceived your material, please contact me im-mediately.

Reminder

As to the Dr. and Mrs. D.L. Bailey Award, itceased to exist in 1999 according to CPS by-laws. Money in the Bailey award fund hasbeen assigned to the Best Student Presen-tation Awards. Finally a notice for registra-tion to the contest for the Best Student Pres-entation Awards will be posted in the Marchissue of CPS-SCP News.

Dr. Luc CoutureChair, CPS Awards Committee

Soils and CropsResearch and Development CentreAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada2560 Hochelaga BoulevardSainte-Foy, Quebec G1V 2J3

Phone: (418) 657-7985, ext. 221FAX: (418) 648-2402Email: [email protected]

Graduate Student Travel Award -Terms of ReferenceCanadian Phytopathological Society

Purpose

To provide financial reimbursement to se-lected graduate students to attend the An-nual Meeting of the CPS.

Guidelines

1. There shall be 2 travel awards given an-nually by the CPS, each for a value of $300per student.

2. Applications for awards should be rankedby the Awards Committee of CPS, and a rec-ommendation made to the President of CPSno later than 8 weeks prior to the meeting.

3. The financial reimbursement shall beused to offset travel, accommodation, regis-tration, or other related meeting costs.

4. The travel award applications can bemade from any postsecondary institution (inCanada or elsewhere) and the student neednot be a member of CPS.

Application procedure

1. The student shall provide 5 copies of theapplication (an original and 4 photocopies)and forward them to the Chair of the CPSAwards Committee by March 1 of the year ofthe CPS annual meeting.

2. The student must be registered in a Mas-ter’s level or PhD degree program at the timeof application and undertake a researchproject in the area of plant pathology.

3. The application must include:

a) A copy of the abstract of the presentationto be published in the Canadian Journal ofPlant Pathology.

b) A one-page statement from the studentoutlining the significance of the research tobe presented and its scientific, economicand/or societal implications.

c) A letter of support from the senior super-visor outlining the student’s research andacademic abilities and other evidence ofscholarship.


d) A brief (2-page) resume of the student’sbackground and relevant experience.

e) Academic transcripts inclusive of under-graduate and graduate training (one origi-nal copy should be attached, if available).

Criteria for selection

Applications will be ranked based on scho-lastic performance, significance of the re-search conducted, and other evidence ofcontributions to the field of plant pathology.Applicants will be notified of the outcome ofthe committee’s deliberations 6 weeks priorto the annual meeting. The successful stu-dents will be presented with a cheque at theCPS Banquet. All travel and other arrange-ments are the responsibility of the student.

Joint Meeting of the CanadianPhytopathological Society and

the Pacific Division of the AmericanPhytopathological Society

“Working Together for Healthier Plants”June 18 - 21, 2000

Victoria Conference Centre,Victoria, BC, Canada

http://www.uvcs.uvic.ca/conf/cps_aps

The Organizing Committee invites abstractsfor oral and poster presentations.Abstract Submission Deadline with AbstractFee(s): February 29, 2000Author Registration Deadline: April 17, 2000

Submission, Program, Travel, Accommo-dation, and Registration information will

be posted at the website

Please refer there for updated informationor contact Pat McGuire at ConferenceManagement, University of VictoriaEmail: [email protected]

Technical Program: Simon ShamounEmail: [email protected]

Sponsors and Exhibits: Zamir PunjaEmail: [email protected]

Join us in Victoria, one of the most livablecities in the world. Bring along your familyto experience our westcoast hospitality, lushnatural surroundings and diverse outdoorand recreational activities.

http://www.travel.bc.ca


Grande réussite pour le “First InternationalPowdery Mildew Conference”

La Première Conférence Internationale sur leBlanc (First International Powdery Mildew Con-ference) s’est tenue à Avignon, France, du 29 aoûtau 2 septembre 1999. Le comité organisateur,présidé par R. R. Bélanger, était composé de W.R.Bushnell, Etats-Unis, T. Carver, Pays de Galles,A.J. Dik, Pays-Bas, H. Kunoh, Japon, P. Nicot,France et A. Schmitt, Allemagne. P. Nicot étaitégalement responsable des activités locales et letout s’est déroulé au Centre des Congrès dumagnifique Palais des Papes. La conférence aatteint ses limites d’accueil avec une participa-tion de 200 délégués représentant plus de 20 paysdifférents.

Le programme comportait sept sessions distinctesqui couvraient les plus récents développementsscientifiques dans l’un des sujets suivants: lechampignon, la plante, épidémiologie et méthodesde lutte. Chaque session était introduite par unconférencier invité et complétée par desprésentations orales sélectionnées parmi lesrésumés soumis. W. R. Bushnell a ouvert laconférence avec un séminaire relatant la recher-che passée et présente sur le blanc. Pour lessessions de posters, plus de 100 travaux de re-cherche étaient présentés. Finalement, plusieurspériodes de discussion avaient été prévues auprogramme pour permettre rencontres etéchanges entre tous les participants.

Au niveau social, les congressistes ont eu droit àdes activités uniques. Suivant la session dumercredi matin, le tout a commencé par une visiteet un lunch au Pont de Gard près de Nîmes, qui aété suivi par une dégustation de vins dans lesdomaines réputés de Châteauneuf-du–Pape ets’est terminé par un banquet dans le village deChâteauneuf-du-Pape agrémenté de dansestypiquement provençales. Pour la soirée de mardi,on avait organisé un souper-croisière sur le Rhônequi nous permettait presque de ‘danser’ sur lePont d’Avignon.

