RESUMO
Fusarium head blight (FHB) is a fungal disease of wheat (Triticum aestivum.L) that causes yield losses and produces mycotoxins which could easily exceed the limits of the EU regulations. Resistance to FHB has a complex genetic architecture and accurate evaluation in breeding programs is key to selecting resistant varieties. The Area Under the Disease Progress Curve (AUDPC) is one of the commonly metric used as a standard methodology to score FHB. Although efficient, AUDPC requires significant costs in phenotyping to cover the entire disease development pattern. Here, we show that there are more efficient alternatives to AUDPC (angle, growing degree days to reach 50% FHB severity, and FHB maximum variance) that reduce the number of field assessments required and allow for fair comparisons between unbalanced evaluations across trials. Furthermore, we found that the evaluation method that captures the maximum variance in FHB severity across plots is the most optimal approach for scoring FHB. In addition, results obtained on experimental data were validated on a simulated experiment where the disease progress curve was modeled as a sigmoid curve with known parameters and assessment protocols were fully controlled. Results show that alternative metrics tested in this study captured key components of quantitative plant resistance. Moreover, the new metrics could be a starting point for more accurate methods for measuring FHB in the field. For example, the optimal interval for FHB evaluation could be predicted using prior knowledge from historical weather data and FHB scores from previous trials. Finally, the evaluation methods presented in this study can reduce the FHB phenotyping burden in plant breeding with minimal losses on signal detection, resulting in a response variable available to use in data-driven analysis such as genome-wide association studies or genomic selection.
