4.5 Article

Preference by a virus vector for infected plants is reversed after virus acquisition

期刊

VIRUS RESEARCH
卷 186, 期 -, 页码 32-37

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.virusres.2013.11.005

关键词

Potato leaf roll virus; Myzus persicae; Potato volatiles; Virus-induced plant volatiles; Plant-insect-virus-interactions; Disease spread

类别

资金

  1. USDA-AFRI competitive grant [2009-65104-05730]
  2. Idaho Agricultural Experiment Station
  3. USDA-NIFA
  4. NIFA [2009-65104-05730, 687205] Funding Source: Federal RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Pathogens and their vectors can interact either directly or indirectly via their shared hosts, with implications for the persistence and spread of the pathogen in host populations. For example, some plant viruses induce changes in host plants that cause the aphids that carry these viruses to settle preferentially on infected plants. Furthermore, relative preference by the vector for infected plants can change to a preference for noninfected plants after virus acquisition by the vector, as has recently been demonstrated in the wheat-Rhopalosiphum padi-Barley yellow dwarf virus pathosystem. Here we document a similar dynamic in the potato-Myzus persicae (Sulzer)-Potato leaf roll virus (PLRV) pathosystem. Specifically, in a dual choice bioassay, nonviruliferous apterous M. persicae settled preferentially on or near potato plants infected with PLRV relative to noninfected (sham-inoculated) control plants, whereas viruliferous M. persicae (carrying PLRV) preferentially settled on or near sham-inoculated potato plants relative to infected plants. The change in preference after virus acquisition also occurred in response to trapped headspace volatiles, and to synthetic mimics of headspace volatile blends from PLRV-infected and sham-inoculated potato plants. The change in preference we document should promote virus spread by increasing rates of virus acquisition and transmission by the vector. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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