Previous Article | Next Article 
Appl Environ Microbiol, April 1998, p. 1436-1441, Vol. 64, No. 4
0099-2240/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Seasonal Pattern of Tomato Mosaic Tobamovirus
Infection and Concentration in Red Spruce Seedlings
George D.
Bachand* and
John D.
Castello
Faculty of Environmental and Forest Biology,
College of Environmental Science and Forestry, State University of
New York, Syracuse, New York 13210-2788
Received 24 July 1997/Accepted 17 January 1998
 |
ABSTRACT |
Tomato mosaic tobamovirus (ToMV) infects red spruce (Picea
rubens) and causes significant changes in its growth and
physiology. The mechanism of infection and the pattern of virus
concentration in seedling roots and needles were investigated.
One-year-old red spruce seedlings were obtained from the nursery in
April and June 1995 and August 1996 and tested for ToMV using
enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Virus-free seedlings were
divided into three treatments: control, root inoculated, and needle
inoculated. Two control, five root-inoculated, and five
needle-inoculated seedlings were sampled destructively at biweekly
intervals for 3 months and then tested for ToMV by ELISA. ToMV was
transmitted to seedlings by root but not by needle inoculation. The
virus was detected in 67 to 100% of roots but in less than 7% of
needles of root-inoculated seedlings. The percent infection of
root-inoculated seedlings differed significantly between the April and
June and between the April and August inoculation periods. Virus
concentration in infected seedling roots increased initially, peaked
within 4 weeks postinoculation, and steadily declined thereafter.
Significant differences in ToMV concentrations in roots also were
detected among inoculation periods and sampling dates. Early spring may represent the optimal time for infection of seedlings, as well as for
assaying roots for ToMV.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Tomato mosaic tobamovirus (ToMV)
infects red spruce (Picea rubens Sarg.) across its range in
the northeastern United States and impacts its growth and physiology
(1, 7, 10). The virus was detected in up to 80% of dominant
and codominant red spruce trees located on nine research plots in New
York, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine (10). The
concentration of ToMV in the roots of dominant-codominant red spruce on
Whiteface Mountain, N.Y., was positively correlated with the number of
fine roots and negatively correlated with the length of the live crown
(7). Under greenhouse conditions, the infection of red
spruce seedlings with ToMV was associated with (i) a 50% reduction in
the rate of increase of height, weight, and root volume, (ii) reduced
shoot growth, (iii) delayed budbreak, and (iv) increased freezing
tolerance of current-season needles (1).
ToMV was transmitted to red spruce seedlings grown on Whiteface
Mountain (10); however, the exact mechanism was not
determined. Because ToMV lacks an invertebrate vector (11,
13) and seedlings did not contact native soil, Fillhart et al.
(10) postulated that ToMV was transmitted by an abiotic,
airborne mechanism. Infectious ToMV was detected in clouds collected
from Whiteface Mountain and fog collected along the coast of Maine
(6). Clouds and fog may initiate infection either by direct
entry into needles through stomatal pores or by facilitating root
infection through the entry of cloud (fog) condensate into soil. Direct
stomatal infection of tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) with
tobacco mosaic tobamovirus (TMV) has been reported (9). In
addition, both ToMV and TMV are soilborne and can infect plants,
including red spruce, through their roots (1, 13, 15, 22,
25). To date, the mechanism by which airborne transmission of
ToMV to red spruce occurs in natural systems remains unknown.
Little information exists concerning the replication and distribution
of viruses within deciduous and coniferous forest trees. Castello et
al. (5) reported variability in the detection of TMV and
tobacco ringspot nepovirus in white ash (Fraxinus americana L.) roots and foliage sampled between May and October. The peak detection of both viruses occurred at 3- to 5-week intervals throughout the growing season. Detection of tobacco ringspot nepovirus was more
consistent in roots than in foliage of white ash, but TMV was detected
in equal frequency in both roots and foliage (5). Seasonal
variation in the detection of poplar mosaic carlavirus (PMV) in hybrid
poplar (Populus × euroamericana) also has been reported (8). The concentration of PMV in foliage generally was greater than that observed in roots or bark; however, virus distribution in symptomatic foliage was uneven. PMV was detectable in
roots and phloem collected in August but not those collected in
December. The virus, however, was readily detectable in terminal buds
collected in December, January, and February (8).
The distribution, replication, and infection mechanism(s) of ToMV in
red spruce have not yet been investigated. This knowledge will allow
more accurate and precise assessment of virus infection and
concentration within red spruce and perhaps other woody hosts. The
objectives of this study were to determine the seasonal differences and
the potential mechanisms of ToMV infection of red spruce seedlings and
to examine the seasonal patterns of virus concentration within roots
and needles. The four hypotheses of this study were that (i) both root
and needle inoculation lead to infection of red spruce seedlings, (ii)
red spruce seedlings are more susceptible to ToMV infection when
inoculated in June than in April and August, (iii) ToMV concentration
in roots and needles initially increases and then declines
postinoculation, and (iv) mean virus concentration in roots and needles
is greatest in seedlings inoculated in June.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Seedling inoculation.
One-year-old (1-0) red spruce
seedlings were obtained in April 1995 from the college nursery in
Syracuse, N.Y., and tested for ToMV by double-antibody sandwich
enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (DAS-ELISA), as described by Bachand
et al. (1). A group of 125 seedlings that tested negative
for ToMV were selected and subdivided into three treatments: control,
root-inoculated, and needle-inoculated seedlings (n = 25, 50, and 50, respectively).
Control and needle-inoculated seedlings were transplanted into
120-mm-diameter pots containing a sterilized mixture of Promix (Premier
Horticulture, Inc., Rivière-du-Loup, Quebec, Canada) and sand
(3:1 [vol/vol]). Plastic trays were placed under each pot to prevent
root contact with both the surface of greenhouse benches and the roots
of neighboring seedlings. Seedlings were watered daily with autoclaved,
deionized water for the duration of the experiment. Needle inoculation
was performed by misting 50 seedlings weekly for 3 months using a
plastic, hand-held garden sprayer (Sprayco, Detroit, Mich.) containing
a 50-ng/ml solution of ToMV-38, a stream water isolate from Whiteface
Mountain (14), prepared in autoclaved, deionized water. The
inoculum was adjusted to a pH of 4.0 to 5.0 with dilute sulfuric acid.
A plastic bag was placed around each pot and on the soil surface during
needle inoculation to prevent deposition of the mist or condensate on the pot or soil surface. Seedlings were misted until visible droplets formed on the needles. Inoculum infectivity was confirmed by mechanical inoculation of Chenopodium quinoa Willd. leaves with each
preparation. Fifty root-inoculated seedlings were grown for 1 week in a
hydroponic culture of dilute nutrient solution (28)
containing ToMV-38 (50 ng/ml) and 0.025% Benomyl. The pH of the
solution was adjusted to approximately 4.0 with dilute sulfuric acid
and then monitored daily. The infectivity of the ToMV-containing
nutrient solution also was confirmed by mechanical inoculation of
C. quinoa leaves. Following the 1-week incubation period,
root-inoculated seedlings were removed from hydroponic culture,
thoroughly rinsed with tap water, and transplanted as described above.
Control seedlings were neither root nor needle inoculated. All
seedlings were maintained in a greenhouse under ambient temperature and
day length conditions and were fertilized weekly with dilute nutrient
solution.
The above procedures were repeated using seedlings that were obtained
from the nursery in June and August 1995. Therefore,
three inoculation
periods were utilized for this experiment: April,
June, and August. A
high rate of mortality due to transplantation-associated
shock occurred
in August 1995; thus, the August inoculation experiment
was repeated in
1996.
