Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of four techniques for plum pox virus detection

  • Short Communication
  • Published:
Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Twenty-four stone fruit trees showing typical symptoms of plum pox virus (PPV) were tested for PPV using ELISA, RT-PCR, real-time RT-PCR and RT-LAMP. The isolates were obtained from various regions in the Czech Republic. PPV was detected in all tested plants. Part of the coding region of the coat protein gene and adjacent non-coding region were sequenced. PPV strains of individual isolates were classified according to the obtained sequences. This study provides comprehensive evaluation of the sensitivity of four techniques used for PPV detection. Five PPV strains (D, M, W, Rec and An) were observed according to analyses of obtained sequences. The results showed that the degree of sensitivity for each detection technique varied across the four chosen methods, with the RT-LAMP technique providing very sensitive results.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Abbreviations

ELISA:

Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay

RT-PCR:

Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction

RT-LAMP:

Reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification

D:

Dideron

M:

Marcus

W:

Winona

Rec:

Recombinant

An:

Ancestor Marcus

EPPO:

European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization

References

  1. Cambra, M., Asensio, M., Gorris, M. T., Pérez, E., Camarasa, E., García, J. A., et al. (1994). Detection of plum pox potyvirus using monoclonal antibodies to structural and non-structural proteins. Bulletin OEPP/EPPO Bulletin, 24, 569–577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Candresse, T., Cambra, M., Dallot, S., Lanneau, M., Asensio, M., Gorris, M. T., et al. (1998). Comparison of monoclonal antibodies and polymerase chain reaction assays for the typing of isolates belonging to the D and M serotypes of plum pox potyvirus. Phytopathology, 88, 198–204.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Eichmeier, A., Baranek, M., & Pidra, M. (2010). Analysis of genetic diversity and phylogeny of partial coat protein domain in Czech and Italian GFLV isolates. Plant Protection Science, 46, 145–148.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. EPPO. (2006). Current status of plum pox virus and sharka disease worldwide. Bulletin OEPP/EPPO Bulletin, 36, 205–218. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2338.2006.01027.x.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Fabre, F., Kervarrec, C., Mieuzet, L., Riault, G., Vialatte, A., & Jacquot, E. (2003). Improvement of Barley yellow dwarf virus-PAV detection in single aphids using a fluorescent real time RT-PCR. Journal of Virological Methods, 110, 51–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hadidi, A., & Levy, L. (1994). Accurate identification of plum pox potyvirus and its differentiation from Asian prunus latent potyvirus in Prunus germplasm1. EPPO Bulletin, 24, 633–643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Kolber, M., Nemeth, M., Krizbai, L., Kiss-Toth, E., & Kalman, M. (1997). Detection of plum pox virus by different methods. In H. W. Dehne (Ed.), Diagnosis and identification of plant pathogens (pp. 317–319). Dorstedt: Kluwer Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Notomi, T., Okayama, H., Masubuchi, H., Yonekawa, T., Watanabe, K., Amino, N., et al. (2000). Loop-mediated isothermal amplification of DNA. Nucleic Acids Research, 28, e63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Olmos, A., Bertolini, E., Gil, M., & Cambra, M. (2005). Real-time assay for quantitative detection of non-persistently transmitted plum pox virus RNA targets in single aphids. Journal of Virological Methods, 128, 151–155.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Olmos, A., Bertolini, E., Capote, N., & Cambra, M. (2008). An evidence-based approach to Plum pox virus detection by DASI-ELISA and RT-PCR in dormant period. Virology: Research and Treatment, 1, 1–8.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Polák, J. (2002). Distribution of plum pox virus in the Czech Republic. Plant Protection Science, 38, 98–102.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Sertkaya, G., Ulubas, C., & Caglayan, K. (2003). Detection and characterization of Plum pox potyvirus (PPV) by DAS-ELISA and RT-PCR/RFLP analysis in Turkey. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 27, 213–220.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Smith, I. M., McNamara, D. G., Scott, P. R., & Holderness, M. (Eds.). (1997). Quarantine pests for Europe (2nd ed.). Wallingford: CABI.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Varga, A., & James, D. (2006). Use of reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification for the detection of Plum pox virus. Journal of Virological Methods, 138, 184–190.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Dr. Jiří Svoboda from Crop Research Institute in Prague (Czech Republic). This research was supported by The Ministry of Agriculture of the Czech Republic, Project Nos. QJ1510352 and QJ1210175.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Mendeleum - Institute of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Mendel University in Brno, Valtická 334, 691 44, Lednice, Czech Republic

    Aleš Eichmeier

  2. Department of Fruit Growing, Mendel University in Brno, Valtická 337, 691 44, Lednice, Czech Republic

    Tomáš Kiss & Tomáš Nečas

  3. Department of Vegetable Growing and Floriculture, Mendel University in Brno, Valtická 337, 691 44, Lednice, Czech Republic

    Eliška Peňázová

  4. Division of Plant Health, Crop Research Institute, Drnovská 507, 161 04, Prague, Czech Republic

    Jaroslav Salava

Authors
  1. Aleš Eichmeier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tomáš Kiss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Eliška Peňázová
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jaroslav Salava
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Tomáš Nečas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aleš Eichmeier.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Eichmeier, A., Kiss, T., Peňázová, E. et al. Comparison of four techniques for plum pox virus detection. J Plant Dis Prot 123, 311–315 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41348-016-0043-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41348-016-0043-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation