time PCR assay for the quantification of apple proliferation phytoplasmas in plants and insects. Acta Horticulturae 657:415-420. Kison, H., B. C. Kirkpatrick, and E. Seemuller. 1997. Genetic comparison of the peach yellow leaf roll agent with European fruit tree phytoplasmas of the apple proliferation group. Plant Pathology 46 (4):538-544. Kison, H., and E. Seemüller. 2001. Differences in strain virulence of the European stone fruit yellows phytoplasma and susceptibility of stone fruit trees on various rootstocks to this pathogen. Journal of Phytopathology 149 (9):533-541. Lee, I. M., A. Bertaccini, M. Vibio, and D. E. Gun<strong>de</strong>rsen. 1995. Detection of multiple phytoplasmas in perennial fruit trees with <strong>de</strong>cline symptoms in Italy. Phytopathology 85 (6):728-735. Lorenz, K. H., F. Dosba, C. Poggi Pollini, G. Llacer, and E. Seemuller. 1994. Phytoplasma diseases of Prunus species in Europe are caused by genetically similar organisms. Zeitschrift fur Pflanzenkrankheiten und Pflanzenschutz 101 (6):567-575. Lorenz, K. H., B. Schnei<strong>de</strong>r, U. Ahrens, and E. Seemuller. 1995. Detection of the apple proliferation and pear <strong>de</strong>cline phytoplasmas by PCR amplification of ribosomal and nonribosomal DNA. Phytopathology 85 (7):771-776. Maixner, M., U. Ahrens, and E. Seemuller. 1995. Detection of the German grapevine yellows (Vergilbungskrankheit) MLO in grapevine, alternative hosts and a vector by a Specific PCR procedure. European Journal of Plant Pathology 101 (3):241-250. Malisano, G., G. Firrao, and R. Locci. 1996. 16S rDNA-<strong>de</strong>rived oligonucleoti<strong>de</strong> probes for the differential diagnosis of plum leptonecrosis and apple proliferation phytoplasmas. Bulletin OEPP 26 (2):421-428. Marcone, C., and E. Seemuller. 2001. A chromosome map of the European stone fruit yellows phytoplasma. Microbiology Reading 147 (5):1213-1221. Marzachi, C., F. Veratti, and D. Bosco. 1998. Direct PCR <strong>de</strong>tection of phytoplasmas in experimentally infected insects. Annals of Applied Biology 133 (1):45-54. Miquelis, A., J. F. Martin, E. W. Carson, G. Brun, and A. Gilles. 2000. Performance of 18S rDNA helix E23 for phylogenetic relationships within and between the Rotifera-Acanthocephala cla<strong>de</strong>s. Comptes Rendus <strong>de</strong> l'Aca<strong>de</strong>mie <strong>de</strong>s Sciences, Série III 323 (10):925-941. Morvan, G. 1957. Mise en évi<strong>de</strong>nce <strong>de</strong> l'action d'un virus dans le dépérissement <strong>de</strong> l'abricotier. Comptes Rendus <strong>de</strong> l'Aca<strong>de</strong>mie d'Agriculture <strong>de</strong> France 43:13-14. Seemüller, E., C. Marcone, U. Lauer, A. Ragozzino, and M. Goschl. 1998. Current status of molecular classification of the phytoplasmas. Journal of Plant Pathology 80 (1):3-26. Seemüller, E., and B. Schnei<strong>de</strong>r. 2004. 'Candidatus Phytoplasma mali', 'Candidatus Phytoplasma pyri' and 'Candidatus phytoplasma prunorum', the causal agents of apple proliferation, pear <strong>de</strong>cline and European stone fruit yellows, respectively. International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology 54:1217-1226. Skrzeczkowski, L. J., W. E. Howell, K. C. Eastwell, and T. D. Cavileer. 2001. Bacterial sequences interfering in <strong>de</strong>tection of phytoplasma by PCR using primers <strong>de</strong>rived from the ribosomal RNA operon. Acta Horticulturae (550):417-424. Smart, C. D., B. Schnei<strong>de</strong>r, C. L. Blomquist, L. J. Guerra, N. A. Harrison, U. Ahrens, K. H. Lorenz, E. Seemuller, and B. C. Kirkpatrick. 