4.6 Article

Genetic Variation between Asian and Mediterranean Populations of Cucurbit Aphid-Borne Yellows Virus

Journal

VIRUSES-BASEL
Volume 15, Issue 8, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/v15081714

Keywords

gene flow; molecular characterization; phylogroup; population genetics; recombination

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Viral symptoms were observed in cucurbits in Iran, and the main suspected causal agent, cucurbit aphid-borne yellows virus (CABYV), was detected and analyzed for genetic diversity. Phylogenetic analysis revealed that Iranian isolates belonged to two major clades, Asian and Mediterranean.
Viral symptoms, such as yellowing, leaf deformation, mottling, vein clearing, and reduced yield, were observed in cucurbits in Iran. This study aimed to detect the main suspected causal agent, cucurbit aphid-borne yellows virus (CABYV), in Iran and analyze the genetic diversity among isolates. Two hundred samples were collected from different growing areas between 2019 and 2022. PCR amplification was performed on the P3 and P4 genes. The sequences of 18 Iranian isolates were obtained and deposited in GenBank. Recombination, phylogenetic, and population genetics studies were then carried out for the complete genome and all ORFs sequences, together with other isolates in GenBank. The nucleotide identities of the overlapped ORF3/4 sequences of Iranian isolates were 94.8 to 99.5% among themselves, and with other tested isolates ranging from 94.3 to 99.3%. Phylogenetic trees based on the complete genome and the overlapped ORF3/4 showed two major clades, namely Asian and Mediterranean, and the new isolates from Iran were positioned in both clades. The obtained results also suggest that all the genes and two clades of CABYV populations were under negative selection pressure. Furthermore, rare gene flow between these two clades (FST > 0.33) confirmed the high genetic separation among them.

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