Transmission of fig leaf mottle-associated virus 1 by Ceroplastes rusci
- 13 Downloads
Viruses associated with fig mosaic disease are disseminated by grafting but not by seed and some of them are transmitted by Aceria ficus. To investigate the role of Ceroplastes rusci in the transmission of fig mosaic disease agents, first nymphs were collected from fig plants exhibiting typical mosaic symptoms in a fig orchard and transferred to fig seedlings in the laboratory. After 20 days, leaf curling, vein clearing and leaf chlorotic mottling symptoms were observed on the leaves of seedlings exposed to C. rusci, but not on control seedlings even after six months. Leaves of donor plants were infected with fig leaf mottle-associated virus 1 (FLMaV-1), fig mosaic virus and fig mosaic-associated virus 1, as shown by RT-PCR with specific primers, but only FLMaV-1 was detected in symptomatic fig seedlings following exposure to C. rusci. Sequencing revealed that FLMaV-1 isolates obtained from both donor plants and recipient seedlings were identical and closely related to an Italian FLMaV-1 isolate. This is the first report of FLMaV-1 transmission by C. rusci.
KeywordsFicus carica cv. Sarılop Fig mosaic-associated virus 1 Transmission Ceroplastes rusci
The authors thank Prof. Dr. Mustafa Gümüş from the University of Ege and Dr. Toufic Elbeaino from İtaly for supplying positive and negative control samples for RT-PCR experiments. The authors also thank Prof. Dr. Ömer Erincik from University of Adnan Menderes for the English editing of the manuscript. This study was supported by Adnan Menderes University ÖYP project (12032), Turkey.
- Acikgoz S, Doken MT (2001) Analysis of double-stranded RNA associated with fig mosaic disease in Agean region-Turkey IX. Phytopathology Congress/Turkey, 145. Google Scholar
- Çağlar BK, Fidan H, Güldür ME, Elbeaino T (2010) The prevelance of three viruses infecting fig in southern Turkey. J Phytopathol 29:1–3Google Scholar
- Çağlayan K, Elçi E, Serçe ÇU, Kaya K, Gazel M, Medina V (2012) Detectıon of fıg mosaıc virus in viruliferous eriophyid mite Aceria ficus. J Plant Pathol 94:629–634Google Scholar
- Condit IJ, Horne WT (1933) A mosaic of the fig in California. Phytopathology 23:887–896Google Scholar
- Edremit E, Açıkgöz S (2011) Aydın Yöresinde İncir Mozaik Hastalığı ile İlgili İlk Rapor. Proceedings IV. Plant Protection Congress/Turkey, 73Google Scholar
- Elbeaino T, Digiaro M, De Stradis A, Martelli GP (2006) Partial characterization of a Closterovirus associated with a chlorotic mottling of fig. J Plant Pathol 88: 187–192Google Scholar
- Elbeaino T, Digiaro M, De Stradis A, Martelli GP (2007) Identification of a second member of the family Closteroviridae in mosaic-diseased figs. J Plant Pathol 89:119–124Google Scholar
- Flock RA, Wallace JM (1955) Transmission of fig mosaic by the eriophyid mite Aceria ficus. Phytopathology 45:52–54Google Scholar
- Gattoni G, Minafra A, Castellano MA, De Stradis A, Boscia D, Elbeaino T, Digiaro M, Martelli GP (2009) Some properties of Fıg latent vırus-1, a new member of the famıly flexıvırıdae. J Plant Pathol 91(3):555–564Google Scholar
- Tzanetakis I, Martin R (2010) New viruses found in fig exhibiting mosaic symptoms. 21st International Confer- ence on Virus and other Graft Transmissible Diseases of Fruit Crops. Julius-Kühn-Archiv 427Google Scholar