Sampling procedure and DAS-ELISA.
Two control, five
root-inoculated, and five needle-inoculated seedlings were randomly
selected at biweekly intervals for 12 weeks within each inoculation
period and then destructively sampled. Roots, current-season needles,
and 1-year-old needles were removed, rinsed thoroughly with tap water,
placed into separate 1.5-ml microcentrifuge tubes, and stored at
20°C. Approximately 30 to 100 mg of roots and needles were
triturated in liquid nitrogen, diluted 1/5 in ELISA extraction buffer,
and tested by DAS-ELISA, as previously described (1).
Data analyses.
Root and needle samples were considered
positive for ToMV if the mean absorbance of replicate wells was greater
than the mean plus three times the standard deviation of four wells
containing virus-free root or needle extracts. Fisher's exact test was
used to determine if (i) root and/or needle inoculation resulted in infection of seedlings in each inoculation period and (ii) the frequency of seedling infection varied among inoculation periods (26).
To determine the virus concentration of each sample, a standard curve
was prepared by using multiple regression analysis,
a quadratic
polynomial model, and absorbances of purified ToMV
dilutions (100, 10, 5, and 1 ng/ml) and virus-free root and needle
extracts. Concentrations
then were multiplied by 5 to correct
for tissue dilution. Mean virus
concentrations (nanograms of virus
per gram of tissue) per seedling
were calculated using all seedlings,
positive and negative, within each
treatment. Treatment means
were plotted as a function of sampling date.
Univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to determine if the
ToMV concentration in roots and/or needles differed among
the three
treatments (control, needle inoculation, and root inoculation).
Sampling time was treated as a blocking factor in these analyses.
Further, each inoculation period (i.e., April, June, and August)
was
analyzed separately.
Univariate split-plot ANOVA was used to determine if ToMV concentration
differed among inoculation periods and sampling times
(
21,
26). Because ToMV was detected consistently only in the
root
samples of root-inoculated seedlings, the split-plot analysis
was
performed with only data from these seedlings. Inoculation
period and
sampling time were treated as the whole-plot and subplot
factors,
respectively. Orthogonal contrasts were used to compare
the linear and
quadratic components of the inoculation periods.
Linear and "lack of
fit" contrasts were used to examine the linear
and nonlinear
components of the interaction term (
26).
 |
RESULTS |
Transmission of ToMV to seedlings.
ToMV was transmitted to red
spruce seedlings by root inoculation but not by needle inoculation in
all three inoculation periods (Tables 1
and 2). The sensitivity of the
ELISA was between 5 and 25 ng/g (1 and 5 ng/ml) (Table 1).
All C. quinoa plants inoculated with ToMV-containing
nutrient solution and inoculum for needle inoculation displayed
necrotic local lesions, typical of ToMV, at 5 to 7 days
postinoculation. The virus was detected in the roots of 8, 6, and 79%
of control, needle-inoculated, and root-inoculated seedlings,
respectively, across all three inoculation periods combined. ToMV was
detected in the needles (current-season and 1-year-old needles) of 0, 1, and 3% of control, needle-inoculated, and root-inoculated
seedlings, respectively, across all three inoculation periods combined.
The levels of detection of ToMV in roots differed significantly among
the three treatments in each inoculation period (P < 0.001) (Table 2). The virus was detected more frequently in the roots
of April root-inoculated seedlings than in those root inoculated in
either June or August (P < 0.001) (Table 1). However,
the frequency of detection did not differ between June and August
root-inoculated seedlings (P = 0.210) (Table 1). The
levels of detection of ToMV in current-season and 1-year-old needles
did not differ significantly among the three treatments
(P > 0.230) or inoculation periods (P > 0.210) (Table 2).
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
TABLE 1.
Absorbances at 405 nm of purified ToMV dilutions and root
and needle samples in three inoculation periods
|
|
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
TABLE 2.
