scholarly journals Evaluation of Maize Inbreds for Maize stripe virus and Maize mosaic virus Resistance: Disease Progress in Relation to Time and the Cumulative Number of Planthoppers

2005 ◽  
Vol 95 (6) ◽  
pp. 600-607 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Dintinger ◽  
N. Boissot ◽  
F. Chiroleu ◽  
P. Hamon ◽  
B. Reynaud
Keyword(s):  
Mosaic Virus ◽  
Disease Incidence ◽  
Control Line ◽  
Cumulative Number ◽  
Peregrinus Maidis ◽  
Maize Mosaic Virus ◽  
Large Numbers ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Artificial Inoculations ◽  
Moderate Resistance

Five tropical maize lines were tested and compared with the susceptible control line B73 for resistance to Maize stripe virus (MStV) and Maize mosaic virus (MMV), both propagatively transmitted by the planthopper Peregrinus maidis (Homoptera: Delphacidae). Resistance to each virus was evaluated separately by artificial inoculations with planthoppers viruliferous for either one virus or the other. Disease incidence and symptom severity progression were quantified in relation to time and the cumulative number of planthoppers. Line Hi40 was found to be susceptible to MStV and highly resistant to MMV. Generally, no MMV symptoms developed on Hi40, even under intense inoculation pressure by a large number of viruliferous planthoppers. Line Rev81 showed a partial but strong resistance to MStV, which mainly reduced disease incidence. Nevertheless, this resistance to MStV was the highest ever reported and held up, even when challenged by large numbers of planthoppers. The percentage of infected plants in line Rev81 never exceeded 30 to 40% in our experiments. Moderate levels of resistance to MStV, and to a lesser extent MMV, were found in lines 37-2, A211, and Mp705. However, resistance in these lines was completely overcome using a large number of insects transmitting either of the two viruses. These results suggest that different types of resistance to MMV and MStV are available in maize lines from Caribbean and Mascarene germ plasm. The expression of virus-specific resistance identified in Hi40 and Rev81 lines was not affected by intense inoculation pressure. In contrast, the moderate resistance in 37-2, A211, and Mp705 was partially effective against both viruses but not at high inoculation pressure. These different types of resistance, when present in the same genotype, could provide protection against both viruses.

Identification of maize mosaic virus by immunoelectron microscopy

1986 ◽  
Vol 44 ◽  
pp. 240-241
Author(s):  
O. E. Bradfute
Keyword(s):  
Zea Mays ◽  
Mosaic Virus ◽  
Immunoelectron Microscopy ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Maize Mosaic Virus ◽  
The World ◽  
Plant Rhabdovirus

Maize mosaic virus (MMV) causes a severe disease of Zea mays in many tropical and subtropical regions of the world, including the southern U.S. (1-3). Fig. 1 shows internal cross striations of helical nucleoprotein and bounding membrane with surface projections typical of many plant rhabdovirus particles including MMV (3). Immunoelectron microscopy (IEM) was investigated as a method for identifying MMV. Antiserum to MMV was supplied by Ramon Lastra (Instituto Venezolano de Investigaciones Cientificas, Caracas, Venezuela).

scholarly journals Streptococcus pyogenes vulvovaginitis in children in Nottingham

1991 ◽  
Vol 106 (3) ◽  
pp. 459-465 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. E. Donald ◽  
R. C. B. Slack ◽  
G. Colman
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Streptococcus Pyogenes ◽  
Public Health Laboratory ◽  
Large Numbers ◽  
Highly Sensitive ◽  
Vaginal Swabs ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Winter Peak ◽  
The Common

SUMMARYIsolates of Streptococcus pyogenes from vaginal swabs of children with vulvovaginitis received at Nottingham Public Health Laboratory during 1986–9 were studied. A total of 159 isolates was made during the 4 years, increasing from 17 in 1986 to 64 in 1989 and accounting for 11% of all vaginal swabs received from children. The numbers of throat swabs yielding S. pyogenes also showed an increase from 974 in 1986 to 1519 in 1989. A winter peak of isolates was noted for both vaginal swabs and throat swabs. A total of 98 strains from vaginal swabs were serotyped: 22 different types were identified, 61% of which were the common types M4, M6, R28 and M12. Erythromycin sensitivity was done on 89 strains; 84% were highly sensitive (MIC < 0·03 mg/1). There are no other reports of such large numbers in the literature; the reason for seeing this increase in Nottingham is unclear.

