Record Details
Comparison of the host range and physical properties of Eola rasp leaf, tobacco ringspot and tomato ringspot viruses
ScholarsArchive at Oregon State University
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Title | Comparison of the host range and physical properties of Eola rasp leaf, tobacco ringspot and tomato ringspot viruses |
| Names |
Liu, Kang-chien
(creator) Allen, Thomas C. Jr (advisor) |
| Date Issued | 1964-05-15 (iso8601) |
| Note | Graduation date: 1964 |
| Abstract | Eola rasp leaf of cherry was first described by Milbrath and Reynolds in Oregon in 1961. Dr. Cadman of the Scottish Horticultural Research Institute suggested that this disease was incited by a strain of tomato ringspot virus (TomRSV), but since then controversial results with some isolates of EoIa rasp leaf have occurred in greenhouse and serological tests. Since both tomato ringspot and tobacco ringspot virus (TRSV) incited similar reactions on a number of host plants, the possibility of TRSV being involved had been considered. The object of this study was to identify the virus principally responsible for Eola rasp leaf of cherry. Twenty plant species were mechanically inoculated with six isolates of EoIa rasp leaf virus (ERLV), TomRSV and TRSV to compare symptoms. Among them, plant species that showed distinctive symptoms to these viruses were Antirrhinum majus, Chenopodium amaranticolor, Datura stramonium, Glycine max, Petunia hybrida, Pisum sativum, Phaseolus vulgaris and Vigna sinensis. Among the isolates of ERLV, 16i incited symptoms closest to those incited by TomRSV, while 17ao was apparently related to TRSV. The other isoIates of ERLV were closer to TomRSV than to TRSV, yet they incited milder symptoms than those of either virus. Tests on physical properties of these viruses demonstrated that one ERLV isolate, 17ao, resembled TRSV and the others resembled TomRSV. This was demonstrated most clearly in the longevity in vitro tests. In the other two types of tests, four isolates of ERLV, 17a, 17o, 17r and 17v, were lower in thermal inactivation points and lower in dilution end points than were TRSV and TomRSV. Since TRSV inactivated at a higher temperature and withstood higher dilution than TomRSV, these four isolates of ERLV would be closer to TomRSV than to TRSV. Thermal inactivation and dilution end points comparable to TRSV were demonstrated by 17ao, while these properties for 16i were very close to those of TomRSV. Cross-protection tests also demonstrated a relationship between TomRSV and the majority of the ERLV isolates. Only one, 17ao, appeared to be related to TRSV. TomRSV isolate 51ad protected petunia and Samsun tobacco from infection by TomRSV 51ad and from five ERLV isolates, but not from the infection of TRSV 51ae and ERLV isolate 17ao. TRSV isolate 51ae protected petunia and Samsun and Necrotic Turk tobacco from the infection of 17ao and 51ae, but not from the other ERLV isolates and 51ad. Serological test results supported the existence of a relationship of five of the ERLV isolates to TomRSV; the other, 17ao, being related to TRSV. In Ouchterlony agar double-diffusion tests, TomRSV antisera and antisera obtained from rabbits injected with 16i and 17o reacted with five ERLV isolates and TomRSV isolates, but not with 17ao and 51ae. TRSV antisera and antiserum obtained from a rabbit injected with 17ao reacted with 17ao and 51ae from various sources but not with the other ERLV isolates or TomRSV. In conclusion, host range, symptoms, physical properties, cross-protection and serology indicated that ERLV isolate 17ao was a strain of TRSV, and the rest of the ERLV isolates were strains of TomRSV. |
| Genre | Thesis/Dissertation |
| Topic | Virus diseases of plants |
| Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/1957/48688 |
