Chilli anthracnose (Colletotrichum spp.) disease and its management approach

May Moe Oo1Sang-Keun Oh1*

Abstract

Chilli is a widely consumed crop throughout the world. However, chilli anthracnose is a major constraint in chilli production leading to huge economic losses worldwide. Colletotrichum is a large genus of Ascomycete fungi, containing species that cause anthracnose diseases on a wide range of crops of economic value. This review is aimed at critically and accurately examining the taxonomic identification of Colletotrichum species by morphological and molecular approaches as well as assessing their management options. The use of appropriate integrated management practices, such as cultural, mechanical, chemical, and biological control, are important in chilli anthracnose disease prevention and control. Emphasis is laid on the use of biological control because it is cost effective and eco-friendly, and is an appropriate approach for disease management. The use of resistant cultivars is the cheapest, easiest, safest, and most effective means of controlling crop diseases. But, since no resistant cultivars of chilli have been developed and commercialized, it is very important to develop biological management strategies. Further studies leading to integrated disease management strategies need to be carried out.

Keyword



Introduction

Based on perceived scientific and economic importance, it was recently voted that Colletotrichum was the eighth most important group of plant pathogenic fungi in the world (Dean et al., 2012). Many researchers have reported that Colletotrichum causes anthracnose disease and postharvest decay on a wide range of tropical, subtropical, and temperate fruits, crops and ornamental plants (Bailey and Jeger 1992; Bernstein et al., 1995; Freeman et al., 1996; Lahoz et al., 2009; Lima et al., 2011; Damm et al., 2012). Among these hosts, chilli pepper (Capsicum spp.), an important economic crop worldwide (Poulos, 1992), is severely affected by chilli anthracnose which can result in yield losses of up to 50% (Pakdeevaraporn et al., 2005). Chilli is a very important vegetable because of its massive consumption worldwide. Not only is it used in many cuisines but it is also found to have many medicinal properties. In addition, chilli can reduce the risk of cancer by preventing carcinogens from binding to DNA and reduce calorie intake by increasing thermogenesis

(Lakshmi et al., 2014). The chilli anthracnose disease caused by Colletotrichum species drastically reduces the quality and yield of chilli fruits resulting in low returns to farmers. In Korea, it results in a reduction of approximately 13% of marketable yield (Yoon et al., 2004). Moreover, in Korea, annual chilli production revenue is estimated to be US $1.4 billion and the annual damage by this disease has been valued at more than US$100 million (Kim et al., 2008).

Typical anthracnose symptoms on chilli fruits include sunken necrotic tissues, with concentric rings of acervuli and fused lesions. Conidial masses may occur under severe conditions. Several species of Colletotrichum etiologically associated with anthracnose diseases in chilli include C. acutatum, C. coccodes, C. dematium, and C. gloeosporioides in Korea (Park and Kim, 1992). According to Kim et al. (2004), different species infect chilli plants at different growth stages. Leaves and stems are damaged by C. coccodes and C. dematium whereas C. acutatum and C. gloeosporioides infect chilli fruits in Korea. Colletotrichum capsici is found to be prevalent in red chilli fruits whereas C. acutatum and C. gloeosporioides cause infections both in young and mature chilli fruits (Hong and Hwang, 1998; Kim et al., 1999; Kim et al., 2004; Park et al., 1990; Than et al., 2008). Among these species, C. gloeosporioides and C. acutatum are the most destructive and widely distributed (Sarath Babu et al., 2011; Voorrips et al., 2004).