1996. Phytoplasma-specific PCR primers based on sequences of the 16S- 23S rRNA spacer region. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 62 (8):2988-2993. Torres, E., M. P. Martin, S. Paltrinieri, A. Vila, R. Masalles, and A. Bertaccini. 2004. Spreading of ESFY phytoplasmas in stone fruit in Catalonia (Spain). Journal of Phytopathology 152 (7):432-437. Tully, J. G., R. F. Whitcomb, D. L. Rose, J. M. Bove, P. Carle, N. L. Somerson, D. L. Williamson, and S. E<strong>de</strong>ngreen. 1994. Acholeplasma brassicae sp. nov. and Acholeplasma palmae sp. nov., 2 non-sterol-requiring mollicutes from plant surfaces. International Journal of Systematic Bacteriology 44 (4):680-684. Wei, W., S. Kakizawa, S. Suzuki, H. Y. Jung, H. Nishigawa, S. Miyata, K. Oshima, M. Ugaki, T. Hibi, and S. Namba. 2004. In planta dynamic analysis of onion yellows phytoplasma using localized inoculation by insect transmission. Phytopathology 94 (3):244-250. - 56 -
Table 1. Sequence of the primers and probes <strong>de</strong>signed to <strong>de</strong>tect or quantify ‘Ca. P. prunorum’ and C. pruni DNA. Name Sequence (5’→ 3’) ‘Ca. P. prunorum’ 16S rDNA ESFYf (forward) CCATCATTTAGTTGGGCACT ESFYr (reverse) ATAGGCCCAAGCCATTATTG ECAQf AAACGACTGCTAAGACTGGATATGAA (forward) ECAQp (probe) VIC-CCCGCAAGGGTATGCTGAGAGATGG ECAQr (reverse) TTACCAACTAACTAATGTGCCGCA C. pruni 18S rDNA CPf (forward) CAAGTACGTCCCCGTTGATCA CPp (probe) FAM-TTAGAGGTTCGAAGGCGATCAGATACCGC CPr (reverse) GCTGGCTGACATCGTTTATGG Table 2. Gui<strong>de</strong>lines to the choice of the primer set <strong>de</strong>pending on the purpose (i.e., i<strong>de</strong>ntification or quantification). Source Conventional Semi-quantitative Quantitative PCR organism specific PCR specific PCR ‘Ca. P. prunorum’ Internal control Insect ESFYf/r ESFYf/r ECAQf/p/r CP f/p/r Plant ESFYf/r ESFYf/r (see Christensen et al., 2004) - 57 -
- Page 1 and 2:
Ecole Nationale Supérieure Agronom
- Page 3 and 4:
Glossaire A leur première occurren
- Page 5 and 6: C. Conclusions sur l’étude des v
- Page 7 and 8: Introduction - 7 - « Deux grands m
- Page 9 and 10: l’intensification permanente de l
- Page 11 and 12: Ceci nous amène aux enjeux liés
- Page 13 and 14: (b) Coût de la lutte contre l’ES
- Page 15 and 16: Royaume- Uni Espagne Allemagne Belg
- Page 17 and 18: 1992) ; par contre, le cerisier dou
- Page 19 and 20: 6) Vection Le vecteur de l’ESFY (
- Page 21 and 22: (b) Caractéristiques de la vection
- Page 23 and 24: Conifères ? Rétention du phytopla
- Page 25 and 26: Partie I : Identifier des facteurs
- Page 27 and 28: Identifying Risk Factors from a Sur
- Page 29 and 30: MATERIALS AND METHODS Data Record a
- Page 31 and 32: visual inspection of their spatial
- Page 33 and 34: Influence of the Risk Factors. The
- Page 35 and 36: Model Application This kind of mode
- Page 37 and 38: ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We are much indebt
- Page 39 and 40: 42. Seemüller, E., and Schneider,
- Page 41 and 42: TABLE 5: Analysis of deviance for e
- Page 43 and 44: Fig. 2. Examination of the model fi
- Page 45 and 46: II. Bilan Au-delà des effets évid
- Page 47 and 48: Partie II : Identifier les cycles b
- Page 49 and 50: A toolbox for the specific detectio
- Page 51 and 52: Bordeaux). Plant samples were also
- Page 53 and 54: cycles). The analyses were performe
- Page 55: The above semi-quantification relie
- Page 59 and 60: ESFY G1R (X) ESFY G2 (X) AP15R (X)
- Page 61 and 62: Survival of European Stone Fruit Ye
- Page 63 and 64: C. pruni Reimmigrants The percentag
- Page 65 and 66: Table 1. Detection of ESFY from C.
