1Citrus samples tested for the presence of Phyllosticta citricarpa and Phyllosticta capitalensis between 2002 and 2010. http://sajs.co.za/index.php/SAJS/article/downloadSuppFile/602/3341
Isolation from clean or mixed fungal cultures using the DNeasy® extraction technique Cultures were grown on different fungal growth media, namely, potato dextrose agar, malt extract agar and oats agar. Using a clean, flamed scalpel, a section of fungal growth was removed from pure or mixed culture plates. Fungal growth typical for Phyllosticta was randomly selected taking special care to limit the use of pigmented mycelium. The material was placed in microcentrifuge tubes containing sterile zirconium or silica beads of different sizes and macerated, together with extraction buffer (DNeasy® Plant Mini kit, Qiagen, Cape Town, South Africa), by a bead beater instrument (FastPrep® Instrument, Qbiogene Inc., Montreal, Canada) for 15 s at 4 m/s. DNA extraction was continued using the manufacturer’s standard protocol for DNA isolation. 24Isolation from clean or mixed fungal cultures using Whatman FTATM technology A section of fungal growth was aseptically removed from a culture as described for the DNeasy extraction technique, but oozing pycnidiospores (when present) were preferentially selected. The mycelium and/or spores were smeared onto a FTATM matrix card (Whatman, Maidstone, UK) and extraction was performed using the standard protocol. 25Isolation from green, wilted or dry citrus leaves Symptomless green leaves were treated with a ‘wet-dry’ technique to enrich fungal mycelial mass and stimulate fruiting body formation. The technique included alternate daily wetting and drying of leaves. Leaves were rinsed in tap water to remove excess dirt, after which surfaces were disinfected with sodium hypochlorite (1.5% NaOCl) for 2 min, followed by thorough rinsing with sterile water. The following four steps were repeated for 4–10 consecutive days: (1) leaves were submerged in sterile tap water at 35 °C for 30 min, (2) excess water was removed by draining the leaves on paper towels for 5 min, (3) leaves were placed in plastic bags (250 mm x 380 mm x 20 µm) and incubated at 42 °C for 6 h and (4) the leaves were air dried at room temperature (22 °C – 26 °C) for 17.5 h under fluorescent light in open bags. After 4 days, leaf material with noticeable mycelium colonisation underwent PCR. Optimally wilted leaves were paper brown and leathery with minimal saprophytic fungal growth. By continuing the process, fruiting bodies (mostly pycnidia) were noticed after about 8 days. After 10 days the fruiting bodies were well defined and, depending on the CBS incidence and the success of colonisation, were abundant. In the case of symptomatic green leaves and leaf litter with fruiting bodies, leaves were used directly for DNA extraction without the wet-dry treatment. A selection of 5 to 12 leaves was made per sample, giving preference to leaves with typical black spot lesions, visible pseudothecia or with darker coloured areas. When no pseudothecia or fungal structures were visible on leaf litter, leaves were selected randomly and no more than two punches (2 mm, Unicore punch, Whatman) were removed from each leaf. A maximum of 10–12 leaf pieces was removed from the selected leaves with a 2-mm Unicore punch (Whatman). The plant tissue was placed into a microcentrifuge tube containing extraction buffer AP1, RNase and two sterile 6.35-mm ceramic beads (Qbiogene, Montreal, Canada). The material was ground in a bead beater instrument for 25 s at 5 m/s and DNA was immediately extracted using the Qiagen DNeasy Plant Mini kit standard protocol for DNA isolation. 24Isolation from symptomatic or symptomless fruit Fruit were surface sterilised with sodium hypochlorite (1.5% NaOCl) for 2 min, followed by thorough rinsing in sterile water. A thin layer of the fruit flavedo containing the black spot lesion and the surrounding tissue was removed with a sharp, sterilised scalpel. Exposed tissue was cut into 2 mm x 2 mm squares, removed and placed into 1.5-mL microcentrifuge tubes. If the lesion was too small, the surface layer of the flavedo was not removed. A maximum of two small (1 mm – 2 mm diameter) lesions per extraction was used. Symptomless fruit were treated the same, except four small sections (1 mm – 2 mm diameter) were randomly cut from the surface. The closed tube was submerged into liquid nitrogen with forceps for 20 s – 30 s and the plant material was then ground manually with a sterile microhomogeniser and the step was repeated twice. The AP1 extraction buffer (DNeasy® Plant Mini DNA extraction kit, Qiagen) was added before the tissue thawed, and the sample was kept on ice until all samples were prepared. DNA extraction was continued using the manufacturer’s standard protocol. 