Anthracnose Disease

Anthracnose

Anthracnose is the common name for plant diseases characterized by very dark, sunken lesions, containing spores (Isaac, 1992). It directly reduces the quality and quantity of the harvested yield. Disease infection and disease progress of chilli anthracnose can be promoted at a temperature of approximately 27°C with 80% relative humidity and a soil pH of 5-6 (Roberts et al., 2001). Several losses may occur in rainy weather because the spores of Colletotrichum are splashed or washed onto other fresh fruits resulting in more infection (Roberts et al., 2001). Colletotrichum species are the most important pathogens to cause latent infections (Jeffries et al., 1990). Typical fruit symptoms are circular or angular sunken lesions and concentric rings of acervuli that are often wet and produce pink to orange conidial masses. Under severe disease conditions, lesions may coalesce. Conidial masses may also occur scattered or in concentric rings on the lesions. Based on the report by Kim et al. (2008), the major pathogen causing chilli anthracnose in Korea may be C. acutatum rather than C. gloeosporioides. Typical fruit symptoms and colony types of C. acutatum are shown in Fig. 1.

http://dam.zipot.com:8080/sites/kjoas/files/N0030430201_image/Figure_KJAOS_43_02_01_F1.jpg

Fig. 1. Typical fruit symptoms and colony types of Colletotrichum acutatum. (A) Sunken necrotic lesion on chilli fruit, (B) White to orange colonies of C. acutatum.

Colletotrichum

Colletotrichum is one of the most important phytopathogens worldwide causing the economically important disease anthracnose in a wide range of hosts (Bailey and Jeger, 1992). The causal agent of chilli anthracnose disease is Colletotrichum which belongs to Kingdom-Fungi, Phylum-Ascomycota, Class-Sordariomycetes, Order-Phyllachorales, and Family-Phyllachoraceae. Causal agents of chilli anthracnose in different countries are tabulated in Table 1 (Than et al., 2008). Kim et al. (2004) reported that different species of Colletotrichum affect different organs of the chilli plant; for examples, C. acutatum and C. gloeosporioides infect chilli fruits at all developmental stages, but not usually the leaves or stems, which are mostly damaged by C. coccodes and C. dematium. Leaf anthracnose of chilli seedlings caused by C. coccodes was first reported in chilli growing in a field in Chungnam Province of Korea in 1988 (Hong and Hwang, 1988).

Table 1. Geographic distribution of Colletotrichum species on Chilli.

Countryy

Colletotrichum species

References

Australia

C. siamense, C. simmondsii, C. queenslandicum, C. truncatum and C. cairnsense

De Silva et al., 2016

India

C. capsici, C.cocodes,C. fruticola and C. siamense

Paul and Behl, 1990;   Sharman and Shenoy; 2014; Sharma et al., 2011

Indonesia

C. acutatum, C. capsici, C. gloeosporioides

Voorrips et al., 2004

South Korea

C. acutatum, C. gloeosporioides, C. coccodes, C. dematium

Park and Kim,1992

Myanmar

Gloeosporium poperatum E. and E., C. nigrum E. and Hals, C. capsici

Dastur, 1920; CPC 2007z

 

Papua New Guinea

C. capsici, C. gloeosporioides

Pearson et al.,1984

New Zeland

C. coccodes

Johnston and Jones, 1997

Taiwan

C. acutatum, C. capsici, C. gloeosporioides

Manandhar et al., 1995

Thailand

C.acutatum, C.capsici, C,gloeosporioides

Than et al., 2008

Vietnam

C. acutatum, C. capsici, C. gloeosporioides, C. nigrum

Don et al., 2007

yAsia-Pacific Countries, zCPC; Crop Protection Compendium.

Most Colletotrichum species are seed borne and may survive in soil or on infected crop debris. Conidia may be spread by water splash dispersal whereas transmission of ascospores can occur through the air (Nicholson et al., 1980). They are capable of growing in and on seeds as acervuli and micro-sclerotia (Pernezny et al., 2003). Colletotrichum species naturally produce micro-sclerotia to allow dormancy in the soil during the winter or when subjected to stressful conditions, and these micro-sclerotia can survive for many years (Pring et al., 1955). Once the pathogen penetrates the host plant, establishment of the fungus in plant tissue is aided by host induced virulence effectors. Colletotrichum species produce a series of specialized infection structures such as germ tubes, appressoria, intracellular hyphae, and secondary necrotrophic hyphae (Perfect et al., 1999).