Dans le cadre de la session de clôture, les par-ticipants ont unanimement reconnu que laconférence avait non seulement répondu à unbesoin en recherche mais qu’elle devrait servirde point de lancement pour des rencontresrécurrentes sur le sujet. A cet égard, il sembleque la deuxième conférence internationale sur leblanc aura lieu en Californie. Entretemps, laconférence ayant fait ressortir le manque d’unlivre récent sur le blanc, APS Press a offert des’associer à une publication sur le sujet: ce livre,qui sera édité par Bélanger, Dik & Bushnelldevrait paraître vers la fin de l’an 2000.

Success for the First InternationalPowdery Mildew Conference

The First International Powdery Mildew Confer-ence was held in Avignon, France from August29 thru Sept 2 1999. The OrganisingCommmittee, chaired by Richard R. Bélanger, wascomprised of W.R. Bushnell, USA, T. Carver,Wales, A.J. Dik, The Netherlands, H. Kunoh, Ja-pan, P. Nicot, France and A. Schmitt, Germany.P. Nicot was also in charge of local arrangementsand all the activities took place in the CongressCentre of the magnificent and historic Palace ofThe Popes. The Congress Centre facilities werefully saturated as over 200 delegates from morethan 20 different countries attended the meet-ing.

The conference was divided into seven differentsessions that covered the latest research devel-opments in one of the four main topics: the fun-gus, the plant, epidemiology, and control. Eachsession was opened by a keynote address froman expert in the field and followed by oral pres-entations from the contributed papers. W.R.Bushnell gave the opening keynote address. Inaddition, over 100 papers were submitted for theposter session. The program allowed several dis-cussion and poster periods so that old and newcolleagues could exchange notes and ideas ontheir favorite subject, powdery mildew.

On the social front, participants were treated toa unique tour on Wednesday afternoon. It startedwith a lunch at Le Pont de Gard and was fol-lowed by wine tasting in some of the world fa-mous estates of Chateauneuf-du-Pape and a ban-quet in the village of Chateauneuf-du-Pape withsome typically Provençal entertainment. On Tues-day night, a dinner cruise on the Rhône was onthe program with a close-up view of the renownedPont d’Avignon.

There was a general concensus among the par-ticipants that the conference had not only filled avoid in plant pathology research but should bethe starting point of recurrent conferences onpowdery mildew. California has been mentionedas the possible site for the Second InternationalPowdery Mildew Conference. In the meantime, theconference has highlighted the need for a text-book on powdery mildews: this book, edited byBélanger, Dik & Bushnell, will be published byAPS Press and should be released toward the endof 2000.


Contact the Editor

E-mail: [email protected]: (306) 934-1088

FAX: (306) 652-2708

702 Lansdowne Ave.Saskatoon, SK S7N 1E5

PeopleRobin Morrall travelled to Uppsala, Swedenin mid September to act as “opponent” forthe Ph.D. thesis defence of Eva Twengstromat the Swedish University of AgriculturalSciences. The thesis was about epidemiol-ogy and forecasting of sclerotinia stem rot ofoilseed rape. Thus, it was right up Robin’salley, particularly since most oilseed rape incentral Sweden is spring-sown, as in west-ern Canada.

The role of the opponent in a Swedish de-fence is an interesting one for people accus-tomed to the north American system. At thepublic defence the opponent makes the ini-tial presentation and is required to (a)present the background to the thesis topicin layperson’s terms and (b) highlight themain findings of the student’s thesis work.Fortunately (c) they also may (perhaps must)speak in English! Subsequently, the oppo-nent has up to two hours to question thecandidate. All this sounds like hard workand it is. Furthermore, the day before thethesis defence Robin presented a seminaron production and diseases of pulse cropsin western Canada. However, before any-one feels sorry for recycled retirees, pleaseread on.

The thesis defence went well, as did the cel-ebratory lunch afterwards, and the even-more-celebratory dinner party in the evening,which took place on a lake cruise boat. Hap-pily, Robin’s wife Barb was able to partici-pate in all the above events (Heaven knowswhy she wanted to listen to the seminar!) aswell as a 10-day holiday afterwards in Swe-den, Norway and Britain. One highlight ofthis holiday was the day after the defence,which, fortuitously, was the annual musicalculture night in Uppsala. Robin and Barbhad been told that this was the only night ofthe year when one could dance between thestacks in the Uppsala public library to thestrains of a big band playing on the mainfloor. They were not disappointed. The bandwas excellent and the hardwood floor verygood; just the space between the stacks wasa little restrictive.

You may be wondering when and if this issuewould ever arrive. I like to think the newsletter isanticipated every quarter with bated breath. DidKaminski’s computer succumb to the so-calledmillennium bug? No, in fact it was Kaminski whosuccumbed to a much deadlier virus you may knowas procrastination. This I attribute to anxiety onthe eve of a turning point much bigger, for me, thanthe less-than-apocalyptic Y2K.

It’s the Y4O bug. Yes, middle age and all thatentails is upon me. “Why so melodramatic andmorose” you ask “It’s a threshold many are happyto get to and, as they say, ‘life goes on’.” The truthis that it’s not an age I expected to experience. Frommy early teens, I had a strong premonition that Iwould not have a long life, not likely see 30.

So much like the pundits and computer nerds whopredicted the end of life as we know in it in a grandcomputer-mediated melt-down, I have to admit Iwas wrong. I have gone on to raise a family,embark on a career, pay taxes, contribute tosociety.

