icvg 2009 part I pp 1-131.pdf - Cornell University

More documents

Recommendations

Info

— 40 — GRAPEVINE VIRUS COLLECTION AT NYON: A CONTRIBUTION TO A PUTATIVE NETWORK OF A WORLDWIDE GRAPEVINE VIRUS REFERENCE COLLECTION Paul GUGERLI * , Jean-Jacques BRUGGER, Maria-Elena RAMEL and Sébastien BESSE Agroscope Changins-Wädenswil Research Station ACW, Virology – Bacteriology, CH-1260 NYON, Switzerland *Corresp. author : Paul Gugerli, Telephone: +41 22 366 27 29, Email: paul.gugerli@bluewin.ch Summary The grapevine virus collection Agroscope Changins- Wädenswil ACW at Nyon and a proposal for an International Network of Grapevine Virus Reference Collections are presented. INTRODUCTION First steps towards a grapevine virus collection in an experimental vineyard of the Federal Agricultural Reserch Station of Changins, now Agroscope Changins-Wädenswil Research Station, at Nyon have been initiated some 50 years ago by R. Bovey, founding member and former secretary of the International Council for the Study of Virus and Virus-like Diseases of the Grapevine (ICVG). At that time, grapevine viruses were not well known and could not easily been transmitted from grapevine to herbaceous test plants. Transmission of grapevine fanleaf virus by a nematode vector was only demonstrated in 1958 by Hewitt et al. and its mechanical transmission to an herbaceous host by Cadman et al. in 1960. It was therefore judicious to conserve the viruses to be investigated on grapevine plants. This allowed studying not only the virus but also the pathology of the associated disease. Several dozens of grapevine viruses have since been discovered and characterized. As experimental transmission to herbaceous host plants still fails for many of them, maintaining these viruses on vines, either on the original plants or on grafted indicator vines, remains therefore as relevant as in the past. Any new accession should possibly be made available to the international scientific community. The extra costs for the maintenance in a collection are low compared to those invested in the study of a newly discovered virus. A second good reason to carry on a grapevine virus collection is its use as a reference set for diagnostic purposes. Both biological and laboratory assays require internal standards. Finally, although harmful viruses may be, they merit at least partial conservation as unique elements of our diverse biological system. THE GRAPEVINE VIRUS COLLECTION AT NYON The present grapevine virus collection at Nyon was entirely renewed since 2000 and comprises today more than 2200 staked goblet vines. The origins go back to several older collections in the same experimental vineyard. Most vines are grafted on 3309 or SO4 rootstocks, few others are own rooted. Each clone comprises three identical vines or occasionally multiples of three. The actual collection comprises therefore more than 600 clones of distinct accessions. They come from many countries and a majority is affected by grapevine leafroll but the collection includes also vines with rugose wood, fanleaf, fleck and other virus diseases. Vines infected by viruses transmitted by Longidorus spp. are maintained in concrete containers. The collection is situated in the vicinity of the Research Station in an experimental field free of Xiphinema spp. as well as potential known aerial virus vectors. Natural transmission of grapevine leafroll has indeed not been recorded since over 30 years. Spacing between vines is 0.9 m and between rows 1.8 m. Clones of three goblet vines with variable growth or symptoms are therefore easily visually distinguished, controlled or photographed (Fig. 1). Fig. 1. Grapevine virus collection Agroscope Changins- Wädenswil ACW at Nyon in autumn. Every vine is identified by a unique number (plant number) engraved on a metallic label on the corresponding stake. Each tenth stake in the row is coloured in order to find one’s position easily. Over the years, older accessions are rejuvenated or grafted on indicators, rootstocks or graft infected with multiple viruses. Each time, daughter plants get a new plant number in order to distinguish clearly any vine once conserved in the collection, used for research and controls or sent to other institutes. The identification of a newly planted or assembled vine must also include the parent plant numbers, cultivar, origin, clone and health status. The procedure rapidly generates considerable amounts of data but allows tracing the origin of any component of a vine, the growing cane, rootstock and eventually one or several additional grafts. Compiling all the plant identifications and temporary localizations requests an efficient database. We presently use Microsoft Access to handle the data (Fig. 2).
— 41 — Fig. 2. Part of a Microsoft Access datasheet from the grapevine virus collection at Nyon. A WORLDWIDE GRAPEVINE VIRUS COLLECTION Grapevine virus collections are maintained in a number of research institutes around the world, e.g. Golino (1992). Efforts have also been made in Europe to constitute centralized collections. Massive intercontinental exchange of vine germ plasm is however not desirable. Therefore, the existence of geographically dispersed collections is likely to persist. Their funding is however not easy and rapid changes of research activities may well endanger their long term survival. Thus, any kind of common international interest or agreement would support and strengthen local efforts in this field, since international recognition generally helps to convince local financing authorities. Although particular plant material can normally be obtained from a colleague upon a request, we know little about all the material that is available around the globe. An