Characterization of Colletotrichum Species

Morphological Characterization

For effective disease management, accurate identification of Colletotrichum species is essential. Classically, identification and characterization of Colletotrichum species have primarily relied on morphological characters such as colony color, size and shape of conidia, optimal temperature for growth, growth rate, presence or absence of setae, and existence of the teleomorph, Glomerella (Freeman et al., 1998). Conidial morphology has been traditionally emphasized over other taxonomic criteria, although conidia of Colletotrichum are potentially variable. Several researchers reported that the growth rate of C. gloeosporioides was higher than that of C. acutatum (Agostini et al., 1992; Liyanage et al., 1992). Adaskveg and Hartin (1997) reported that, considering mycelial growth responses to temperature, C. acutatum from strawberry, almond, and peach grew well at 25°C while C. gloeosporioides from citrus and papaya grew well at 30°C. Table 2 shows the morphological data of Colletotrichum species (Sutton, 1992).

Table 2. Morphological data for Colletotrichum species.

Species

Colony Color

Conidia

Aspersoria

Sclerotia

Setae

Length

(µm)

Width

(µm)

Shape

Length

(µm)

Width

(µm)

Shape

C. acutatum

White to pinkish gray or orange color colony with slight mycelium

8.5-10

4.5-6

Fusiform, medianly constricted

8.5-10

4.5-6

Clavate or irregular

Present

Absent

C. capsici

White to gray color with dark green centre and cottony mycelium

18-23

3.5-4

Falcate, fusiform apices acute

9-14

6.5-11.5

Clavate to circular

Abundant

Absent

C. coccodes

White mycelia

16-22

3-4

Fusiform medianly constricted

11-16.5

6-9.5

Long clavate irregular

Present

Abundant

C. dematium

White to grey

or dark brown

19.5-24

2-2.5

Falcate, fusiform apices acute

8-11.5

6.5-8

Clavate to circular

Abundant

Abundant

C. gloeosporioides

Varied

9-24

3-4.5

Straight, obtuse at apex

6-20

4.12

Clavate to irregular

Varied

Varied

Molecular Characterization

One of the most serious problems in chilli anthracnose is that two pathogens, C. acutatum and C. gloeosporioides cannot easily be differentiated based on morphological and cultural characteristics due to environment-induced changes in morphological characteristics. Therefore, to overcome this problem, DNA sequence analyses have been used to characterize and analyze the taxonomic complexity of Colletotrichum. Canon et al. (2000) stated that data derived from DNA analyses is the most reliable framework for classifying Colletotrichum as DNA is not directly influenced by environmental factors. In particular, sequence analysis of the internal transcribed spacer (ITS) regions lying between the 18S and 5.8S genes and the 5.8S and 28S genes, has proved very useful in studying phylogenetic relationships among Colletotrichum species (Sreenivasaprasad et al., 1996; 1996; Moriwaki et al., 2002; Photita et al., 2005). Sequence analysis of protein coding genes such as partial β-tubulin gene and introns from two genes (glutamine synthetase and glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase) were also useful in resolving the phylogenetic relationships among C. acutatum species (Sreenivasaprasad and Talhinhas, 2005; Guerber et al., 2003). Although ITS sequences do not separate the C. gloeosporioides complex, some single genes or combination of genes, glutamine synthetase, and glyceraldehydes-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH), can be used to differentiate Colletotrichum species (Weir et al., 2012). Isolates of C. acutatum were phylogenetically separated from A1 to A4 subgroups based on sequences in partial β -tubulin 2 (exons 3-6) (Talhinhas et al., 2002). According to Canon et al. (2000), an integrated approach, where molecular diagnostic tools are applied along with morphological characterization, is a more accurate and reliable approach for studying Colletotrichum species.