Have you any advice for a man on the verge ofmid-life? Redouble my efforts? Try harder? Worksmarter? Eschew obfuscation? Now there’s anidea - become an irascible plain speaker! I nowhave licence. To quote a toothless lion in an ancientdental health commercial, “Cut the guff mouse. . .and chew!”

If you’re looking for advice on where to turn first inthis issue (as though this isn’t the last item youread in the News), I direct you to a thoughtprovoking treatise on how women have found theirway into plant pathology and the obstacles theyhave faced in doing so. Are you a closet chauvinist?Accept women as equals but chafe at the idea ofequal opportunity or having a female superior?

Or, if you’re feeling as though Canadian initiativedoes not cut it on the world stage, consider theprecedent setting Powdery Mildew Conferencesparked by some of your Canadian colleagues.

Happy reading. See you in March. - David (Ed.)


The BC regional group of the Canadian Phy-topathological Society had its annual meet-ing at the Pacific Agri-Food Research Centre(PARC) of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada(AAFC) in Summerland, BC, on October 19and 20, 1999. The BC regional group of CPShas been meeting annually since 1972. Thiswas the 28th annual meeting and I apologizefor some confusion since I reported last year’smeeting as being the 26th annual meetingwhen it was in fact the 27th.

Close to 50 people attended the meeting or-ganized by Guus Bakkeren (PARC). Themeeting was held immediately after the West-ern Forum on Pest Management, which al-lowed scientists from Alberta, Saskatchewanand Manitoba to attend. We thank theseparticipants for their attendance and theirvaluable input at our regional meeting.

The participants were given a welcome pres-entation by Peter Burnett (AAFC, Lethbridge,AB). Peter was the Acting Director at PARCwhile Gordon Neish was away. A total of 13papers were presented including the tradi-tional and entertaining annual report fromthe BCMAF plant diagnostic laboratory(Abbotsford, BC). Guus Bakkeren managedto get three sponsors for this meeting: AgroPacific Industries Limited (Abbotsford, BC),BC Fruit Growers’ Association (Kelowna, BC),and Dow Agroscience Canada Inc. (Calgary,AB). Their contributions facilitated the or-ganization of a mini-symposium on rustsentitled “What can we learn from well-stud-ied pathosystems”. Don Harder (AAFC, Win-nipeg, MN) gave a presentation entitled“Bountiful harvests - a tribute to a centurywith the rusts in Canada”, a historical over-view of an area of plant pathology in whichCanadians have excelled. This was followedby a presentation by Roland Line (USDA-ARS, Pullman, WA) entitled “Integrated con-trol of rusts and other diseases of wheat andbarley”. It was fascinating and humbling tosee the phenomenal amount of scientificwork and progress in management that hasbeen done in North America for thesepathosystems.

Participants became sensory evaluators atthe banquet by trying a wide range of BCwines. The keynote speaker was Dick Ham-ilton who broadened our horizons with hispresentation entitled “Plant pathologists andglobal food security”. With his scientificknowledge in biotechnology and experienceas president of the International Society forPlant Pathology, Dick was able to give us avery unique perspective on our global roleas plant pathologists. Very lively exchangesand discussions followed his presentation.Related to this, Dick also informed us of awebsite where emerging plant diseases arediscussed. The address is (http://w w w . h e a l t h n e t . o r g / p r o g r a m s /promed.html).

The winners of the 1999 competition for BestStudent Papers were Brad Hoffman from thelaboratory of Colette Breuil (UBC) for hispaper entitled “A comparison of homologoussubtilases in sapstaining fungi”, andCaroline Jackson, a student of Jim Rahe(SFU) working in the laboratory of AndréLévesque (PARC), for her paper entitled“Pythium jasmonium, a new species withornamented oogonia isolated fromjasmonate-deficient Arabidopsis mutant”.They each received a cash prize and a oneyear CPS membership.

During the business meeting the winners ofthe 1999 John Yorston award were an-nounced. They were Dawn Higginson (UBC)and Peter Isaacson (SFU). Eric Littley, PlantHealth Consulting, Kamloops, was electedas BC’s CPS representative, replacing AndréLévesque after 3 years of service. Ken Ngwas appointed as the industry rep for BC.

The BC members of CPS will meet next yearin Victoria at the national CPS meeting tobe held jointly with the APS Pacific Divisionmeeting, June 18-21, 2000. The websiteaddress is (http://www.uvcs.uvic.ca/conf/cps_aps/). The 30th annual BC regionalmeeting of the CPS, to be held in October,2001, will be organized by Bob Copeman(UBC).

Submitted by C.A. Lévesque, B.C. rep 1997/99.

Regional Report


Book Review: Modern Fungicidesand Antifungal Compounds IIby George Lazarovits

My job, when I started working at the Lon-don Research Institute, was to investigatethe mode of action of systemic fungicides.Thus, I looked forward to catching up on thetopics covered in the book “ModernFungicides and Antifungal Compounds II”Edited by H. Lyr, P.E. Russell , H.W. Dehneand H.D. Sisler and published by Intercept,Andover, UK (www.intercept.co.uk). Thepapers in this book were presented at the12th International Reinhardsbrunn Sympo-sium held in 1998 in Thuringia, Germany.The book has 505 pages, comprising 62 pa-pers, in 7 sections. The work is mostly fromEurope, although there are papers from theUS, Japan, Israel, and Russia. The book hassome excellent articles but suffers from theinclusion of many papers that contributeonly marginally to our knowledge aboutmodern fungicides. Many such articles couldhave been reduced to one or two pages andseveral could have been omitted altogether.This would have allowed for expansion ofthose papers that report on more recent andrelevant research. The organization of thebook could have been improved by more ju-dicious placement of related articles withina section.