The habits and habitats of the opisthobranch molluscs of the British Solomon Islands

1969 ◽  
Vol 255 (800) ◽  
pp. 541-548 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Natural History ◽  
Solomon Islands ◽  
Gut Contents ◽  
Numerical Evidence ◽  
Large Numbers ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Opisthobranch Molluscs ◽  
First Time ◽  
Reef Formation

Often bizarre in shape and gaudily coloured, the opisthobranchs of the tropical IndoPacific have always been attractive subjects for the specialist worker and for writers of popular natural history. There is certainly no lack of papers describing their anatomy and systematics (Marcus & Burch (1965) give a fairly full bibliography), but only in those by Risbec (1928 a, b , 1951, 1953) are there descriptions of where or how they live and his statements are brief and rather vague. I collected opisthobranchs so as to record them for the British Solomon Islands for the first time and, whenever possible, I noted their habits and habitats. My observations on gut contents are rather scanty as I did not wish to damage any of the few specimens of each species collected. From an examination of ten different types of reef formation I discovered that opisthobranchs are common in only two places; (1) the crest of a semi-exposed reef where algae occur in pools, and (2) the flat of a sheltered or semi-sheltered reef. At each of these sites several distinct habitats can be distinguished. Unfortunately my recognition of these habitats is not supported by strong numerical evidence as none of the 55 species occurred in large numbers.

scholarly journals KETAHANAN BEBERAPA KULTIVAR CABAI TERHADAP CUCUMBER MOSAIC VIRUS DAN CHILLI VEINAL MOTTLE VIRUS

2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 130-139
Author(s):  
Muhammad Taufik ◽  
Sri Hendrastuti Hidayat ◽  
Sriani Sujiprihati ◽  
Gede Suastika ◽  
Sientje Mandang Sumaraw
Keyword(s):  
Virus Infection ◽  
Cucumber Mosaic Virus ◽  
Mosaic Virus ◽  
Yield Loss ◽  
Disease Incidence ◽  
Growth And Yield ◽  
Mottle Virus ◽  
Tolerance Response ◽  
Chilli Veinal Mottle Virus ◽  
Das Elisa

Resistance Evaluation of Chillipepper Cultivars for Cucumber Mosaic Virus and Chilli Veinal Mottle Virus.  The use of resistance culivars is an important strategy for management of virus infection in chillipepper. A research was undergone to study the effect of single and mix infection of CMV and ChiVMV on the disease incidence and on the growth and yield of nine chillipepper cultivars, i.e. Cilibangi 4, Cilibangi 5, Cilibangi 6, Helem, Jatilaba, Tit Bulat, Tit Segitiga, Tit Super and Tampar. Mechanical inoculation was conducted to transmit the virus. Infection of the virus was then confirmed with DAS-ELISA.  In general, inoculated chillipepper cultivars developed similar symptoms, i.e. mosaic type for CMV and mottle type for ChiVMV.  More severe symptom was not always observed from mix infection of CMV and ChiVMV. Disease incidence occurred in the range of 16.67 – 86.0% and this caused 18.3 – 98.6% yield loss.  Based on symptom expression, ELISA result, and reduction on yield, it can be concluded that all chillipepper cultivars used in this study could not hold up the virus infection. However, several cultivars showed tolerance response :  Jatilaba, Tit Super, and Tampar for CMV; Cilibangi 4 for ChiVMV; Tit Super for mix infection; and Cilibangi 5 for CMV, ChiVMV, and mix infection.  Further evaluation and investigation involving different chillipepper cultivars should be conducted.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document