24Isolation from twigs and petioles A 1-mm thick layer of the twig or petiole surface containing lesions and/or fruiting bodies was removed. A maximum of six small (1 mm – 2 mm diameter) lesions per extraction were used. The tissue was cut into smaller pieces and placed into microcentrifuge tubes containing extraction buffer, RNase and two ceramic beads (6.35 mm, Qbiogene). Material was macerated in a bead beater for 30 s at 5.5 m/s. Buffer volumes were adjusted to account for the volume of the beads and the Qiagen DNeasy standard protocol for DNA isolation was used. 24Isolation from soil Soil from the top layer of the A horizon of a citrus tree rhizozone was collected after clearing infected leaf litter. The soil was added to a microcentrifuge tube containing zirconium or silica beads that were either 0.5 mm or 1 mm in diameter (Biospec Products, Bartlesville, OK, USA). Soil DNA extraction buffer and proteinase K were added and the tube was agitated with a bead beater for 20 s at 5 m/s. Soil lysis buffer was added and the standard protocol and volumes described in the SoilMasterTM DNA extraction kit manual (Epicentre Biotechnologies, Madison, WI, USA) were further applied. 26Isolation from microscope slide from Kotzé Inoculum Monitor Standard microscope slides were coated with petroleum jelly and used in a Kotzé Inoculum Monitor (Interlock Systems, Pretoria, South Africa) to capture spores from citrus leaf litter.27 The presence of Guignardia ascospores on the slide was microscopically verified without using any stain or mounting fluid. Using a clean, flamed scalpel, a thin layer of petroleum jelly was scraped off and smeared onto a FTA matrix card and left to dry completely. The standard Whatman FTATM DNA extraction protocol was used. 25Polymerase chain reaction amplification Standard polymerase chain reaction conditions For detection and differentiation of P. citricarpa and P. capitalensis, the primers CITRIC1 and CAMEL2 were used together with the ITS4 reverse primer. 4PCR reactions were performed in 50-µL volumes, with each reaction containing 2 µL template DNA, 15 pmol ITS4, 10 pmol CITRIC1 and 60 pmol CAMEL2, 5 µL recommended 10x buffer (supplied with Taq polymerase), 200 µM dCTP, dGTP, dATP and dTTP (TaKaRa Bio Inc., Shiga, Japan) and 0.5 U Taq polymerase (TaKaRa). Following an initial denaturation step at 95 °C for 2 min, 35 PCR cycles were performed on an Eppendorf G thermocycler (Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany) using the following conditions: a denaturation step at 94 °C for 30 s followed by annealing at 58 °C for 45 s and extension at 72 °C for 90 s. These cycles were followed by a final extension at 72 °C for 7 min. The amplified DNA fragments were visualised on a 1.5% (w/v) agarose gel in tris-borate-EDTA (TBE) buffer. 28Purified positively identified DNA extracts from P. citricarpa and P. capitalensis were included as positive controls. A citrus isolate of Colletotrichum gloeosporioides (Penz.) Penz. & Sacc. (because of its ubiquitous occurrence on citrus) and distilled water were included as negative controls in all PCR reactions. Nested polymerase chain reaction conditions A two-step PCR was developed using the universal primers ITS1 and ITS4 to amplify the internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region of any fungal tissue present in the sample. Amplicons of the first PCR step were used for a second amplification with primers CITRIC1 and CITRIC1R. Therefore, the second PCR used the product of the first PCR as template and a second, inner pair of primers nested within the region amplified by the first PCR. The design of the oligonucleotide reverse primer CITRIC1R (5’-GAA AGG TGA TGG AAG GGA G-3’) was based on the DNA sequences of previously sequenced ITS gene regions of Phyllosticta species10 and was used in conjunction with the primer CITRIC1. In order to confirm the specificity of the primer, it was analysed using the Basic Local Alignment Search Tool (BLAST) program29 (National Centre for Biotechnology Information). Previously sequenced isolates5 were used to evaluate the efficacy of the CITRIC1-CITRIC1R primer set. Standard PCR analyses were conducted on these isolates as described above. PCR reactions were performed in 25-µL volumes, with each reaction containing 1 µL template DNA, 20 pmol CITRIC1, 20 pmol CITRIC1R, 2.5 µL recommended 10x buffer (TaKaRa), 200 µM dNTP (TaKaRa) and 0.3 U Taq polymerase (TaKaRa). Following an initial denaturation step at 95 °C for 2 min, 40 PCR cycles were performed on an Eppendorf G thermocycler using the following conditions: a denaturation step at 94 °C for 30 s followed by annealing at 60 °C for 45 s and extension at 72 °C for 90 s, followed by a final extension at 72 °C for 7 min. The amplified DNA fragments were visualised on a 1.5% (w/v) agarose gel in TBE buffer. 28The same positive and negative controls were used as described for the standard PCR conditions. Results and discussion Recent developments in molecular biology have helped to alleviate many of the challenges associated with the movement, control and regulation of quarantine pests. However, these molecular techniques are not always universally accepted, because of the need to validate the techniques and determine limitations, specifically with regard to specificity. 