Section one deals with “Current status anddevelopment of fungicide science” and is oneof the most informative. Topics covered in-clude registration, the value of fungicides inglobal plant protection, target based fungi-cide discovery, and the use of molecular ge-netics in fungicide research. Section two on“Mode of action of fungicides” has many pa-pers which do not deal with mechanisms atall. One of the better articles covers the po-tential role of the ATP binding cassette (ABC)transporters in pathogenicity and fungicideresistance of fungi with a wide host spec-trum, such as Botrytis. We have known fora long time that fungicides can also havepotent activity on plant physiology and sec-tion three discusses such aspects. Articlesof note cover the impact of strobilurins onplant vigour and whether plant derived

polyamines could replace polyamines infungi when blocked by chemical inhibitorsthat specifically block this pathway. Sec-tion four examines integrated control of plantdiseases. The paper dealing with a four yeartrial to control early and late blight in Israelipotato production is an excellent case studyof efforts needed to manage two very differ-ent organisms with reduced applications ofchemicals. An article on managing diseaseand fungicide resistance in pome fruit patho-gens in Belgium is also well done. The sec-tion on management of fungicide resistancehas as an impressive report on the use ofgenetic tags to screen for Benomyl resist-ance. Chemicals that work by induced re-sistance (IR) are now being marketed andremain an intriguing topic in plant protec-tion. While there are several interesting re-ports presented on inducing agents, such asphosphate and AlCl

3, as well as on the use

of parsley cells for screening of IR inducingchemicals, the chapter does not do justiceto this area of work. The last section dealswith natural products and biological controlagents, an area which is certainly also bet-ter covered in other books and reviews. Top-ics covered include the fungicidal activity ofproducts such as gramicidin S andpyrrolnitrin derived from bacteria, volatileoils such as clove extract, and Trichodermapreparations.

Overall, I had hoped for more from this bookbecause it could, with some planning, havebecome a vital reference source for informa-tion about new chemicals and fungicide tech-nology. I was particularly surprised at theomission of papers on the most promisingdevelopment of the century in plant protec-tion and that is incorporation into plants ofnovel genes that code for fungicidal prod-ucts, such as antifungal peptides. This bookdoes have important fungicide science andwill have uses as a reference source. It mayalso be a reflection of the loss of effort in thedevelopment of chemical protectants thathas been ongoing for the last two decades.


Plum Pox Potyvirus found inPennsylvania

On October 20, 1999, the US Department ofAgriculture and Pennsylvania Department ofAgriculture announced the discovery of theD-strain of plum pox potyvirus (PPV) onpeaches grown in an orchard in AdamsCounty, Pennsylvania. This is the first NorthAmerican report of PPV. As a result, theCanadian Food Inspection Agency has sus-pended all import permits for Prunus plantmaterial (including nursery trees, scionwoodand rootstocks) with the exception of cherryfrom the United States. The D-strain of PPVis not known to affect cherry.

Surveys and testing of Prunus trees in or-chards in the surrounding area have beenundertaken by the US Animal and PlantHealth Inspection Service (APHIS) and thePennsylvania Department of Agriculture(PDA). The PDA has since established aquarantine zone, prohibiting the movementof Prunus fruit stock and budwood out of theinfested area, and commenced traceback andtraceforward work on infected trees.

Plum pox is generally considered one of themost serious diseases of plums, apricots andpeaches and is of great economic importancein many European countries. Sweet andsour cherries are affected by some strains.Fruit quality, size and quantity are adverselyaffected, often necessitating removal of in-fected trees. Yield losses and overall eco-nomic losses have been catastrophic to plumand peach growers in large geographic ar-eas of the affected countries. In these areasall affected trees have been removed by thegrowers and replaced with resistant varie-ties or with other crops.

The virus was first reported in Bulgaria, butis now known to occur in practically all Eu-ropean and Mediterranean countries. In thecentral and eastern European countries, PPVspread relatively early and levels of infectionare generally high. In the Mediterraneancountries, PPV is a more recent event andfurther spread is possible. In the northernand western countries, levels of PPV are veryuneven and outbreaks are sporadic and usu-

ally localized. It also occurs in Chile, havingfirst been reported in 1992.

The main source of the virus is infected trees.From these, PPV is transmitted either bygrafting or by aphids in a non-persistent,stylet-borne manner to uninfected hosts.Furthermore, the virus can survive in theroots of rogued infected trees and spreadfrom there by natural root grafting.

Symptoms may appear on leaves or fruits ofinfected trees, and are particularly evidenton leaves in spring when chlorotic spots,bands or rings, vein clearing and even leafdeformation is evident. Infected fruits showchlorotic spots or rings, and diseased plumsand apricots are deformed with internalbrowning of the flesh and pale rings or spotson the stones. Symptoms are highly vari-able.

Plum pox has proven to be difficult to con-trol in Europe. Once introduced the viruscan spread and become quickly entrenchedin the native vegetation. Control of the vi-rus is primarily removal of infected trees.There is no anti-virus treatment that can beapplied to infected trees or orchards.