Pathogenic Variability

When any of the progeny exhibits a characteristic that is different from those present in the ancestral individuals, this individual is called a variant (Agrios, 2005). Compatibility of plant-pathogen interactions is often governed by the gene-for-gene model in many pathosystems (Flor, 1971). Some pathogen populations are known to be pathogenically diverse and the diversity seems to be due to continuous generation of novel pathogenic variations (Taylor and Ford, 2007). A genotype with partial resistance would result in lower levels of infection which eventually would decrease the amount of inoculum in the field and limit the potential of epidemics.

Several studies (AVRDC, 1999; Yoon et al., 2004) have screened C. acutatum, which is a very virulent species (Than et al., 2008) against chilli genotypes and found that Capsicum baccatum genotype ‘PBC 80’ is a genetic resource pool for resistance to anthracnose. However, another genotype of C. baccatum, ‘PBC81’ showed high susceptibility to some C. acutatum isolates. In contrast to C. baccatum, the susceptibility of the cultivar Capsicum annuum has been reported in several studies (Mongkolporn et al., 2004; Park, 2007). Moreover, Capsicum chinense ‘PBC932’ has been reported as a resistant variety to C. capsici (AVRDC, 2003). However, to date, there has not been any strong resistance found in C. annuum, which is the only species grown worldwide (Park, 2007).

Disease Management

There are various methods of controlling plant disease. As no single strategy is found to be very effective in controlling chilli anthracnose disease, Agrios (2005) recommended an integrated disease management approach. Effective approaches for disease management usually involve the combined use of intrinsic resistance along with cultural, mechanical, biological, and chemical control (Wharton and Dieguez-Uribeondo, 2004).

Using resistant varieties may eliminate losses from diseases as well as chemical and mechanical expenses of diseases control (Agrios, 2005). The use of shorter ripening period cultivars may allow fruits to be harvested earlier in order to prevent infection by the fungus. Crop rotation should be done at least 2 years with crops that are not Solanaceous plants. As the pathogen is capable of remaining in the soil and in plant debris, soil must be deeply ploughed to completely bury the crop residues containing the pathogens (Agrios, 2005). Among disease control management approaches, the use of resistant cultivars is the cheapest, easiest, safest, and most effective means of controlling diseases.

Chemical Control

Use of chemicals is a widely used disease control strategy and a practical method to control anthracnose disease. However, fungicide resistance often arises quickly, if a single compound is relied upon too heavily (Staub, 1999). A fungicide widely recommended for anthracnose management in chilli is manganese ethylene bis dithiocarbamate (Maneb) (Smith, 2000). Chakravarthy (1975) recommended that soaking of chilli seeds for 12 hours in 0.2% thiram is best way to control Colletotrichum species.

The strobilurin fungicides azoxytrobin (Quadris), trifloxystrobin (Flint), and pyraclostrobin (Cabrio) have recently been recommended for the control of chilli anthracnose (reviewed by Than et al., 2008). Moreover, various fungicides have been found to be effective, including 0.2% mancozeb, 0.1% ziram, Blitox 50, 0.1% Bavistin and 0.5% or 1% Bordeaux mixture; benlate and Delsene M are used as seed dressings (CPC, 2007). However, there are numerous undesirable effects of using chemicals such as on farmers’ income, the toxic effects of chemicals on farmers, and other environmental concerns, particularly in developing countries (Voorrips et al., 2004).

Biological control

To overcome the negative effect of chemical usage, use of plant extracts and biocontrol agents to control infection have become a solution. Complete inhibition of fungal growth and spore germination were achieved with the use of 3% garlic bulb extract concentration (Singh, 1997). Crude extracts from different parts of Sweet flag, Palmorosa oil, Neem oil have been reported to be effective in curbing the growth of anthracnose fungus (Jayalakshmi and Seetharaman, 1998). An effective approach for eco-friendly management of chilli anthracnose is the combined application of plant extract of neem (Azadirachta indica), mahogany (Swietenia mahagoni), and garlic (Allium sativum). The combination of extracts from these plants showed significant impact on disease reduction as well as on yield of chilli (Rashid et al., 2015).

