3,4 millones de euros para el nuevo Centro de Diagnóstico y Detección de Plagas y Enfermedades Exóticas del IVIA

La Conselleria de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación realizará esta inversión para financiar la construcción y dotación del nuevo centro de investigación dedicado al diagnóstico y la detección de plagas y enfermedades exóticas, en el Insitututo Valenciano de Investigaciones Agrarias (IVIA) en Moncada.

La idea es aumentar la vigilancia y el control de posibles agentes fitófagos o fitopatógenos de países ajenos a España, y que podrían afectar a los cultivos valencianos, como ha sido el caso de Ceratitis Capitata y Rhynchophorus ferrugineus (o picudo rojo).

Esta noticia ya fue adelantada por Juan Cotino (el Consejero) a mediados de diciembre, y forma parte de las conclusiones en las primeras jornadas científicas internacionales sobre el picudo rojo.

Para el 2008 se habrán construído las instalaciones, con unos 2.000 metros cuadrados y tres plantas, que contarán con despachos, laboratorios, almacenes y cámaras acondicionadas.

Los principales objetivos serán el aislamiento, identificación, caracterización y comportamiento de los fitófagos y fitopatógenos, el desarrollo de técnicas de detección y caracterización para contar con un diagnóstico lo más rápido y fiable posible de estas plagas exóticas. Además, se potenciará el estudio de métodos de control biológicos, químicos y culturales de plagas y enfermedades.

Por último, “se desarrollarán otros trabajos como procedimientos de cuarentena, obtención de plantas libres de patógenos y certificación así como la mejora genética de plantas, mediante la utilización de técnicas de biotecnología y genómica, orientada fundamentalmente a la obtención de genotipos de calidad resistentes a patógenos”.

Vía | Nota de prensa de la Consellería de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación.

One Comment

  1. José García de la Ro
    Posted 15 marzo 2007 at 20:36 | Permalink

    WHITEFLY IS A NECROPHAGOUS INSECT & NOT A PEST

    Whitefly has been considered as a pest, mainly because it is a virus vector.
    However, since 1967 was demonstrated that virus doesn’t cause the damage
    attributed to them since 1896, when Ivanowski and Beijerink thought that the
    sap from plants with tobacco mosaic, contained “poison” (virus in Latin).

    In the Appendix of the book Mycoplasmas, Volume V, Edited by Robert Whitcomb
    and Joseph G. Tully, Academic Press, 1989, you will find a list of more than
    800 mycoplasma-like organisms(MLO), now phytoplasma diseases, considered as
    virus before 1967. Since then, more diseases have been confirmed as phytoplasma
    instead of virus.

    Based on this publication and on the fact that Koch’s Postulates can not be
    fulfilled with virus diseases (because you have to inoculate wounded tissue and
    need cells to replicate), I concluded that virus are not phytopathogens but
    phytotoxic, due to the nucleic acid they contain.

    At the present time, it is accepted by researchers worldwide the great importance of
    phytoplasmas´ damage and the effectiveness of oxytetracyclin to control them.

    Therefore, if phytoplasma diseases are effectively controlled with oxytetracyclin,
    if sprayed correctly, there is no need to apply insecticides against whitefly or
    any other insect as virus vector, since the damage as sucking insect they may cause,
    is not of economic importance.

    Besides, whitefly is attracted by the yellow color of plants and by the high sugar
    contents (symptoms of phytoplasma damage), because it is, as many other insects, a
    necrophagous insect (not a pest), that only colonize plants damage by other factors
    like phytoplasma. Furthermore, by “remission of symptoms” obtained after 4-5
    applications with oxytetracyclin, I have proved during the last 20 years that the
    casual agent of many diseases considered as virus, are really caused by phytoplasma.
    “Remission of symptoms” is scientifically accepted, as a proof that the casual agent
    is a phytoplasma and not a virus, because the antibiotic doesn’t have any action against
    virus and it is specific against phytoplasma.

    Chemical control of whitefly in most cases, have been a very expensive failure, pretended
    to be justified by the appearance of new biotypes resistant to the majority of insecticides
    used for its control.

    Oxytetracyclin in plants decomposes in 72 hours and does not leave residues. The
    Environment Protection Agency(EPA) approved its use in pear and apples, more than 40
    years ago. Besides, at the present time, this antibiotic is rarely prescribed for
    humans.

    During the time I worked for Pfizer México(36 years), developing the use of antibiotics
    to control bacteria and phytoplasma, I found that in many cases symptoms caused by
    phytoplasma are confused with virus or micronutrients deficiencies. Also, I confirmed
    that phytoplasma cause the lesions (by the foliage distortion), that facilitate, if the weather
    conditions are appropriate, the penetration of saprophyte(not pathogen) fungi like:
    Phytophthora infestans, Fusarium oxysporum, Phymatotrichum omnivorum, Phytophthora
    cinnamomi, etc.

    For more than 100 years, the wrong virus diagnosis has caused great losses to farmers
    worldwide, despite all the scientific information published since 1967 in regard to
    phytoplasma diseases. This new knowledge will improve productivity of farmers,
    especially in developing countries, and substantially increase their income by saving a
    lot in pesticides.

    Your opinion will be highly appreciated

    Very truly yours,

    Ing. José García de la Rosa
    Consultant


Escribe un comentario