Advertisement

Adaptation of positive-strand RNA viruses to plants

  • R. Goldbach
  • J. Wellink
  • J. Verver
  • A. van Kammen
  • D. Kasteel
  • J. van Lent
Part of the Archives of Virology Supplementum book series (ARCHIVES SUPPL, volume 9)

Summary

The vast majority of positive-strand RNA viruses (more than 500 species) are adapted to infection of plant hosts. Genome sequence comparisons of these plant RNA viruses have revealed that most of them are genetically related to animal cell-infecting counterparts; this led to the concept of “superfamilies”. Comparison of genetic maps of representative plant and animal viruses belonging to the same superfamily (e.g. cowpea mosaic virus [CPMV] versus picornaviruses and tobacco mosaic virus versus alphaviruses) have revealed genes in the plant viral genomes that appear to be essential adaptations needed for successful invasion and spread through their plant hosts. The best studied example represents the “movement protein” gene that is actively involved in cell-to-cell spread of plant viruses, thereby playing a key role in virulence and pathogenesis. In this paper the host adaptations of a number of plant viruses will be discussed, with special emphasis on the cell-to-cell movement mechanism of comovirus CPMV.

Keywords

Mosaic Virus Tobacco Mosaic Virus Plant Virus Tobacco Etch Virus Beet Necrotic Yellow Vein Virus 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Goldbach RW (1986) Molecular evolution of plant RNA viruses. Annu Rev Phytopathol 24: 289–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Goldbach R, Wellink J (1988) Evolution of plus-strand RNA viruses. Intervirology 29: 260–267PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Strauss EG, Strauss JH, Levine AJ (1990) Virus evolution. In: Fields BN, Knipe DM, Chanock RM (eds) Virology. Raven Press, New York, pp 167–190Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Koonin EV (1991) The phylogeny of RNA-dependent RNA polymerases of positive- strand RNA viruses. J Gen Virol 72: 2197–2206PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wilson TMA (1984) Cotranslational disassembly of tobacco mosaic virus in vitro. Virology 137: 255–265PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brisco MJ, Hull R, Wilson TMA (1986) Swelling of isometric and of bacilliform plant virus nucleocapsids is required for virus-specific protein synthesis in vitro. Virology 148: 210–217PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Roenhorst JW, Verduin BJM, Goldbach RW (1989) Virus-ribosome complexes from cell-free translation systems supplemented with cowpea chlorotic mottle virus particles. Virology 168: 138–146PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shaw JG, Piaskitt KA, Wilson TMA (1986) Evidence that tobacco mosaic virus particles disassemble cotranslationally in vivo. Virology 148: 326–336PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Plaskitt KA, Watkins PAC, Sleat DE, Gallie DR, Shaw JG, Wilson TMA (1987) Immunogold labeling locates the site of disassembly and transient gene expression of tobacco mosaic virus pseudovirus particles in vivo. Mol Plant Microbe Int 1: 10–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Terry BR, Robards AW (1987) Hydrodynamic radius alone governs the mobility of molecules through plasmodesmata. Planta 171: 145–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Deom CM, Lapidot M, Beachy RN (1992) Plant virus movement proteins. Cell 69: 221–224PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Goldbach R, Eggen R, De Jager C, Van Kämmen A, Van Lent J, Rezelman G, Wellink J (1990) Genetic organization, evolution and expression of plant viral genomes. In: Fräser RSS (ed) Recognition and response in plant-virus interactions. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York Tokyo, pp 147–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Goldbach R, Rezelman G, Van Kämmen A (1980) Independent replication and expression of B-component RNA of cowpea mosaic virus. Nature 286: 297–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rezelman G, Franssen HJ, Goldbach RW, Le TS, Van Kämmen A (1982) Limits to the independence of bottom component RNA of cowpea mosaic virus. J Gen Virol 60: 335–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wellink J, Van Kämmen A (1989) Cell-to-cell transport of cowpea mosaic virus requires both the 58K/48K proteins and the capsid proteins. J Gen Virol 70: 2279–2286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Van Lent J, Wellink J, Goldbach R (1990) Evidence for the involvement of the 58K and 48K proteins of intercellular movement of cowpea mosaic virus. J Gen Virol 71: 219–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Van Lent J, Storms M, Van der Meer F, Wellink J, Goldbach R (1991) Tubular structures involved in movement of cowpea mosaic virus are also formed in infected cowpea protoplasts. J Gen Virol 72: 2615–2623PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Huber R, Hontelez J, Van Kammen A (1977) Cowpea mosaic virus infection of protoplasts from Samsun tobacco leaves. J Gen Virol 34: 315–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    De Jong W, Ahlquist P (1991) Bromovirus host specifity and systemic infection. Semin Virol 2: 97–105Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Roenhorst JW, Van Lent JWM, Verduin BJM (1988) Binding of cowpea chlorotic mottle virus to cowpea protoplasts and relation of binding to virus entry and infection. Virology 164: 91–98PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Goldbach
    • 1
  • J. Wellink
    • 2
  • J. Verver
    • 1
  • A. van Kammen
    • 2
  • D. Kasteel
    • 1
  • J. van Lent
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of VirologyAgricultural University WageningenWageningenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Molecular BiologyAgricultural University WageningenWageningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations