1887

Abstract

SUMMARY

Purified preparations of the two sedimenting nucleoprotein components (M and B) of tomato ringspot virus (TomRSV) and of strains of cherry leaf roll virus (CLRV) from elderberry (G) and from rhubarb (R) had little infectivity alone whereas mixtures of homologous components were very infective. However, whereas heterologous mixtures of the components of CLRV strains G and R were also very infective, heterologous mixtures of the components of CLRV-R and TomRSV were not. These results and serological evidence indicate that CLRV and TomRSV are not closely related to each other or to other nepoviruses with similar properties.

Pseudo-recombinants produced by exchanging the nucleoprotein components of CLRV strains R and G were less stable than the parent isolates on storage in sap at 18 °C. Component M determined serological specificity whereas component B determined ability to infect , and the lesion type and severity of systemic symptoms in and spp. Virulence also depended on the compatibility of M and B components and neither pseudo-recombinant was as virulent as the parent donating component B. Systemic infection and symptom production in required M and B components from strain R. In plant protection tests, the parent strains of CLRV protected tobacco plants against either parent and against the two pseudo-recombinants, whereas the pseudo-recombinants protected plants against either pseudo-recombinant but not against the parent strains. This suggests that determinants in both nucleoprotein components of either the protecting or challenging virus are involved.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jgv/10.1099/0022-1317-50-2-269
1980-10-01
2021-10-25
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jgv/50/2/JV0500020269.html?itemId=/content/journal/jgv/10.1099/0022-1317-50-2-269&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Cropley R., Tomlinson J. A. 1971; Cherry leaf roll virus. Commonwealth Mycological Institute/Association of Applied Biologists Descriptions of Plant Viruses No. 80 4 pp
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Dias H. F. 1975; Peach rosette mosaic virus. Commonwealth Mycological Institute/Association of Applied Biologists Descriptions of Plant Viruses No. 150 4 pp
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Fulton J. P., Fulton R. W. 1970; A comparison of some properties of elm mosaic and tomato ringspot viruses. Phytopathology 60:114–115
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Gooding G. V. 1963; Purification and serology of a virus associated with the grape yellow vein disease. Phytopathology 53:475–480
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Haber S., Hamilton R. I. 1980; Distribution of determinants for symptom production, nucleoprotein component distribution and antigenicity of coat protein between the two RNA components of cherry leaf roll virus. Journal of General Virology 50:377–389
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Hanada K., Harrison B. D. 1977; Effects of virus genotype and temperature on seed transmission of nepoviruses. Annals of Applied Biology 85:79–92
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Harrison B. D., Murant A. F. 1977; Nepovirus group. Commonwealth Mycological Institute/Association of Applied Biologists Descriptions of Plant Viruses No. 185 4 pp
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Jones A. T. 1973; A comparison of some properties of four strains of cherry leaf roll virus. Annals of Applied Biology 74:211–217
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Jones A. T. 1976; Serological specificity of isolates of cherry leaf roll virus from different natural hosts. Potjoprivredna znanstvena smotra ‒ Agriculturae Conspectus Scientificus 39:527–532
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Jones A. T., Mayo M. A. 1972; The two nucleoprotein particles of cherry leaf roll virus. Journal of General Virology 16:349–358
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Jones A. T., Murant A. F. 1971; Serological relationship between cherry leaf roll, elm mosaic and golden elderberry viruses. Annals of Applied Biology 69:11–15
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Jones A. T., Wood G. A. 1979; The occurrence of cherry leaf roll virus in red raspberry in New Zealand. Plant Disease Reporter 62:835–838
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Jones A. T., Forster R. L. S., Mohamed N. A. 1979; Purification and properties of Australian lucerne latent virus, a seed‒borne virus having affinities with nepoviruses. Annals of Applied Biology 92:49–59
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Martelli G. P., Quacquarelli A., Gallitelli D. 1978; Grapevine Bulgarian latent virus. Commonwealth Mycological Institute!Association of Applied Biologists Descriptions of Plant Viruses No. 186 4 pp
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Quacquarelli A., Gallitelli D., Savino V., Piazzola P., Martelli G. P. 1978; Some properties of grapevine fanleaf and other nepoviruses infecting the grapevine. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Viruses and Virus Diseases of Grapevines, Cordova 1976 (in the press)
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Stace-Smith R. 1962; Studies on Rubus virus diseases in British Columbia. IX. Ringspot disease of red raspberry. Canadian Journal of Botany 40:905–912
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Tomlinson J. A., Walkey D. G. A. 1967; The isolation and purification of rhubarb viruses occurring in Britain. Annals of Applied Biology 59:415–426
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Walkey D. G. A., Stace-Smith R., Tremaine J. H. 1973; Serological, physical, and chemical properties of strains of cherry leaf roll virus. Phytopathology 63:566–571
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Waterworth H. E., Lawson R. H. 1973; Purification, electron microscopy, and serology of the dogwood strain of cherry leaf roll virus. Phytopathology 63:141–146
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/jgv/10.1099/0022-1317-50-2-269
Loading
/content/journal/jgv/10.1099/0022-1317-50-2-269
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Most cited this month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error