The use of disease-free propagative materialat all times is fundamental to preventingintroduction to new areas. Measures to re-duce the importance of plum pox in areaswhere it is present include the use of dis-ease-free planting stock when planting neworchards or replenishing existing ones, re-moval of infected trees (including their roots),use of tolerant or less susceptible species orcultivars where possible, proper spacing oftrees to reduce the rate of spread, control ofaphids to slow spread and weed control (in-cluding wild Prunus species) to eliminatereservoirs of either aphids or PPV.

A task force with representatives from theCFIA, provincial ministries and producergroups across Canada has been formed withthe objective of determining the best courseof action for Canada in light of reports of thevirus in the US. There is a plum pox link tomore information on the CFIA home page atwww.cfia-acia.agr.ca.


Photos of PPV-infected plums & symptoms onleaves courtesy of J.McDonald, Centre for PlantQuarantine Pests, CFIA, Nepean, ON.

Fusarium Workshop: The worstdisease threat to cereal crops in50 yearsWinnipeg, Man., Dec. 6, 1999: It’s the worstdisease threat to Canadian cereal crops sincerust in the 1950s and a “time bomb” thatcould get worse before it gets better. That’sthe message from more than 25 speakers atthe recent Canadian Workshop on FusariumHead Blight (FHB)/Colloque Canadien surla Fusariose.

The numbers are staggering says Dr. JimBole, Director of Agriculture and Agri-FoodCanada’s (AAFC) Cereal Research Centre inWinnipeg. In recent years Canada’s yieldlosses to FHB have totaled above $500 mil-lion. Quality losses resulting in downgrad-ing have totaled another $400 million inWestern Canada alone. Factor in the millionslost by farmers and the industry to managethe disease, and the total rises to well over$1 billion.

FHB is a regular problem in the Maritimes,Quebec and Ontario and in recent years in-cidence has increased dramatically in Mani-toba and eastern Saskatchewan, threaten-ing the western prairies. The more than 200researchers, grain producers, processors,marketers and consumers attending theWorkshop broke into discussion groups andprovided recommendations for actions.

In an overview of the emerging issues, Dr.Andre Comeau of the AAFC Ste. Foy Re-search Centre, Quebec summed up the ur-gency of the problem and the challenges ofthe research effort. “We are on a time bombwith respect to Fusarium,” he says. “Thegenetic variability in Fusarium is very dan-gerous, and the problem could get worse.”

From a scientific perspective, the disease isunusually complex, Comeau says. There aremany questions regarding how it occurs andhow it can be stopped. “It’s going to takecoordination, national and international,sharing of ideas and methods, andprioritization of the scientific research gaps.We have to bridge those research gaps.”


Though there has been some progress inwheat breeding - wheat varieties with im-proved FHB resistance are expected begin-ning in 2001 - researchers need to find awider and more diverse base of resistance toprovide a long-term defense. In addition, theindustry lacks fundamental informationabout the epidemiology of the most seriousfusarium pathogen, F. graminearum, and themycotoxin it produces.

Canadian researchers observed that somehelp may come from the United States. Ahandful of U.S. scientists were in attendance,including Dr. Bob Stack of North DakotaState University, who delivered an overviewof the FHB situation south of the border,where the disease took hold long before itbecame a major issue in Canada.

“Let’s make sure we ask the Americans sowe don’t simply redo what they’ve alreadydone, in terms of making breeding crossesand so on,” cautioned Canadian barleybreeder Dr. Brian Rossnagel of the Univer-sity of Saskatchewan. “We’ve always had avery good relationship with people in theAmerican barley group . . . and they’re verywilling to share information with us.”

The scientific and technical concerns high-lighted at the meeting were bolstered by con-cerns from farmer and consumer representa-tives. Producer representative DennisGarlick, of Roland, Man., outlined the yieldand quality losses and other “lost opportu-nity” costs that farmers are facing due toFHB, including restricted rotations, limitedvarieties to choose from and limited market-ing opportunities. Most top grades and mar-kets for wheat and barley have a “low or zerotolerance” for the FHB mycotoxin.

Farmers would benefit from improved fore-casting and better information on how cropvarieties respond to FHB, Garlick says. “Thecurrent system is not specific enough. Weneed some kind of an early warning system.”

Daryl Embury of the Canadian Food Inspec-tion Agency, reporting comments of partici-pants interested in consumer issues, empha-sized the need for the grain industry to beaccountable to the public on food safety con-

cerns, such as those raised by the presenceof FHB-produced mycotoxin in the grainsupply. While there may be no currentrisk to consumers, the industry has a re-sponsibility to keep the public informed ofthe FHB situation, he says. “The public, thepeople who buy the product, have a right toknow what’s going on. Clearly an educationeffort is needed to bring these people up tospeed.” The Workshop concluded withagreement to form a steering committee toaddress the Fusarium problem.

********************************************************

Fusarium Workshop: Geneticprogress is best defense forCanadian grain industryWinnipeg, Man., Dec. 6, 1999: While farm-ers fight Fusarium head blight (FHB) in grainfields across Canada, the long-term winnerof the battle will be decided in the labora-tory, according to speakers at the recentCanadian Workshop on Fusarium HeadBlight/Colloque Canadien sur la Fusariosein Winnipeg.

Crop breeding research to develop improvedcereal varieties, backed by supporting re-search in several disciplines, offers the bestlong-term hope to turn the tide on FHB,which has already cost the Canadian grainindustry an estimated $1 billion.