P values calculated with Fisher's exact test
for comparison of percent ToMV detection in red spruce roots and
needles among three treatments in each of three inoculation periods
|
|
Differences in ToMV concentrations among treatments.
The mean
virus concentrations in the roots of control, needle-inoculated, and
root-inoculated seedlings were 1.2, 0.8, and 440.8 ng/g, respectively,
for the April inoculation period. The mean virus concentrations in the
roots of control, needle-inoculated, and root-inoculated seedlings were
4.2, 0.3, and 143.2 ng/g, respectively, for the June inoculation
period. The mean virus concentrations in the roots of control,
needle-inoculated, and root-inoculated seedlings were 0.1, 0.1, and
10.8 ng/g, respectively, for the August inoculation period. A
significant difference in the virus concentrations in roots was
detected among the three treatments (Table
3; Fig. 1),
but this was not found for the current-season or 1-year-old needles
(data not shown) for all three inoculation periods.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
TABLE 3.
Summary of univariate ANOVA comparing ToMV concentrations
in the roots of control, root-inoculated, and needle-inoculated
seedlings (treatments) inoculated in April, June, and August
|
|

View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
Mean ToMV concentration in the roots of control ( ),
needle-inoculated ( ), and root-inoculated ( ) seedlings at six
biweekly sampling times in each of three inoculation periods: April
(A), June (B), and August (C). Bars represent 1 standard error of the
mean.
|
|
Variation in ToMV concentration over time and among inoculation
periods.
A significant difference in ToMV concentration in roots
of root-inoculated seedlings was detected among the three inoculation periods (Tables 4 and
5; Fig. 2).
The mean ToMV concentrations in roots across all six sampling dates of
seedlings root inoculated in April, June, and August were 440.8, 143.2, and 10.8 ng/g, respectively. The virus concentration in the roots of
root-inoculated seedlings fluctuated over the 12-week sampling period
in each of the three inoculation periods. In both the April and
June inoculation periods, ToMV concentration in roots increased
initially, peaked at 4 weeks postinoculation, and then steadily
declined over time (Fig. 1A and B). In the August inoculation, the ToMV
concentration in the roots peaked 2 weeks postinoculation, then
declined, and finally remained steady at approximately 10 ng/g (Fig.
1C). A significant difference in virus concentration in roots of
root-inoculated seedlings was detected among sampling times
(P < 0.001) (Table 4). Significant variation in the
linear (P = 0.002), but not the quadratic
(P = 0.624), component of the sampling time factor was
detected (Table 5). A significant interaction between inoculation period and sampling time also was detected in roots of root-inoculated seedlings (P = 0.003) (Table 4). Further, the linear
portion of the virus concentration curves differed among the
inoculation periods (P < 0.001) (Table 5).
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
TABLE 4.
Summary of split-plot ANOVA for the comparison of ToMV
concentrations in the roots of seedlings that were root inoculated
in April, June, or August
|
|
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
TABLE 5.
Summary of main effect and interaction contrasts for the
comparison of ToMV concentrations in the roots of seedlings that
were root inoculated in April, June, or August
|
|

View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
Mean ToMV concentration in roots of root-inoculated
seedlings at six biweekly sampling times in each of three inoculation
periods: April ( ), June ( ), and August ( ). Bars represent 1 standard error of the mean.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
Needle inoculation of red spruce seedlings did not result in ToMV
infection (Tables 1 and 2). Fillhart et al. (10) reported the airborne transmission of ToMV to red spruce seedlings on Whiteface Mountain, and postulated that transmission was abiotic and occurred through contact with virus-laden clouds. The physiognomy of red spruce
allows for the efficient interception of clouds and/or fog and
therefore of ToMV. Further, high rates of fog deposition on red spruce
needles have been reported, particularly on the epicuticular waxes that
occlude epistomatal chambers (17). The entry of cloud and
fog deposition, and possibly of ToMV, into stomates through mass
flow is possible; however, infection of surrounding mesophyll
cells and entry into the symplast are more difficult barriers.
