HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Related articles in Crop Science Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (27) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Vallad, G. E. Articles by Goodman, R. M. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Vallad, G. E. Articles by Goodman, R. M. Agricola Articles by Vallad, G. E. Articles by Goodman, R. M. Related Collections Sustainable Agriculture Plant Disease

REVIEW & INTERPRETATION

Systemic Acquired Resistance and Induced Systemic Resistance in Conventional Agriculture

^a Dep. of Plant Pathology, Univ. of California–Davis, c/o U.S. Agriculture Research Station, 1636 E. Alisal St., Salinas, CA 93905
^b Dep. of Plant Pathology and Gaylord Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies, Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706

^* Corresponding author (rgoodman{at}facstaff.wisc.edu)

Plants possess a range of defenses that can be actively expressed in response to pathogens and parasites of various scales, ranging from microscopic viruses to insect herbivores. The timing of these defense responses is critical and can be the difference between being able to cope or succumbing to the challenge of a pathogen or parasite. Systemic acquired resistance (SAR) and induced systemic resistance (ISR) are two forms of induced resistance; in both SAR and ISR, plant defenses are preconditioned by prior infection or treatment that results in resistance (or tolerance) against subsequent challenge by a pathogen or parasite. Great strides have been made over the past 20 yr in understanding the physiological and biochemical basis of SAR and ISR. Much of this knowledge is due to the identification of a number of chemical and biological elicitors, some of which are commercially available for use in conventional agriculture. However, the effectiveness of these elicitors to induce SAR and ISR as a practical means to control various plant diseases is just being realized. In this review, we first briefly summarize the fundamentals of ISR and SAR, for which a number of critical reviews already exist. We then examine the efficacy of SAR and ISR in published field-based studies. We place special emphasis on the benefits, drawbacks, and future considerations for the improved use of chemical and biological elicitors of induced resistance in conventional agriculture; this includes the potential to exploit genetic variability within populations of crop species to improve the utility of SAR and ISR in the field.

Abbreviations: ISR, induced systemic resistance • PGPR, plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria • SAR, systemic acquired resistance

Related articles in Crop Science:

THIS ISSUE IN CROP SCIENCE

Crop Science 2004 44: 1889-1892. [Full Text]  

This article has been cited by other articles:

				W. A. Vargas, S. Djonovic, S. A. Sukno, and C. M. Kenerley Dimerization Controls the Activity of Fungal Elicitors That Trigger Systemic Resistance in Plants J. Biol. Chem., July 11, 2008; 283(28): 19804 - 19815. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Anand, S. R. Uppalapati, C.-M. Ryu, S. N. Allen, L. Kang, Y. Tang, and K. S. Mysore Salicylic Acid and Systemic Acquired Resistance Play a Role in Attenuating Crown Gall Disease Caused by Agrobacterium tumefaciens Plant Physiology, February 1, 2008; 146(2): 703 - 715. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]