Russian wheat aphid biotype RWASA2 causes more vascular disruption than RWASA1 on resistant barley lines

We investigated the comparative effects of the feeding damage caused by two Russian wheat aphid (RWA, Diuraphis noxia Kurdjumov) biotypes, RWASA1 and RWASA2, on leaves of three RWA-resistant barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) lines from the USDA-ARS, and used a South African non-resistant cultivar as control. The relationship between aphid breeding capacity and the structural damage inflicted by the aphids was studied, using wide-field fluorescence and transmission electron microscopy (TEM). Colonies of the two biotypes grew rapidly on all four barley lines during a 10 day feeding exposure but as expected, population size and density were generally lower on the resistant lines than on the non-resistant cultivar. The new South African biotype, RWASA2, bred significantly faster than the original RWASA1 biotype. The feeding and water uptake-related damage sustained by phloem and xylem tissues of the resistant lines suggest that RWASA2 was a more aggressive feeder and caused substantially more cell damage than RWASA1. Examination of wound callose distribution after aphid feeding revealed that high levels of wound callose occurred in non-resistant and in resistant lines. Reduction in aphid population size, as well as ultrastructural damage during feeding by RWA biotypes on resistant lines, signals potential antibiotic and tolerant responses of the barley lines to aphid feeding. We infer from callose distribution and ultrastructural studies, that phloem transport would be substantially reduced in the non-resistant PUMA and to a lesser extent in the resistant STARS lines, which suggests that the STARS lines may be a potential source of RWASA1 and RWASA2-resistance.

Research Highlights► Population density of both RWA biotypes lower on resistant lines than PUMA after 10d infestation. ► RWASA2 bred faster than RWASA1 on the four barley lines. ► Feeding-related cell damage was reduced on resistant lines compared to the non-resistant line. ► RWASA2 caused more extensive cell damage than RWASA1 in the resistant lines. ► Resistant lines show antibiosis and tolerance resistance effects. ► US lines may be of significance to a South African RWA-resistant barley-breeding programme.