That was the view emphasized by more than25 speakers at the workshop, largely fromthe scientific community, who outlined thechallenges ahead. The Workshop was organ-ized by the Canadian Agri-Food ResearchCouncil (CARC) to provide a forum for infor-mation exchange and ongoing collaboration.Along with scientists, the more than 200participants included grain producers, proc-essors, other industry, regulators, market-ers and consumer representatives.

FHB, a fungal disease that attacks Canada’smajor grain crops, including wheat, barley,corn and oat, reduces yields and quality, andmay make the grain difficult to market. Forplant breeders, the challenge is identifyinggenes with resistance to FHB and breeding


that resistance into new cereal varieties.

In cereals, the most promising effort has beenin wheat, where breeders have developedseveral potential varieties with FHB resist-ance. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s(AAFC) Cereal Research Centre in Winnipeghas a Canada Prairie Spring line that couldbe registered by 2001, followed by a CanadaWestern Red Spring in 2002 and a CanadaWestern Extra Strong in 2003. However, theFHB resistance identified in wheat is largelybased on one genetic source, which increasesthe chances it may be overcome by the dis-ease within several years.

An additional problem is that the resistancewheat breeders are using comes from Chi-nese wheat material poorly adapted toCanada, says Dr. Fred Townley-Smith of theCereal Research Centre. “The Chinese sourcehas lots of problems with agronomy, qualityand other disease resistance,” he says. Thedifficulty of transferring FHB resistance fromthat poor material is further increased be-cause the resistance is based on severalgenes. However, breeders will get help fromrecent progress in molecular genetics. Re-searchers led by Dr. Doug Procunier and Dr.Jeannie Gilbert at the Cereal Research Cen-tre have developed DNA markers that makeit easier to identify and transfer FHB resist-ance in breeding programs.

In barley, the breeding effort toward resist-ance started later and is much further be-hind. So far, researchers have been unableto find good sources of FHB resistance withinbarley species, and, as in wheat, the limitedresistance in barley is complex, says barleybreeder Dr. Bill Legge of the AAFC BrandonResearch Centre.

The good news is that several current barleyvarieties appear less susceptible to the dis-ease, most notably the newer two-row malttypes such as AC Metcalfe, CDC Kendall andCDC Stratus. However, “less susceptible” isa far cry from resistant, says Legge. “It willtake a long time to develop highly-resistantvarieties. But we are making progress.”

The outlook is brighter for corn, says breederDr. Lana Reid of AAFC’s Eastern Cereal and

Oilseed Research Centre, Ottawa. Reid andcolleagues have identified several sources ofvery good FHB resistance in corn, which theyhave used to develop potential new varie-ties. A challenge is that corn is affected byseveral Fusarium species, some of whichcause infection through the corn silk andothers which directly attack the kernel. “It’stough to get resistance to multiple species,”says Reid.

In oat there is currently no breeding effortin Canada, but that could change if FHBbecomes a persistent problem for the crop.“We know that Fusarium head blight canaffect oat, but there’s not much work donein North America,” says pathologist Dr. BrentMcCallum of the Cereal Research Centre.“There appear to be varietal differences sobreeding for improved resistance may bepossible.”

All researchers in breeding expect to benefitfrom further advances in molecular genet-ics and other research areas. The more theyunderstand about FHB, the easier it will beto identify resistance and develop success-ful breeding strategies. Such advances mayalso make genetic transformation a viableoption for improving FHB resistance, butresearchers at the workshop expressed re-luctance to venture into that area, given theclimate of market concern. The Workshopended with the formation of a steering com-mittee to coordinate research and informa-tion on Fusarium.

For more information contact:

Dr. Andy Tekauz, Workshop Co-chair

Cereal Research Centre,

Phone: (204) 983-5533

Fax: (204) 983-4604

Email: [email protected]

Acknowledgement: Communications sponsored jointlyby Western Grains Research F o u n d a t i o n ,Meristem Information Resources and the CanadianWorkshop on Fusarium Head Blight/ColloqueCanadien sur la Fusariose.


Gender Discrimination in PlantPathology – Perception vs. Realityby Sue Boyetchko and Karen Bailey

Is there equality for women in plant pathol-ogy? While pondering this question, elo-quently posed to us by a CPS roving reporter,our initial reaction (perception) was thatthere are no real differences in our scientificdiscipline. We are not sexist, after all. How-ever, MIT president, Charles M. Vest, recentlywrote: “I have always believed that contem-porary gender discrimination within univer-sities is part reality and part perception . . .but I now understand that reality is by farthe greater part of the balance.” His com-ments were based on a study initiated at theSchool of Science at MIT to resolve a dis-pute regarding charges of inequity towardsfemale professors (Boston Globe, March 21,1999). So, gender issues do occur in somescience disciplines. That made us wonderabout what happens in our own backyard.Do women in plant pathology have an easieror harder time of attaining success and rec-ognition in science?

Our initial premise (hypothesis) was that weare all individuals and experiences differ forboth men and women. Yet, women scientistsmust often make choices in their personallives that will affect their career choices. Totest our hypothesis, we approached ourwomen colleagues throughout North Americaand posed precise questions to determinehow they got into biological sciences andplant pathology. Are women in plant pathol-ogy a privileged group or downtrodden bygender issues? We approached our surveyand quest for answers in a scientific man-ner. If we have 25 replicated statisticallysignificant experiments, we should be ableto reach a definitive answer to our hypoth-esis . . . isn’t that how our research turnsout anyway? The following summarizes ourfindings, much of which is anecdotal, butsome facts and figures have been gatheredand presented. Phrases in italics indicatespecific comments made by women respond-ing to our survey.

