4.5 Article

Association of a DNA Virus with Grapevines Affected by Red Blotch Disease in California

期刊

PHYTOPATHOLOGY
卷 103, 期 10, 页码 1069-1076

出版社

AMER PHYTOPATHOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1094/PHYTO-10-12-0253-R

关键词

geminivirus; next-generation sequencing

资金

  1. Viticulture Consortium West

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the Napa Valley of California, vineyards of 'Cabernet Franc' (CF) clone 214, 'Cabernet Sauvignon' clone 337, and 'Zinfandel' clone 1A (Z1A) with grapevines exhibiting foliar symptoms of red blotches, marginal reddening, and red veins that were accompanied by reduced sugar accumulation in fruit at harvest were initially suspected to be infected with leafroll-associated viruses. However, reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests were negative for all known leafroll-associated viruses, with the exception of Grapevine leafroll-associated virus 2 in Z1A. Metagenomic analysis of cDNA libraries obtained from double-stranded RNA enriched nucleic acid (NA) preparations from bark scrapings of dormant canes on an Illumina platform revealed sequences having a distant relationship with members of the family Geminiviridae. Sequencing of products obtained by PCR assays using overlapping primers and rolling circle amplification (RCA) confirmed the presence of a single circular genome of 3,206 nucleotides which was nearly identical to the genome of a recently reported Grapevine cabernet franc-associated virus found in declining grapevines in New York. We propose to call this virus Grapevine red blotch-associated virus (GRBaV) to describe its association with grapevine red blotch disease. Primers specific to GRBaV amplified a product of expected size (557 bp) from NA preparations obtained from petioles of several diseased source vines. Chip bud inoculations successfully transmitted GRBaV to test plants of CF, as confirmed by PCR analysis. This is the first report of a DNA virus associated with red blotch disease of grapevines in California.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据