Although the transmission of TMV to tobacco was demonstrated by a
similar method (9), inherent differences between conifer
needles and tobacco leaves may account for the lack of infection
observed in our experiment. Alternatively, conditions utilized in our
experiment do not precisely simulate those occurring in nature. Factors
such as droplet size, inoculum concentration, impact velocity,
wounding, and pH may affect the transmission of ToMV to seedlings by
needle inoculation. Virus-laden cloud and/or fog deposition also may
condense and fall to the soil surface, as opposed to entering stomatal
chambers, and so facilitate root infection of red spruce. This
mode of transmission, however, was prevented in our experiment by
covering the soil surface with plastic.
ToMV was transmitted to red spruce seedlings by root inoculation
with hydroponic culture (Tables 1 and 2). In prior experiments, ToMV was transmitted to 35 to 85% of red spruce seedlings that were
incubated for 24 h in a 1-µg/ml solution of purified ToMV and
Celite (1, 15). Celite was utilized to induce wounds and
provide infection courts. In this study, ToMV was detected in 67 to
100% of seedlings that were root inoculated with a nutrient solution
containing 50 ng of purified ToMV per ml without abrasive additives. Wounding due to transplantation and handling, however, may
have facilitated infection. Tomato (Lycopersicon
esculentum L.) and pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) grown in
ToMV-containing hydroponic culture become infected readily (22,
25). Efficient transmission of maize white line mosaic virus to
maize (Zea mays L.) seedlings also has been achieved with
hydroponic culture (19). Our study represents the first
report of virus transmission to a forest tree species in a hydroponic
system. The transmission of viruses to forest tree species, especially
conifers, is difficult. Our hydroponic procedure provided an easy and
efficient method for virus transmission to red spruce seedlings.
ToMV was detected frequently (>67%) in the roots but infrequently
(<7%) in the needles of infected red spruce seedlings (Table 1). The
concentration of ToMV in roots also was considerably greater than in
needles (Table 1). The virus was purified and transmitted from the
needles of mature, dominant and codominant red spruce trees on
Whiteface Mountain, but the frequency and concentration of ToMV were
much lower than in the roots (16). Thus, replication of ToMV
in red spruce occurs primarily in root tissues and does not occur or is
limited in needle tissues. The presence of virus in needles may
represent either a low level of virus replication or passive movement
of virus with plant assimilates, nutrients, and water from roots
to needles. A more detailed investigation (e.g., detection of
the viral replicative intermediate) is required to determine
the exact location of the replicating ToMV in spruce tissue. At the
tissue level, ToMV was detected in cortical and epidermal cells, as
well as in the lateral root primordia of root-inoculated seedlings, by
immunofluorescence (2). In recent experiments, both the
positive and negative strands of ToMV have been detected in
root-inoculated red spruce and white pine seedlings by reverse transcription-PCR (4a).
The time of inoculation affects both the transmission and the
concentration of ToMV in the roots of red spruce seedlings (Table 4 and
Fig. 2). To our knowledge, our study represents the first report of the
seasonal effects on virus infection and concentration in the roots of
any woody plant species. Accurate and precise assessment of infection
is dependent upon virus concentration. The sensitivity of our ELISA
system was 5 to 25 ng/g of root or needle tissue (Table 1). Therefore,
roots and needles in which the virus concentration did not exceed 5 to
25 ng/g would be assessed incorrectly as negative. The virus
concentration in the roots of infected seedlings was considerably lower
in seedlings inoculated in August than in those inoculated in either
April or June (Fig. 2). The concentration of ToMV observed in seedlings
inoculated in August rarely exceeded 10 to 25 ng/g (Fig. 1). Thus,
infected seedlings may have been assessed as negative and so may
account for the observed differences in percent infection of
root-inoculated seedlings among the inoculation periods. A more
sensitive assay, e.g., reverse transcription-PCR, may be required to
further investigate seasonal effects on virus transmission.