The reality is that women, like men, are di-

verse in their natures and interests. Whenasked about how they chose their currentprofession, the responses were diverse.Some entered plant pathology by accident,while others entered with some forethought.Most of the women agreed that gender hadnothing to do with their choice of a speciali-zation in science. Some knew they wouldbe scientists at a very young age. There wereoften individual professors, most often men,who inspired these women into this area.Our male colleagues have had similar expe-riences.

In the late 1960’s, it was quite unusual tofind women plant pathologists, let alone sci-entists. In those early years, the presence ofa woman in a research environment oftenmade many male colleagues uncomfortable.Despite the presence of several female gradu-ate students in the discipline, few womenpursued careers in science . . . maybe be-cause the majority of mentors for womenwere men. By 1975, the number of womenin tenured faculty positions nationwide (USA)was 18% and by 1995 this number grew to26% (Boston Globe, March 21, 1999). Formany years, encouraging young women toenter into science was a challenge, partlybecause there were few women mentors andpartly because of the old perception that girlsjust don’t like science. Based on the growingnumbers of women in pathology and sciencein general, we are happy to say that this isnot the norm in the 1990’s.

Comments by some male colleagues such as“Don’t you notice how many more womencandidates there are than men for that posi-tion?” have been recently noted. The factthat affirmative action policies encourage thehiring of women candidates, particularlywhen advertisements for jobs in science tar-get women and minorities, fuels the debate.Although this approach attempts to addressthe fact that women are unequally repre-sented in science, most women would notwish to have their merits and qualificationscome into question when [they have been]awarded a position. Perhaps those feelingsexpressed by our male colleagues are par-tially borne out of frustration [in finding] that


ever-elusive permanent position rather thanthe belief that some women were hired be-cause of their gender.

So what about job opportunities and pro-motions? Are they any different for men andwomen? Does it take a great deal more timefor women to be recognized for their contri-butions compared to men? MIT discoveredthat gender issues related to salaries, labo-ratory space, access to funding, and inclu-sion of women in positions of power wereprevalent. Although the discrimination wasoften subtle, it was recognized that inequityat MIT and other research institutions doesexist. As a result, women’s salaries wereincreased an average of 20%. Women atother Canadian universities have also seenmore than one salary adjustment due tomale/female equity evaluations.

In our current environment in Canada, itwould be difficult to find anyone who is notfrustrated to a certain degree about promo-tion prospects. Hardly anyone of either gen-der has been promoted recently. Lack ofrecognition of the contributions and the im-pact that plant pathologists have on agri-culture is an issue for both genders.

So, have women received more or less rec-ognition than men for their professionalstrengths and abilities? Women are per-ceived to have “nurturing” capabilities andoften find themselves mentoring young stu-dents, men and women alike, giving talks toschools and counseling undergraduates andgraduate students. Some women try to do itall, spending considerable time commit-ments on mentorship programs and givingfreely to numerous committees. Has the ad-vancement of women been impeded by notbeing more greedy with their time and se-lecting more opportunistic appointments?

One interesting aspect about women scien-tists is how their interactions with other maleand female colleagues and their leadershipabilities are perceived. Women and menwould probably agree that working relation-ships can be bad or good with both genders.The success or failure of working relationshipsdepends very much on the personalities of theindividuals involved, not their gender. The

women scientists we talked to feel they arerespected for their leadership roles, organ-izing and chairing meetings and involvementin scientific societies. However, many haveencountered individuals, mostly older men inmanagerial positions, who seem to have diffi-culty with the idea of women in positions ofauthority. Unfortunately, it is quite rare tofind a woman in a position of authority wheredecisions about hiring and funding are of-ten made.

According to Dr. Judith Rosner, a manage-ment professor at the University of Califor-nia, gender does matter in managementstyles (Globe and Mail, June 9, 1999). Mentend to define themselves through their job.Male leaders often have a command and con-trol style, while women more often use aninteractive style, preferring to share infor-mation and encourage participation. In 1990,the interactive style was perceived as beingweak and not acting like a man, but 10 yearslater this perception has changed. One styleis not necessarily better than the other, wehave to recognize that they are just differ-ent.

Women often feel that their personal rela-tionships suffer due to career choices. Somemonths ago during a meeting, while takinga break with a female colleague, we askedhow life was treating her. The work wasgreat, and her move to the new job allowedher to be closer to her significant other. Asit turns out, the relationship is no longer,yet the career thrives. We nod; it soundsfamiliar.

Some women perceive that their advance-ment may be a little slower if they take timeout to care for children. Women who choseto have children may have difficulties in jug-gling a demanding career with a family, par-ticularly during the early stages of their ca-reers. Those few female academics who dohave families are either rarely present at theirjob and are not considered to be pulling theirweight compared to others, or they frequentlyhave their children with them at the univer-sity. There are those women who choose totake a short maternity leave in order to mini-mize the impact it has on their careers or


their ability to show productivity [and] toattain a permanent or tenure-track position.The fact that absence from their jobs coulddisrupt the momentum in their researchprograms may be viewed as a lack of com-mitment to career is often not taken lightly.Childbearing years also coincide with theyears when most women get tenure at uni-versities. It was commented that there is agreat deal of stress and guilt associated withbalancing a demanding job and raising afamily, something that the majority of part-ners still do not have to deal with. The guiltlaid on working women by the society theywere raised in is less of a problem today, butit has not changed [that] much over the years.