Trichoderma species have been reported to effectively control Colletotrichum species in chilli with concomitant disease reduction (Boonnratkwang et al., 2007). Moreover, antagonistic bacterial strains (DGg13 and BB133) were found to effectively control C. capsici (Intanoo and Chamswarng, 2007). Other biological control agents such as Bacillus subtilis and Saccharomyces cerevisiae have been reported as antagonistic to microorganisms (Jayelakshmi and Seetharaman, 1998).

Conclusion

Until now, outbreaks of chilli anthracnose have severely affected pepper production. Thus, it is very urgent to accurately identify the chilli anthracnose pathogen for early diagnosis and disease management in the field. Although several researches have been carried out on anthracnose disease of chilli, resistant chilli cultivars for these pathogens have not been commercialized (Park, 2007). Fungicide is normally used to control this disease. But this practice can affect the human health as the fruit of chilli is commonly eaten raw without cooking. Furthermore, continuous chemical use leads to adverse effects including pest resistance and environmental pollution (Lakshmi et al., 2014). Therefore, an integrated management practice and the use of biological control including combined applications of plant extracts leading to organic production of chilli may guarantee a safe and healthy production. However, the best and most effective approach for control of this disease could be the development of high yielding resistant cultivars. So, the development of resistance in chilli should be focused on as it would provide a long lasting remedy.

Acknowledgements

We thank Mr. Solomon Tweneboah for reading the manuscript. This work was supported by grants from the Next-Generation BioGreen21 Program (Project No. PJ01118702).

References

1 Adaskaveg JE, Hartin RJ. 1997. Characterization of Colletotrichum acutatum isolates causing anthracnose of almond and peach in California. Phytopathology 87:979-987. 

2 Agostini JP, Timmer LW, Mitchell DJ.1992. Morphological and pathological characteristics of strains of Colletotrichum gloeosporioides from citrus. Phytopathology 82:1377-1382. 

3 Agrios GN.2005. Plant Pathology, 5th Ed. p.922. Academic Press, San Diego. 

4 Alexander SA, Waldenmaier CM. 2002. Management of Anthracnose in Bell Pepper. Fungicide and Nematicide Tests [Online]. New Fungicide and Nematicide Data Committee of the American Phytopathological Society. 

5 AVRDC (Asian Vegetable Research and Development Centre). 1999. Off-season Tomato, Pepper, and Eggplant. Progress Report for 1998. Asian Vegetable Research and Development Centre, Taiwan, China. 

6 AVRDC (Asian Vegetable Research and Development Centre), 2003. AVRDC Progress Report for 2002. Asian Vegetable Research and Development Centre, Taiwan, China. 

7 Bailey JA, Jeger MJ. (Eds.) 1992. Colletotrichum: Biology, Pathology and Control. Commonwealth Mycological Institute. 

8 Bernstein B, Zehr EI, Dean RA, Shabi E. 1995. Characteristics of Colletotrichum from peach, apple, pecan and other hosts. Plant Pathology 52:798. 

9 Boonnratkwang C, Chamswarng C, Intanoo W, Juntharasri V. 2007. Effect of Secondary Metabolites from Trichoderma Harzianum Strain Pm9 on Growth Inhibition of Colletotrichum Gloeosporioides and Chilli Anthracnose Control. pp. 323-336. Proceeding of the 8th National Plant Protection Conference. Naresuan University, Phisanulok, Thailand.  

10 Canon PF, Bridge PD, Monte E. 2000. Linking the past, present and future of Colletotrichum systematics. In Prusky, D., Freeman, S., Dickman, M.(Eds), Colletotrichum: Host specificity, Pathology, and Host-pathogen Interaction. pp. 1-20. APS Press, St. Paul, Minnesota.  

