Oak Wilt Diagnostics

Oak Wilt Diagnostic Dilemma

Screen Shot 2019 08 23 At 10.21.46 Am

 

Should we Use Traditional Culture or DNA/PCR diagnostics?

 

Debate is good. We need more debate in our lives. In every field of study – all progress comes from critical reflection of current practices. It would appear to most Texans that the traditional culture diagnostics offered by THE TEXAS PLANT CLINIC is our only choice – but is it really?!? Actually, did you know that one of the most premier molecular biologists here in the USA, using real-time PCR (polymerase chain reaction technique/protocol/method) dna diagnostics hails from right here in Allen, Texas?! His name is Dr. Chad Lytle and he is changing the plant pathology world – and has been for quite some time (see the ASCA Arboricultural Consultant re-print below).

An amazing, thorough study of traditional culture vs. nested pcr vs. real time pcr was conducted by A. Yang from the Univ. of Minnesota and J. Juzwik with the USDA Forest Service Northern Research Division, and printed in “Plant Disease”/ Vol. 101 No.3 (2017). Those who wish to tackle some very serious technical information – please help yourself to the full document below, but for those who would prefer the reader’s digest version:

What benefits does the traditional culture method offer over the PCR techniques regarding Oak Wilt diagnostics?  None stated.

 

Screen Shot 2019 08 22 At 3.07.10 Pm  Screen Shot 2019 08 23 At 10.39.39 Am 

 

What benefits do the PCR approaches offer?

  • Superior results across the spectrum at finding oak wilt – especially helpful if only small levels are present; further real-time PCR (also known as qPCR – quantitative PCR) can even specify the amount of fungus present in the sample (or its CT value)

  • PCR is way more effective with white oak family diagnostics. In my professional assessment - weakness of the traditional diagnostics, likely has played a considerable part in the fiasco of the TFS position that the white oak family is resistant (see next webpage)

  • Effective on dried out samples

  • Results same day received – next day delivery (That would be real-time pcr used by Dr. Chad Lytle ;), or 3 days worst case (nested pcr) vs. 3-5 weeks for traditional

  • Samples can be re-used for further testing at a later time

  • Small samples (think aspirin pill vs. huge wood chunks from branches and or huge chunks of tree trunk -  see TFS video pics above or view full TFS video link below)

  • Don’t need blue ice or dry ice or any kind of ice! No cooler either! You only need a mailing envelope.

  • Real-time PCR techniques (at least Dr. Chad Lytle w/Research Associates Laboratory can) offer more test options for other plant heath tests than the Texas A&M Agrilife Extension –Texas Plant Disease Diagnostic Lab offers; This means huge implications for the entire Green Industry diagnostic needs - well beyond just oak wilt, but any disease type, fungal, insect, and more (See image/link below)

  • PCR has good bit more room to improve a lot and soon (see latter third of 2017 study below), while traditional is “stuck” and won’t improve speed, time required, diagnostician and sample prep labor, etc.

  • Cost for DNA testing is much cheaper - $20 vs. $35 (RAL & Agrilife respective published charges as of Aug. 2019). Really though, due to whats at stake – I put this benefit last because the information is so critical and costs of waiting potentially so very high

Image of PDF document

Oak Wilt Diagnostics - Arbor Care and Consulting

Taking a Sample to Verify Oak Wilt

The above video was published on Mar 12, 2019

Courtesy of The American Phytopathological Society, 2017

You can read more about Jennifer Juzwik and her elite research team below

Designed & Powered by On Fire Media |