- Page 67 and 68: Si l’expérience est répétée d
- Page 69 and 70: Il y a cependant deux réserves à
- Page 71 and 72: The spread of European stone fruit
- Page 73 and 74: inside the cage. The cages were rem
- Page 75 and 76: Quantification of ‘Ca. P. prunoru
- Page 77 and 78: prunorum’: the infectious reimmig
- Page 79 and 80: Table 2. Occurrence of Cacopsylla p
- Page 81 and 82: Number of C. pruni on P. spinos 40
- Page 83 and 84: V. Bilan sur le fonctionnement de l
- Page 85 and 86: Partie III : Tester des hypothèses
- Page 87 and 88: émergents migrent dans des massifs
- Page 89 and 90: identique à Qc(d) sauf qu’elle e
- Page 91 and 92: MATERIALS AND METHODS Characteristi
- Page 93 and 94: allows summarising in one graph (i)
- Page 95 and 96: (A) (B) Fig. 1. Summary of the spat
- Page 97 and 98: Investigating Disease Spread betwee
- Page 99 and 100: when some plants may be missing for
- Page 101 and 102: the graphical display by an appropr
- Page 103 and 104: shows that the proportion of missin
- Page 105 and 106: the approach developed by Pélissie
- Page 107 and 108:
APPENDIX Test 2. This section corre
- Page 109 and 110:
several types of points. J. R. Stat
- Page 111 and 112:
TABLE 4. Type I error and power of
- Page 113 and 114:
Fig. 2. Spatiotemporal pattern of d
- Page 115 and 116:
IV. Application à l’analyse de c
- Page 117 and 118:
Verger D1-4 Verger BH1 Verger BH2 V
- Page 119 and 120:
annuelle (Figure 1 de l’Article V
- Page 121 and 122:
consiste à disposer de vergers à
- Page 123 and 124:
Partie IV : Synthétiser l’inform
- Page 125 and 126:
Tableau 6. Propriétés biologiques
- Page 127 and 128:
Conclusion - 127 - « Il importe de
- Page 129 and 130:
fonctionnement du système épidém
- Page 131 and 132:
Tableau 7. Avantages et inconvénie
- Page 133 and 134:
malades correspondrait alors unique
- Page 135 and 136:
Expérimentations expérimentales S
- Page 137 and 138:
Références bibliographiques - 137
- Page 139 and 140:
30. Chabrolin C. (1924) Quelques ma
- Page 141 and 142:
86. Institute of Medicine (1992) Em
- Page 143 and 144:
138. Morvan G. (1977) Apricot chlor
- Page 145 and 146:
190. Torres E., Martin M. P., Paltr
- Page 147 and 148:
Annexes - 147 -
- Page 149 and 150:
if (estim!=1) W2.99) text(B2,0,past
- Page 151 and 152:
if ((sum(Do[1:4])!=0)&(sum(do1D)==0
- Page 153 and 154:
III. Annexe 3 : Programme R pour si
- Page 155 and 156:
IV. Annexe 4 : “Testing Boolean A
- Page 157 and 158:
Testing boolean assumption in the n
- Page 159 and 160:
ehavior, which is difficult to obse
- Page 161 and 162:
distributed. So, the length distrib
- Page 163 and 164:
ule which transforms the tangent po
- Page 165 and 166:
large void segments will clearly ap
- Page 167 and 168:
together with local measurements at
- Page 169 and 170:
Kamphorst E.C. , Chadøeuf J. , Jet
- Page 171 and 172:
c.d.f 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0 1 2
- Page 173 and 174:
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4
- Page 175 and 176:
c.d.f. c.d.f. c.d.f. 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.
- Page 177:
RESUME Les maladies (ré-)émergent