exchange of information and minimal standardisation would therefore be useful and assure that valuable material does not get lost, especially material that has been used in published work. Access to international grapevine virus references will also be of interest for diagnostic and phytosanitary purposes. Consequently, we propose to examine the possibility of creating an international network of grapevine virus collections. PROPOSAL (1) As a first step, we invite members of ICVG to communicate to the secretary, before the end of the year 2009, their interest in sharing information about their grapevine virus collections and any useful suggestion and recommendation. (2) In the first half of 2010, participants provide more information about their collections, i.e. localization, organisation, use, size, owner, person in charge, some pictures as well as any other relevant information. (3) Participants provide precise data about important accessions in their collections and the type of material that could be made available: leaf samples, wood, canes, virus extracts, cDNA., antibodies, etc. This might include the expression of the willingness to conserve material for third part institutes that do not have the necessary facilities or sanitary containment. Collections of insect-proof houses or in vitro collections might be necessary in some grapevinegrowing regions. It is possible that some institutes may just indicate a link to their already existing database. Other may prefer to have information also compiled in an extra database of ICVG. The outcome is still entirely open. A special file could be opened in the ICVG homepage http://www.icvg.ch, and progress reported periodically. LITERATURE CADMAN, C. H., DIAS, H. F. & HARRISON, B. D. 1960. Saptransmissible viruses associated with diseases of grapevine in Europe and North America. Nature 187, 577-579. GOLINO, D. A. 1992. The Davis Grapevine Virus Collection. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture 43 (2), 200-205. HEWITT, W. B., RASKI, D. J. & GOHEEN, A. C. 1958. Transmission of fanleaf virus by Xiphinema index Thorne and Allen (Abstr.). Phytopathology 48, 393-394. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We thank N. Dubuis for extensive and accurate laboratory analysis, as well as Sabine Bonnard, Larisa Grosu, Myriam Lüchinger and Pierre- Henry Crausaz for valuable technical help in the vineyard. Progrès Agricole et Viticole, 2009, Hors Série – Extended abstracts 16 th Meeting of ICVG, Dijon, France, 31 Aug – 4 Sept 2009
Page 3 and 4: 16th Meeting of the International C
Page 5 and 6: AVANT-PROPOS Nous sommes très heur
Page 7 and 8: Content - Sommaire Page Partners an
Page 9 and 10: Session IV - Epidemiology - Survey
Page 11 and 12: Poster 51 Poster 52 Poster 53 Poste
Page 13 and 14: Identification and distribution of
Page 15 and 16: — 15 — GRAPEVINE VIROLOGY HIGHL
Page 17 and 18: — 17 — were found, in that a va
Page 19 and 20: — 19 — Likewise, an antibody bi
Page 21 and 22: — 21 — LITERATURE ABOU GHANEM-S
Page 23 and 24: — 23 — ORECCHIA, M., NOELKE, G.
Page 25 and 26: — 25 — immunoassays, either ELI
Page 27 and 28: — 27 — ENGELBRECHT, D.J. & KASD
Page 29 and 30: — 29 — NEW DEVELOPMENTS IN UNDE
Page 31 and 32: — 31 — LIU, Y.-P., PEREMYSLOV,
Page 33 and 34: — 33 — RESULTS AND DISCUSSION O
Page 35 and 36: — 35 — northeastern Oklahoma fr
Page 37 and 38: — 37 — viruses multiple primers
Page 39: — 39 — glass planar microarrays
Page 43 and 44: — 43 — Complete sequencing of G
Page 45 and 46: — 45 — slightly bigger molecule
Page 47 and 48: — 47 — result suggests that the
Page 49 and 50: — 49 — ELISA. Rootstock samples
Page 51 and 52: — 51 — acquisition and analysis
Page 53 and 54: — 53 — identity at the protein
Page 55 and 56: — 55 — The sequences obtained w
Page 57 and 58: — 57 — MULLIS, K. & FALOONA, F.
Page 59 and 60: — 59 — qualitative level among
Page 61 and 62: — 61 — incidence of negative se
Page 63 and 64: — 63 — Madeira Islands. Eight a
Page 65 and 66: — 65 — stylet on actively growi
Page 67 and 68: — 67 — ANDRET-LINK, P. & FUCHS,
Page 69 and 70: — 69 — IDENTIFICATION OF PLASMO
Page 71 and 72: — 71 — SYMPTOM DETERMINANTS ON
Page 73 and 74: — 73 — RECOMBINATION EVENTS IN
Page 75 and 76: — 75 — THE SPECIFICITY OF GFLV
Page 77 and 78: — 77 — PARTIAL RNA-2 SEQUENCE O
Page 79 and 80: — 79 — CHARACTERIZATION OF RASP
Page 81 and 82: — 81 — ISOLATION OF MOVEMENT PR
Page 83 and 84: — 83 — REAL-TIME PCR OF GRAPEVI
Page 85 and 86: — 85 — FIRST RECORDS OF ARABIS
Page 87 and 88: — 87 — primers allow us to quan
Page 89 and 90: — 89 — transgenic grape lines,
Page 91 and 92:
— 91 — highest values were obse
Page 93 and 94:
— 93 — Imura et al., 2008, Loud
Page 95 and 96:
— 95 — GFLV-F13. Low levels of
Page 97 and 98:
— 97 — This is probably due to
Page 99 and 100:
— 99 — variation was distribute
Page 101 and 102:
— 101 — Figure 1. Proportion of
Page 103 and 104:
— 103 — were produced. The prod
Page 105 and 106:
— 105 — 2007 positive results w
Page 107 and 108:
— 107 — dehydrogenase (GAPDH) t
Page 109 and 110:
— 109 — detected, either as sin
Page 111 and 112:
— 111 — basal leaf tissue inclu
Page 113 and 114:
— 113 — GLRaV-3 incidence cover
Page 115 and 116:
— 115 — Figure 2. Frequency of
Page 117 and 118:
— 117 — Ljutun, Mladenka, Nincu
Page 119 and 120:
— 119 — ELISA reagent used in t
Page 121 and 122:
— 121 — Due the late season the
Page 123 and 124:
— 123 — RT-PCR & PCR: Primers f
Page 125 and 126:
— 125 — Table 2. Sanitary statu
Page 127 and 128:
— 127 — SANITARY STATUS OF AUTO
Page 129 and 130:
— 129 — THE VIRUS STATUS OF GRA
Page 131:
— 131 — PRESENCE OF GLRAV 1, 2,
show all

icvg 2009 part I pp 1-131.pdf - Cornell University

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?