The virus concentration in the roots of ToMV-infected seedlings peaked
within 4 weeks postinoculation and subsequently decreased over time at
a linear rate (Table 5; Fig. 2). The rate of decrease in virus
concentration (i.e., the linear portion of the concentration curve)
differed significantly among the three inoculation periods (Table 5). A
similar pattern in virus concentration was observed in pepper foliage
systemically infected with cucumber mosaic cucumovirus. The
concentration of cucumber mosaic cucumovirus in symptomatic foliage
peaked approximately 1 week postinoculation and steadily decreased with
time (18). This pattern also has been observed in soybean
[Glycine max (L.) Merr.] foliage inoculated with soybean dwarf luteovirus (12).
Seasonal effects on virus concentration and disease development have
been reported in a number of herbaceous and woody hosts (5,
23-25, 29). The mean ToMV concentration in roots was greatest in
seedlings root inoculated in April, followed by those root inoculated
in June and August (441, 143, and 11 ng/g, respectively) (Fig. 2).
Prunus necrotic ringspot, prune dwarf, and apple mosaic ilarviruses were detected by ELISA most frequently in the infected foliage of apple (Malus domestica Borkh.), plum
(Prunus domestica L.), and cherry (Prunus spp.)
trees early in the growing season (29), suggesting a
decrease in concentration of these viruses during the growing season.
Similarly, Prunus necrotic ringspot and apple mosaic
ilarviruses were detected easily in infected almond [Prunus
dulcis (Mill.) Webb] early in the season but could not be
detected after June (4). The relative concentration of plum
pox potyvirus in peach [Prunus persica (L.) Batsch] leaves also peaked early in the season (i.e., May), and then steadily declined
(23). Seasonal effects on the concentration of grapevine fanleaf nepovirus in infected plants also have been observed
(24). A high concentration of grapevine fanleaf nepovirus
was detected in mature leaves in May, followed by a rapid decrease to a
low, constant level for the remainder of the growing season
(24). Seasonal differences in the root necrosis and wilting
of pepper (C. annuum cv. Hungarian Wax) infected with ToMV
have been observed in hydroponic cultures (25). The observed
differences in disease severity of ToMV-infected pepper were associated
with both temperature and relative humidity (25). Day length
and light intensity also may affect disease expression and virus
replication (20).
Physiological age and developmental stage of a host are important
factors that influence the course of infection and disease development (20). Age-dependent susceptibility of
N. tabacum cv. Samsun and Samsun NN to TMV
infection has been reported (27). Reduced susceptibility of
soybean to soybean dwarf luteovirus infection was correlated with plant
age (10). ToMV infection and concentration in roots were
greatest in seedlings inoculated in April, when the roots were dormant.
Reduced competition for cellular constituents and metabolites in
dormant tissues may allow the virus to reach high concentrations.
Ribosome content was associated with mature plant resistance in potato
against potato X potexvirus (30); however, a causal
relationship was not established. Endogenous host compounds such as
hormones also may influence virus replication (19). For
example, Balázs et al. (3) reported increased TMV
multiplication in tobacco (N. tabacum cv. Xanthi-nc) leaves treated with abscisic acid.
Understanding the seasonal patterns of ToMV infection and replication
is important for evaluating the ecological aspects of this pathosystem
and permits a more accurate and precise assessment of virus infection
and concentration in this and perhaps other woody hosts. Infections of
seedlings and ToMV concentration in roots were greatest when root
inoculation was performed prior to the onset of root growth. Early
spring may represent an important window for ToMV infection of red
spruce in natural ecosystems, as well as the ideal time to assay tissue
for virus infection. Additional investigation, however, is required to
determine the specific seasonal and developmental factors (e.g., day
length, temperature, humidity, and physiological age) that affect virus infection and replication.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
This work was supported by a grant from the McIntire-Stennis
Cooperative Forestry Research Program of the USDA.