30,31 In this paper, we have described optimised and validated techniques for the successful DNA extraction of P. citricarpa from various citrus samples, to ultimately provide good quality and sufficient DNA for downstream PCR tests and trials. The extraction protocols described in the current study form part of a test method that is used in ISO/IEC 17025 accredited laboratories. This accreditation implies that the method has been evaluated extensively and validated by our laboratory as well as outside laboratories as part of a mandatory interlaboratory testing scheme. In all cases, the assays were shown to be reliable, reproducible and highly sensitive. In this study, both standard and nested PCRs were performed on 823 samples and were used to successfully identify P. citricarpa from 529 samples (Table 1). The extensive use of this PCR-based technique with Phyllosticta specific primers for diagnosis and differentiation of P. citricarpa and P. capitalensis has proven to be consistently repeatable and reliable. A high concentration of pure, undamaged, DNA could be successfully and consistently extracted from cultures (139 samples), leaves (222 samples), fruit (245 samples), twigs (20 samples), petioles (10 samples) and soil (125 samples) using commercially available extraction kits in combination with bead beating. The bead beater served to physically disrupt plant and fungal tissue. The use of different beads in combination with different durations and force (m/s) of beating was optimised in such a way that DNA was not damaged but plant and fungal cells were disrupted. For sturdy material such as leaves, twigs and petioles, two 6.35-mm ceramic beads were ideal and could disrupt the tissue in a very short time, with minimal DNA damage. In contrast, fungal mycelium and spores required only a mix of small zirconium beads to break the fungal cell walls. The addition of a physical disruption step to the DNA extraction protocol greatly increased the quality and quantity of the DNA extracted. For isolation from infected or symptomless fruit, a very small amount of lesion tissue, regardless of the symptom type, was required to produce a sufficient DNA concentration for PCR detection. Usually, a maximum of two lesions (1 mm – 2 mm diameter) was used for successful extraction and amplification (Figure 1). In samples where larger host tissue sections were included, organic inhibitors in the host tissue brought about false negative results. Often fruit containing questionable spots had only one or two lesions from which to extract DNA, making it imperative that no material was lost. By using liquid nitrogen with a microhomogeniser when working with limited tissue samples, no material was lost and DNA was protected for optimal extraction. A maximum of two or three lesions from twigs and petioles could also be homogenised in liquid nitrogen, but two 6.35-mm ceramic beads used with the bead beater were just as effective in disrupting the tissue and required less time (Figure 1). Positive results were consistently achieved with the detection of Phyllosticta species from symptomless green leaves using the empirical wet-dry technique (Figure 2). Phyllosticta species can survive endophytically in green citrus leaves, but in small localised zones only. The wet-dry technique (similar to natural leaf wilting) stimulated the change to saprophytic growth at an accelerated rate. This acceleration enhanced the likelihood of detecting single infection points already present in citrus nursery trees, ultimately curbing the spread of this quarantine pathogen to new orchards and growing areas. FTA matrix cards were designed for the collection, archiving and purification of nucleic acids from a wide variety of biological samples for PCR analysis. The great advantage of the FTA technology is that the samples can be dried and stored for years. Isolation from clean or mixed fungal cultures (54 samples) using FTA matrix technology, in contrast with the DNeasy extraction technique, produced a lower concentration of DNA, albeit sufficient to yield a positive PCR. FTA matrix technology was also effectively used in the isolation of DNA from petroleum-covered microscope slides retrieved from the inoculum monitor (28 samples). The absence or presence of pathogenic ascospores was thus confirmed. Nevertheless, the fluctuating release of spores from leaf litter should be considered. Isolation from soil proved to be effective with the use of the Soil Master™ kit (Epicentre). The direct PCR system often failed to amplify the fragment of interest from the total DNA extracted from natural soil underneath infected leaf litter. Where amplicons could be obtained, they were often rather faint. Therefore