11 CPC. 2007. Crop Protection Compendium 2007. 

12 Damm U, Cannon PF, Woundenberg JHC, Johnston PR, Weir BS, Tan YP, Shivas RG, Crous PW. 2012. The Colletotrichum boninense species complex. Studies in Mycology 73:1-36. 

13 Dastur JF. 1920. Glomerella cingulate (Stoneman) Splad and its conidial form, Gloeosporium piperatum E. and E. and Colletotrichum nigrum E. and Hals. On Chilli and Carica papaya. Annals of Applied Biology 6:245-268. 

14 Dean R, Van Kan JAL, Pretotius ZA et al. 2012. The Top 10 fungal pathogens in molecular plant pathology. Molecular Plant Pathology 13:414-430. 

15 De Silva1 DD, Ades PK, Crous PW, Taylor PWJ. 2016. Colletotrichum species associated with chili anthracnose in Australia. Plant Pathology doi: 10.1111/ppa.12572. 

16 Don LD, Van TT, Phuong Vy TT, Kieu PTM. 2007. Colletotrichum spp. Attacking on Chilli Pepper Growing in Vietnam. Country report In; Oh DG, Kim KT (Eds), Abstract of the first International Symposium on Chilli Anthracnose. p. 24. National Horticultural Research Institute, Rural Development of Administration, South Korea. 

17 Flor HH. 1971. Current status for the gene-for-gene concept. Annual Reviews of Phytopathology 99:275-296. 

18 Freeman S, Katan T, Shabi E. 1998. Characterization of Colletotrichum species responsible for anthracnose diseases of various fruits. Plant Disease 82:596-605.  

19 Guerber JC, Liu B, Correll JC, Johnston PR. 2003. Characterization of diversity in Colletotrichum acutatum sensu lato by sequence analysis of two gene introns mtDNA and intron RFLPs and mating compatibility. Mycologia 95:872-895. 

20 Hong JK, Hwang BK. 1998. Influence of inoculum density, wetness duration, plant age, inoculation method, and cultivar resistance on infection of pepper plant by Colletotrichum cocodes. Plant Disease 82:1079-1083. 

21 Intanoo W, Chamswarng C. 2007. Effect of antagonistic bacterial formulations for control of anthracnose on chilli fruits. Proceeding of the 8th National Plant Protection Conference. pp. 309-322. Naresuan University, Phisanlok, Thailand. 

22 Isaac S. 1992. Fungal Plant Interaction. p. 115. Chapman and Hall Press, London.  

23 Jayalakshmi C, Seetharaman K. 1998. Biological control of fruit rot and die-back of chilli with plant products and antagonistic microorganisms. Plant Disease Research 13:46-48. 

24 Jeffries P, Dodd JC, Jegerand MJ, Plumbley RA. 1990. The biology and control of Colletotrichum species on tropical fruit crops. Plant Pathology 39:343-366. 

25 Johnston PR, Jones D. 1997. Relationships among Colletotrichum isolates from fruit-rots assessed using rDNA sequences. Mycologia 89:420-430. 

26 Kim JT. Park SY, Choi W, Lee YH, Kim HT. 2008. Characterization of Colletotrichum isolates causing anthracnose of pepper in Korea. Plant Pathology Journal 24:17-23. 

27 Kim KD, Oh BJ, Yang J. 1999. Differential interactions of a Colletotrichum gloeosporioides isolates with green and red pepper fruits. Phytoparasitica 27:1-10. 

28 Kim KK, Yoon JB, Park HG, Park EW, Kim YH. 2004. Structural modifications and programmed cell death of chilli pepper fruits related to resistance responses to Colletotrichum gloeosporioides infection. Genetic and Resistance 94:1295-1304. 