We thank S. V. Stehman for assistance with statistical analyses.
We also thank P. D. Manion, L. B. Smart, M. Schaedle, R. F. Kopp, and anonymous reviewers for their critical reviews of the
manuscript.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: State University
of New York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry, 350 Illick Hall, Syracuse, NY 13210. Phone: (315) 470-6965. Fax: (315) 470-6934. E-mail address: gdbachan{at}syr.edu.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Bachand, G. D.,
J. D. Castello,
M. Schaedle,
S. V. Stehman, and W. H. Livingston.
1996.
Effects of tomato mosaic tobamovirus infection on red spruce seedlings.
Can. J. For. Res.
26:973-981.
|
| 2.
|
Bachand, G. D., and J. D. Castello.
1998.
Immunolocalization of tomato mosaic tobamovirus in red spruce seedlings.
Eur. J. For. Pathol.
28:75. (Abstract.)
|
| 3.
|
Balázs, E.,
R. Báborjányi, and Z. Király.
1973.
Leaf senescence and increased virus susceptibility in tobacco: the effect of abscisic acid.
Physiol. Plant Pathol.
3:341-346.
|
| 4.
|
Barba, M.
1986.
Detection of apple mosaic and Prunus necrotic ringspot viruses in almond by ELISA.
Arch. Phytopathol. Pflanzenschutz
22:279-282.
|
| 4a.
| Castello, J. D. Unpublished data.
|
| 5.
|
Castello, J. D.,
L. A. Amico, and M. T. O'Shea.
1984.
Detection of tobacco mosaic and tobacco ringspot viruses in white ash trees by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.
Plant Dis.
68:787-790.
|
| 6.
|
Castello, J. D.,
D. K. Lakshman,
S. M. Tavantzis,
S. O. Rogers,
G. D. Bachand,
R. Jagels,
J. Carlisle, and Y. Liu.
1995.
Detection of tomato mosaic tobamovirus in fog and clouds.
Phytopathology
85:1409-1412.
|
| 7.
|
Castello, J. D.,
P. M. Wargo,
V. Jacobi,
G. D. Bachand,
D. Tobi, and M. A. M. Rogers.
1995.
Tomato mosaic virus infection of red spruce on Whiteface Mt., New York: prevalence and potential impact.
Can. J. For. Res.
25:1340-1345.
|
| 8.
|
Cooper, J. I., and M. L. Edwards.
1981.
The distribution of poplar mosaic virus in hybrid poplars and virus detection by ELISA.
Ann. Appl. Biol.
99:53-61.
|
| 9.
|
Duggar, B. M., and B. Johnson.
1933.
Stomatal infection with the virus typical of tobacco mosaic.
Phytopathology
23:934-948.
|
| 10.
|
Fillhart, R. C.,
G. D. Bachand, and J. D. Castello.
1997.
Airborne transmission of tomato mosaic tobamovirus and its distribution in red spruce in the northeastern United States.
Can. J. For. Res.
27:1176-1181.
|
| 11.
|
Gibbs, A. J.
1977.
Tobamovirus group, no. 184..
Descriptions of plant viruses.
Commonwealth Mycological Institute Association for Applied Biology, Kew, England.
|
| 12.
|
Hewings, A. D.,
V. D. Damstreegt,
A. E. Sindermann, and S. A. Tolin.
1990.
Variation in serologically detectable antigen of soybean dwarf virus in soybean leaflets as a function of time after inoculation and plant age.
Plant Dis.
74:844-848.
|
| 13.
|
Hollings, M., and H. Huttinga.
1976.
Tomato mosaic virus, no. 156..
Descriptions of plant viruses.
Commonwealth Mycological Institute Association for Applied Biology, Kew, England.
|
| 14.
|
Jacobi, V., and J. D. Castello.