We have discussed some of the perceptionsof women on their personal lives, but whatare the real demographics? At MIT, a studyshowed that there were 7 women in tenure-track faculty positions and 55 men. Of thewomen in these advanced positions, only halfhad children (no information was availableon the men). At selected Agriculture andAgri-Food Canada research institutes, oursurvey indicated that of all scientific staff (in-cluding plant pathologists), 22% were womenand 78% were men. Of the women employ-ees, 28% were married with children, 44%married with no children, and 28% were notmarried (and no kids). Of the male employ-ees, 96% were married with children, and4% were married with no children.

The reality is that many women take intoconsideration the impact of their chosencareer on their personal lives, present orfuture relationships, and ability to have afamily. These are issues that most men of-ten have little need to contemplate. The ques-tion whether female academics have fami-lies, whether by choice or design, andwhether sacrifices for one over the other inorder to have a successful career plays heav-ily on young women’s minds can be debated.We acknowledge that the women who chooseto have a family consider it to be no sacrificeat all, but we often wonder if there are thoselike ourselves who feel that it is a choice someof us are more hesitant to make. The realityis that there are more women in science (and

pathology) who are either single or marriedwith no kids, than those who have families.When trying to decide about future careergoals, some young women felt they had toconsider the demands of career, family, andpersonal life and wondered if they could haveit all!

At the end of our survey, we are hard-pressedto make any conclusions about whetherwomen have easier, harder, or similar ob-stacles to overcome than our male col-leagues. Most of our results are based onanecdotal evidence, with some facts and fig-ures generated from our somewhat limitedsurvey. However, there are some ratherundeniable truths about what women expe-rience in this chosen profession. Thenumber of women entering the plant pathol-ogy is increasing, women do have differentleadership styles, and their career ambitions,personal goals, and family ties are closelyintertwined. Many recent scientific surveys,such as that conducted at MIT, prove thatgender bias does exist.

For many of us, there is a strong bond be-tween our professional and personal lives.While contemplating these varied and long-term relationships with our male and femalecolleagues in plant pathology, we have con-cluded that within our profession we haveseveral great friendships with men andwomen alike. There is the odd one who welike not at all (both genders). As younggraduate students, we had many more malefriends than female ones (mostly becausethere were fewer women in graduate schoolat that time), many of whom we are in con-tact with to this day. As we get a little older,we realize how special our colleagues andfriends in plant pathology and other scien-tific disciplines are and we would not tradethem for one moment. But it also seemsthat as women [in science] build in number,we begin to appreciate our female colleaguesall the more and gain a greater understand-ing of the choices we’ve made and wherewe’re heading.

So, what was the question again?


THE CANADIAN PHYTOPATHOLOGICAL SOCIETY

Renewal Of Membership

For Year 2000 (January - December)

Name: ................................................................................... Title : ............................................................Department: ................................................. Organization: .........................................................................Street Address: ...............................................................................................................................................Town/City: ...................... State/Province ...................... Postal Code: .................. Country .....................Phone: ....................................... Fax: ........................................ E-mail: ..................................................

2000 MEMBERSHIP (income tax deductible less a Journal fee of $25)Regular & Fellow Membership (Canada) @ Can $75.00 .......................................... ________

(USA) @ Can $85.00 or equivalent US$ …................................... ________ (Outside Canada & USA) @ Can $95.00 or equivalent US$.......... ________

Emeritus (retired & member for >10 years, no cost for all benefits exceptthe journal, or $25.00 to continue to get the journal) ............ ________

Student Membership @ Can $25.00 (sign below) .......................................... ________Sustaining Associate minimum Can $175.00 .................................................... ________

DONATIONS TO CPS (income tax deductible)Award for Outstanding Research (donations from Henry & Yarwood) ............. ________Gordon J. Green Outstanding Young Scientist Award ....................................... ________Best Student Presentation Awards (donations from Vanterpool)......................... ________Dr. and Mrs. D.L. Bailey Award (For an article demonstrating

the benefits of plant pathology to humanity) .................................. ________Glenn Anderson Lectureship (Given at joint CPS-APS meetings) ....................... ________Student Travel Award Fund ............................................................................... ________Other (please specify) ........................................................................................ ________

JOURNAL SUBSCRIPTIONSUse the enclosed form for NRC Journals and place order directly with NRC.Ann. Rev. Phytopathol. (available directly from Ann. Rev. Inc at a discount to members)

TOTAL REMITTED (in Canadian Funds) ............................................................... ________

STUDENT MEMBERSHIP CERTIFICATIONThis certifies that _______________________________ is a full-time student in the Department of

______________________________ at the University of _____________________________________.

Supervisor’s Name ____________________ Signature _______________________.

METHOD OF PAYMENT

- Cheque or Money Order. Please make this payable to The Canadian Phytopathological Society in Canadian funds.

- Credit Card. Charge my __ Visa or __ MasterCard or __ American Express

Card Number _______________________________ Signature ________________________

Expiry Date ____________

Receipts for income tax purposes will be mailed to you later.

Please Return This Statement With Your Payment By Post, FAX or E-mail To:

Dr. Vikram Bisht, Membership Secretary (CPS),Ag-Quest Inc., P.O. Box 144,Minto, MB, R0K 1M0 Canada

FAX: (204) 776-2250 E-mail: [email protected]

president’s message inside this issue · 1. there shall be 2 travel awards given an-nually by the...

Documents