29 Lakshmi Sahitya U et al., 2014. Anthracnose, a Prevalent Disease in Capsicum. ISSN: 0975-8585. 

30 Lahoz E, Caiazzo R, Carella A, Porrone F, Porrone F. 2009. Colletotrichum acutatum Simmonds as agent of anthracnose and stem blight on Nerium oleander in Italy. Floric Ornamental Biotechnology 3:62-66. 

31 Lima WG, Sposito MB, Amorim L, Golcalves FP, de Filho PAM. 2011. Colletotrichum gloeosporioides, a new causal agent of citrus post-bloom fruit drop. Europe Journal of Plant Pathology 131:157-165. 

32 Liyanage HD, McMillan RT, Kistler HC. 1992. Two genetically distinct populations of Colletotrichum gloeosporioides from citrus. Phytopathology 82:1371-1376. 

33 Manandhar JB, Hartman GL, Wang TC. 1995. Anthracnose development of pepper fruits inoculated with Colletotrichum gloeosporioides. Plant Disease 79:380-383. 

34 Mongkolporn O, Dokmaihom Y, Kanchana-udomkarn C, Pakdeevaraporn P. 2004. Genetic purity test of F1 hybrid Capsicum using molecular analysis. Journal of Horticultural Science and Biotechnology 79:449-451. 

35 Montri P, Taylor PWD, Mongkolporn O, 2009. Pathotypes of Colletotrichum capsici, the causal agent of chilli anthracnose, in Thailand. Plant Disease 93:17-20. 

36 Moriwaki J, Tsukiboshi, T, Sato T. 2002. Grouping of Colletotrichum species in Japan based on rDNA sequences. Journal of General Plant Pathology 68:307-320.  

37 Nicholson RL, Moraes WBC. 1980. Survival of Colletotrichum graminicola: importance of the spore matrix. Phytopathology 70:255-261. 

38 Pakdeevaraporn P, Wasee S, Taylor PWJ, Mongkolporn O. 2005. Inheritance of resistance to anthracnose caused by Colletotrichum capsici in Capsicum. Plant Breeding 124:206-214. 

39 Park HG. 2007. Problem of anthracnose in pepper and prospects for its management. In: Oh Dg, Kim KT. (Eds.), Abstracts of the first international symposium on chilli anthracnose. p. 19. National Horticultural Research Institute, Rural Development of Administration, South Korea. 

40 Park HK, Kim BS, Lee WS. 1990. Inheritance of resistance to anthracnose (Colletotrichum spp.) in pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) II. Genetic analysis of resistance to Colletotrichum dematium. Horticulture Environment Biotechnology 31:207-212. 

41 Park KS, Kim CH. 1992. Identification, distribution and etiological characteristics of anthracnose fungi of red pepper in Korea. Korean Journal of Plant Pathology 3:85-92. 

42 Paul YS, Belh MK. 1990. Some studies on bell pepper anthracnose caused by Colletotrichum capsici and its control. Seed Research 1:656-659. 

43 Pearson MN, Bull PB, Speke H. 1984. Anthracnose of Capsicium in Papua, New Guinea; varietal reaction and associated fungi. Tropical Pest Management 30:230-233. 

44 Perfect SE, Hughes HB, O’Connell RJ, Green JR. 1999. Colletotrichum: a model genus for studies on pathology and fungal-plant interactions. Fungal genetics and Biology 27:186-198.  

45 Pernezny K, Roberts PD, Murphy JF, Goldberg NP. 2003. Compendium of Pepper Diseases. p. 37. The American Phytopathological Society. St. Paul, Minnedota.  

46 Photita W, Taylor PWJ, Ford R, Lumyong P, McKenzie HC, Hyde KD. 2005. Morphological and molecular characterization of Colletotrichum species from herbaceous plants in Thailand. Fungal Diversity 18:117-113. 