a nested PCR was developed based on an initial amplification using ITS1 and ITS4 primers, followed by a subsequent amplification with CITRIC1-CITRIC1R primers. A distinct ITS fragment of 280 bp could be reproducibly generated for 87 soil samples (Figure 3). Nested PCR was more sensitive in situations where inhibitory substances or low DNA concentrations prevailed. The protocols we have described here have been extensively used to confirm and clarify the presence or absence of the pathogen in questionable fruit spots for the producer, pack house manager, export agent, quarantine and quality control officials, and researchers. Pathogen detection in soil, twig, petiole and leaf samples continuously helps to paint a clearer picture of the spread and survival of the pathogen P. citricarpa and its common endophytic partner P. capitalensis in South Africa. The protocols focusing on pathogen isolation from symptomless green leaves have been successfully implemented by the citrus industry in South Africa to screen citrus nurseries for the presence of P. citricarpa, to improve quality and hygiene and to prevent the spread of black spot to new orchards. Acknowledgements The financial support of Citrus Research International (CRI) and the Technology and Human Resources for Industry Programme (THRIP), a partnership programme funded by the Department of Trade and Industry and managed by the National Research Foundation, is gratefully acknowledged. Competing interests We declare that we have no financial or personal relationships which may have inappropriately influenced us in writing this article. Authors’ contributions L.K. was the project leader; L.M. was responsible for the project design, experimental design and performed most of the experiments; R.J. performed some of the experiments; J.M.K. and M.T. were responsible for the experimental design and performed most of the wet-dry techniques and spore inoculums monitor experiments; L.M. wrote the manuscript with editorial contributions from L.K., R.J. and M.T. 1.SmithIMMcNamaraDGScottPRet al.Quarantine pests for Europe. Data sheets on quarantine pests for the European Union and for the European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization2. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:10242196296693.http://dx.doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-91-5-05254.http://dx.doi.org/10.1094/PD-90-00975.http://dx.doi.org/10.3767/003158511X5691696.WagerVAThe black spot disease of citrus in South Africa7. McOnieKCGermination and infection of citrus by ascospores of Guignardia citricarpa in relation to control of black spot8.BrodrickHTLight and temperature effects on symptom development of citrus black spot disease9.http://dx.doi.org/10.1094/PD-65-94510. MeyerLSlippersBKorstenLet al.Two distinct Guignardia species associated with citrus in South Africa11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1094/PHYTO.2002.92.5.4641894302012. McOnieKCThe latent occurrence in citrus and other hosts of a Guignardia easily confused with G. citricarpa, the citrus black spot pathogen13.http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2338.2003.00638.x14. WulandariNFTo-anunCHydeKDet al.Phyllosticta citriasiana sp. nov., the cause of citrus tan spot of Citrus maxima in Asia15.http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0434.2007.01244.x16.http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1415-4757200200020002117. KielyTBPreliminary studies on Guignardia citricarpa n.sp.: The ascigerous stage of Phoma citricarpa McAlp and its relation to black spot of citrus18. KotzéJMStudies on the black spot disease of citrus caused by Guignardia citricarpa Kiely, with particular reference to its epiphytology and control at Letaba19.TruterMEpidemiology of citrus black spot disease in South Africa and its impact on phytosanitary trade restrictions20.http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AEM.67.10.4495-4503.2001115711489319521.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0167-7012(02)00210-522. TebbeCCVahjenWInterference of humic acids and DNA extracted directly from soil in detection and transformation of recombinant DNA from bacteria and yeast769022118233523.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1164-5563(03)00033-524.Qiagen DNeasy® plant handbook [homepage on the Internet]c200625.Whatman FTA® technology [homepage on the Internet]c200726.Epicentre Biotechnologies. SoilMaster™ DNA extraction kit [homepage on the Internet]27.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2004.08.018 28. WhiteTJBrunsTLeeSet al.Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal rDNA genes for phylogenetics29.http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jmbi.1990.9999223171230.http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.phyto.38.1.2071170184231.LievensBGrauwetTJMACammueBPAet alRecent developments in diagnosis of plant pathogens: A review