Molecular and Biochemical Studies on Copper Resistance of Plant Pathogenic Bacteria

用硫酸铜和氢氧化铜(Koaid)测定了植物病原菌(5属31种179株)对铜的抗性。细菌在琼脂平板(BACTO马铃薯-葡萄糖琼脂)和水溶液中暴露于这些铜化合物。琼脂法测得的硫酸铜最小抑菌浓度(MIC)是水溶液的100倍。石竹(3 Mm)、洋葱(4.5 mm)、唐菖蒲(4.25 mm)、青枯菌(3.2 mm)、青枯菌(2.25 mm)、青枯草(P.sytingae PV)对硫酸铜具有较高的抗性。Aceris(2.25 mm)，紫丁香P.Acinidiae(3.0 mm)、紫丁香P.syringae PV.Maclicola(2.0 mm)，紫丁香P.syringae PV.番茄(2.75 mm)、托拉索青霉(2.75 mm)、菊花欧文氏菌(Erwinia chrysanhemi PV.)Zeae(2.75 mm)、根癌农杆菌(2.25 mm)和Capmpestris Xanthomonas capmpestris PV.膀胱(1.75毫米)。假单胞菌rRNA组II的成员对铜的高抗性是一致的。每个细菌的…更多m was？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？青霉对？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？Copper的抗性，紫丁香P.syringae PV.Acinidiae，P.syringae pv.Maculicola和P.syringae pv.经鉴定，番茄为质粒源。Gluumae(PPgCul)和P.syringae PV.Acinidiae(PPaCul)是自我传播的。后者的另一种质粒(PPaCu2)是不可传播的。抗铜质粒并不总是与高水平的抗性相关。在P.sytingae PV.例如，光霉菌的中等铜抗性(MIC为0.8 mm)也是由一个质粒决定的，尽管它的性质还没有被详细阐明。这些抗铜质粒有时还带有其他表型特性，例如，紫丁香疫霉质粒对链霉素的抗性。紫丁香菌质粒中的猕猴桃和胞外多糖合成。在大多数被测试的细菌中，对硫酸铜的抗性程度与对氢氧化铜的抗性程度之间存在高度的相关性。而洋葱拟青霉、唐葛兰拟青霉、绿假单胞菌和狭叶假单胞菌则有较大的不同。猕猴桃对这两种铜化合物的行为不同于其他种类。紫丁香P.syringae pv.猕猴桃对氢氧化铜的抗性大于对硫酸铜的抗性。洋葱疫霉、剑叶疫霉和青海疫霉的这一关系正好相反。这些事实表明，植物病原菌对铜的抗性机制不同，即使对硫酸铜具有最高MIC的细菌，对氢氧化铜或杀菌剂的MIC仍在实际喷洒的浓度范围内。因此，植物病原菌对铜化合物的抗性并不一定意味着这些化合物在控制细菌性植物病害方面无效。较少

Copper resistance of plant pathogenic bacteria (5 genus, 31 species and 179 strains) was examined with copper sulfate and copper hydroxide (Kocide). The bacteria were exposed to these copper compounds in the from of agar plate (Bacto potato-dextrose agar) and of aqueous solution. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of copper sulfate obtained by the agar method was one hundred times higher than that by aqueous solution. The high resistance to copper sulfate was observed with P. caryophylli (3mM), P. cepacia (4.5 mM), P. gladioli (4.25 mM), P. glumae (3.2 mM), P. solanacearum (2.25 mM), P. sytingae pv. aceris (2.25 mM), P. syringae pv. actinidiae (3.0 mM), P. syringae pv. maclicola (2.0 mM), P. syringae pv. tomato (2.75 mM), P. tolaasii (2.75 mM), Erwinia chrysanthemi pv. zeae (2.75 mM), Agrobacterium tumefaciens (2.25 mM), and Xanthomonas capmpestris pv. vesicatoria (1.75 mM). The members of rRNA group II of Pseudomonas were consistent in the high copper resistance. Each bacteriu … More m was???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????Copper resistance in P. glumae, P. syringae pv. actinidiae, P. syringae pv. maculicola and P. syringae pv. tomato was confirmed to be plasmid origin. The plasmid of P. glumae (pPgCul) and P. syringae pv. actinidiae (pPaCul) were self-transmissible. Another plasmid of the latter (pPaCu2) was not transmissible. Copper-resistance plasmids did not always associate with high level of resistance. In P. sytingae pv. photiniae, for example, moderate copper resistance (MIC 0.8 mM) was also determined by a plasmid, although its properties have not been elucidated in detail. These copper-resistance plasmids sometimes carried other phenotypic properties e. g., streptomycin resistance in plasmids of P. syringae pv. actinidiae and extracellular polysaccharide synthesis in the plasmid of P. syringae pv. maculicola.In the majority of bacteria tested, high correlation was observed between the degree of resistance to copper sulfate and that to copper hydroxide. However, P. cepacia, P. gladioli, P. glumae and P. sytingae pv. actinidiae were different from others in the behavior to these two copper compounds. In P. syringae pv. actinidiae, the resistance to copper hydroxide was greater than that to copper sulfate. The relationship was just opposite in P. cepacia, P. gladioli and P. glumae. These facts suggested that the diverse mechanisms are involved in copper resistance of plant pathogenic bacteria.Even in bacteria with the highest MIC to copper sulfate, the MIC to copper hydroxide or Kocide was still within the range of concentrations for practical spray. Thus, the resistance to copper copmpounds in plant pathogenic bacteria may not necessarily imply the ineffectiveness of these compounds in control of bacterial plant diseases. Less