4.6 Article

Biology and Ultrastructural Characterization of Grapevine Badnavirus 1 and Grapevine Virus G

Journal

VIRUSES-BASEL
Volume 14, Issue 12, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/v14122695

Keywords

grapevine badnavirus 1; grapevine virus G; real-time PCR; transmission modes; host range; cytopathology

Categories

Funding

  1. Croatian Science Foundation
  2. [IP-2018-01-1305]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigated the transmission and host range of two newly described grapevine viruses in Croatia. It found that the vine mealybug is a vector of these viruses and can transmit them through vine-to-vine transmission. Grafting and green grafting techniques were also shown to transmit the viruses.
The biological characteristics of grapevine viruses, such as their transmission and host range, are important for the adoption of successful prophylaxis strategies. The aim of this study was to investigate the traits of two newly described grapevine viruses widely distributed in Croatia, grapevine badnavirus 1 (GBV-1) and grapevine virus G (GVG). The vine mealybug (Planoccocus ficus) proved to be a vector of GBV-1 and GVG capable of vine-to-vine transmission with overall experimental transmission rates of 61% and 14.6%, respectively. Transmission was also demonstrated by grafting, with an overall transmission rate of 53.8% for GBV-1 and 100% for GVG, as well as by green grafting using the T-budding technique. Symptoms of GBV-1 and GVG were not observed on the woody cylinders of the indicators LN 33, Kober 5BB, 110 Richter and cvs. Chardonnay and Cabernet Sauvignon. Seed transmission and mechanical transmission were not confirmed. Electron microscopy revealed accumulation of GBV-1 particles and viroplasms in the cytoplasm, but no alternations of the cell structure. Infection with GVG revealed the proliferation of tonoplast-associated vesicles inside phloem cells and cell wall thickening.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available