47 Poulos JM, 1992. Problems and Progress of Chilli Pepper Production in the Tropics. In: Hock, C.B., Hong, L.W., Raejab, M., Syed, A.R. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Conference on Chilli Pepper Production in the Tropics. pp.98-129. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. 

48 Pring RJ, Nash C, Zakaria M, Bailey JA. 1995. Infection process and host range of Colletotrichum capsici. Physiological and Molecular Plant Pathology. 46:137-152. 

49 Rashid MM, Kabir MdH, Hossain MdM, Bhuiyan Md.R, Khan MAI. 2015. Eco-friendly management of chilli anthracnose (Colletotrichum capsici). International Journal of Plant Pathology 6:1-11. 

50 Sarath Babu B, Pandravada S, Prasada Rao R, Anitha K, Chakrabarty S, Varaprasas K. 2011. Global sources of pepper genetic resources against arthropods, nematodes and pathogens. Crop Protection 4:389-400. 

51 Sharmaa G, Shenoy BD. 2014. Colletotrichum fructicola and C. siamense are involved in chilli anthracnose in India. Archives of Phytopathology and Plant Protection 47:1179-1194. 

52 Sharma PN, Katoch A, Sharma P, Sharma SK, Sharma OP. 2011. First Report on Association of Colletotrichum coccodes with Chili Anthracnose in India. Plant Disease 95:1584. 

53 Singh SN, Yadav BP, Sinha SK, Ojha KL. 1997, Efficacy of plant extracts in inhibition of radial growth and spore germination of Colletotrichum capsici. Journal of Applied Biology 7:58-61. 

54 Smith KL. 2000. Peppers. In: Precheur, R.J. (Ed.), Ohio Vegetable Production Guide. pp.166-173. Ohio State University Extension, Columbus, Ohio.  

55 Sreenivasaprasad S, Mills P, Meehan BM, Brown A. 1996. Phylogeny and systematic of 18 Colletotrichum species based on ribosomal DNA spacer sequences. Genome 39:499-512. 

56 Sreenivasaprasad S, Talhinhas P. 2005. Genotypic and phenotypic diversity in Colletotrichum acutatum, a cosmopolitan pathogen causing anthracnose in wide range of hosts. Molecular plant pathology 64:361-378. 

57 Staub T. 1999. Fungicide resistance: practical experience and antiresistance strategies and the role of integrated use. Annual Review of Phytopathology 29:421-442. 

58 Sutton BC. 1992. The genus Glomerella and its anamorph Colletotrichum. In: Colletotrichum Biology, Pathology and Control (eds. J.A. Bailey and M.J. Jeger). pp. 1-26. CAB International, Wallingford. 

59 Taylor PWJ, Ford R. 2007. Diagnostics, genetic diversity and pathogenic variation of ascochyta blight of cool season food and food legumes. European journal of Plant Pathology 119:127-133. 

60 Than PP, Jeewon R, Hyde KD, Pongsupasamit S, Mongkolporn O, Taylor PWJ. 2008. Characterization and pathogenicity of Colletotrichum species associated with anthracnose on chilli (Capsicum spp) in Thailand. Plant Pathology 57:562-572. 

61 Voorrips RE, Finkers R, Sanjaya L, Groenwold R. 2004. QTL mapping of anthracnose (Colletotrichum spp.) resistance in a cross between Capsicum annuum and C. chinense. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 109:1275-1282. 

62 Weir BS, Johnson PR, Damm U. 2012. The Colletotrichum gloeosporioides species complex. Studies in Mycologia 73:115-180. 

63 Wharton PS, Dieguez-Uribeondo J. 2004. The biology of Colletotrichum acutatum. Anales del Jardin Botanico de Madird 61:3-22. 

64 Yoon JB, Yand DC, Lee WP, Ahn SY, Park HG. 2004. Genetic resources resistant to anthracnose in the genus Capsicum. Journal of Koran Society Horticulture Science & Technology 45:318-323.