1991.
Isolation of tomato mosaic virus from waters draining forest stands in New York State.
Phytopathology
81:1112-1117.
|
| 15.
|
Jacobi, V., and J. D. Castello.
1992.
Infection of red spruce, black spruce, and balsam fir seedlings with tomato mosaic virus.
Can. J. For. Res.
22:919-924.
|
| 16.
|
Jacobi, V.,
J. D. Castello, and M. Flachmann.
1992.
Isolation of tomato mosaic virus from red spruce.
Plant Dis.
76:518-522.
|
| 17.
|
Jagels, R.
1991.
Biophysical aspects of fog deposition on the needles of three conifers.
J. Exp. Bot.
42:757-763[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 18.
|
Lapidot, M.,
I. Paran,
R. Ben-Joseph,
S. Ben-Harush,
M. Pilowsky,
S. Cohen, and C. Shifriss.
1997.
Tolerance to cucumber mosaic virus in pepper: development of advanced breeding lines and evaluation of virus level.
Plant Dis.
81:185-188.
|
| 19.
|
Louie, R.,
J. J. Abt, and J. K. Knoke.
1992.
Maize white line mosaic virus transmission to maize seedlings in hydroponic culture.
Plant Dis.
76:1069-1073.
|
| 20.
|
Matthews, R. E. F.
1991.
.
Plant virology, 3rd ed.
Academic Press, Inc., New York, N.Y.
|
| 21.
|
Meredith, M. P., and S. V. Stehman.
1991.
Repeated measures experiments in forestry: focus on analysis of response curves.
Can. J. For. Res.
21:957-965.
|
| 22.
|
Pares, R. D.,
L. V. Gunn, and G. C. Cresswell.
1992.
Tomato mosaic virus in a recirculating nutrient solution.
J. Phytopathol.
135:192-198.
|
| 23.
|
Polák, J.
1995.
Reliability of detection and relative concentration of plum pox virus determined by ELISA in an infected peach tree during the vegetation period.
Z. Pflanzenkr. Pflanzenschutz
80:16-22.
|
| 24.
|
Rowhani, A.,
M. A. Walker, and S. Rokni.
1992.
Sampling strategies for the detection of grapevine fanleaf virus and the grapevine strain of tomato ringspot virus.
Vitis
31:35-44.
|
| 25.
|
Schuerger, A. C., and W. Hammer.
1995.
Effects of temperature on disease development of tomato mosaic virus in Capsicum annuum in hydroponic systems.
Plant Dis.
79:880-885.
|
| 26.
|
Steel, R. G. D., and J. H. Torrie.
1980.
.
Principles and procedures of statistics: a biometrical approach.
McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, N.Y.
|
| 27.
|
Takahashi, T.
1972.
Studies on viral pathogenesis in plant hosts. III. Leaf age-dependent susceptibility to tobacco mosaic virus infection in `Samsun NN' and `Samsun' tobacco plants.
Phytopathol. Z.
75:140-155.
|
| 28.
|
Thornton, F. C.,
M. Schaedle, and D. J. Raynal.
1987.
Effects of aluminum on red spruce seedlings in solution culture.
Environ. Exp. Bot.
27:489-498.
|
| 29.
|
Torrance, L., and C. A. Dolby.
1984.
Sampling conditions for reliable routine detection by ELISA of three ilarviruses in fruit trees.
Ann. Appl. Biol.
104:267-276.
|
| 30.
|
Venekamp, J. H., and A. B. R. Beemster.
1980.
Mature plant resistance of potato against some virus diseases. I. Concurrence of development of mature plant resistance against potato virus X, and decrease of ribosome and RNA content.
Neth. J. Plant Pathol.
86:1-10.
|
Appl Environ Microbiol, April 1998, p. 1436-1441, Vol. 64, No. 4
0099-2240/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.