Abstract
Virus-like symptoms on fig tree leaves are a common occurrence worldwide and has mostly been attributed to fig mosaic disease (FMD). Even though only fig mosaic virus (FMV) has been shown to cause FMD, many other viruses have been identified in diseased fig trees. In 2021, total RNA was extracted from fig leaf samples displaying symptoms of mosaic and chlorotic mottling and was subjected to high-throughput sequencing (HTS) to construct the first virome profile of a South African fig tree. Bioinformatic analyses identified FMV, fig leaf mottle-associated virus 1 (FLMaV1), fig leaf mottle-associated virus 2 (FLMaV2), fig latent virus 1 (FLV1), fig badnavirus 1 (FBV1) and grapevine badnavirus 1 (GBV1) in the data. Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) was conducted, for these viruses, on 24 additional fig leaf samples collected in the Western Cape. FBV1, GBV1, FMV, FLMaV1, FLV1, FLMaV2, and fig fleck-associated virus (FFkaV) were detected in 100%, 96%, 92%, 54%, 46%, 21%, and 12.5% of the samples, respectively. This is the first report on the presence of FMV, FLMaV2, FLV1, FFkaV, FBV1 and GBV1 in South Africa and offers a preliminary insight into the virus status of fig trees in the country.
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
The common fig (Ficus carica) is a species of deciduous tree or shrub that are native to the Mediterranean and were likely first domesticated in the Jordan Valley about 11,400 years ago, preceding cereal domestication (Kislev et al. 2006). Figs are now widely grown throughout the world, both for its fruit and as an ornamental plant. Figs are well adapted to dry areas with a Mediterranean climate with characteristic high temperature and low humidity (Stover et al. 2007). Fig production in South Africa is mainly based in the dry warm regions of the Western Cape (SAFPA 2021).
The commercial propagation of figs is through grafting or self-rooted cuttings that favour the spread of various diseases, including fig mosaic disease (FMD) (Preising et al. 2021). FMD is the most common graft transmittable disease of fig trees and is characterised by a wide variety of symptoms mainly on the leaves, in the form of yellow and chlorotic mottling, interveinal chlorosis, vein blotching, discolorations, deformations, mosaic patterns and ringspot patterns (Elbeaino et al. 2009; Preising et al. 2021). In the 1950s it was shown that the causative agent of the disease is spread by the mite, Aceria ficus (Cotte) (Flock and Wallace 1957) and in 2009, it was demonstrated that fig mosaic virus (FMV, species Emaravirus fici, genus Emaravirus) can cause FMD (Elbeaino et al. 2009). In addition to FMV, numerous viruses have been reported to be associated with FMD. In 2006 and 2007, fig leaf mottle-associated virus 1 (FLMaV1) and fig leaf mottle-associated virus 2 (FLMaV2) were detected, respectively, and proposed to be members of the family Closteroviridae (Elbeaino et al. 2006, 2007). Fig badnavirus 1 (FBV1) (Tzanetakis et al. 2010; Preising et al. 2021), fig latent virus 1 (FLV1) (Gattoni et al. 2009), fig mild mottle-associated virus (FMMaV) (Elbeaino et al. 2010), fig fleck-associated virus (FFkaV) (Elbeaino et al. 2011a), and fig cryptic virus (FCV) (Elbeaino et al. 2011b) have been detected in mixed infections in FMD affected fig trees. A divergent variant of grapevine badnavirus 1 (GBV1) was recently discovered to infect different fig species (Chirkov et al. 2022) and named fig-grapevine badnavirus 1 (fGBV1). FMD-associated viruses are only spread via vegetative propagation of infected plant material, except for FLV1 which is seed transmissible and FCV proposed to be seed transmissible (Castellano et al. 2009; Elbeaino et al. 2011b). Not all the above mentioned viruses are necessarily associated with symptoms and many infections have also been identified in asymptomatic plant material (Preising et al. 2021; Chirkov et al. 2022).
High-throughput sequencing (HTS) has become the method of choice to obtain a snapshot of viruses infecting a certain host plant in a single assay (Massart et al. 2014; Rott et al. 2017; Navarro et al. 2018; Olmos et al. 2018; Maliogka et al. 2018; Maree et al. 2018; Villamor et al. 2019; Bester et al. 2020, 2021a; Bester and Maree 2022). Not only is HTS very efficient to identify disease associated agents, it also contributes to generating more complete genome sequences (Coetzee et al. 2010; Bester et al. 2021c, d) and can also allow for variant detection or genotyping (Bester et al. 2021b).
To date, FLMaV1 is the only virus officially identified to infect fig trees in South Africa (Castellano et al. 2007). The goal of the current study was to identify viruses found in South African fig trees using HTS and virus-specific reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assays.
In July 2021 fig leaves displaying mottling and mosaic patterns were collected from three garden trees in the Simondium district, Western Cape, South Africa for HTS analysis (Fig. 1). Total RNA was extracted from one gram of leaf tissue from each of the samples using a CTAB extraction protocol (Ruiz-García et al. 2019). The integrity and purity of the RNA was assessed using Nanodrop 2000 spectrophotometry (Thermo Scientific, Massachusetts, USA) and 1% agarose Tris–acetate-EDTA (TAE) gel electrophoresis. The three total RNA extracts were pooled, and a ribo-depleted RNA library was constructed using the Illumina TruSeq Stranded Total RNA Sample Preparation kit with Plant Ribo-Zero (Macrogen, South Korea). The RNA library was sequenced on an Illumina NovaSeq 6000 instrument (Illumina, California, USA) (2 × 100 bp). The adapter sequences were removed and the data trimmed for quality (SLIDINGWINDOW:3:20, MINLEN:20) using Trimmomatic (Bolger et al. 2014). The trimmed data were de novo assembled using SPAdes 3.13.0 with default parameters (Nurk et al. 2013). Nucleotide BLAST (BLASTn) analysis of the de novo assembled contigs against a local copy of the NCBI GenBank database identified viral contigs with high nucleotide (nt) identity to FMV (98%), FLMaV1 (87%), FLMaV2 (83%), FBV1 (99%), GBV1 (99%) and FLV1 (84%). For each identified virus, the GenBank reference accession with the highest nt identity to the assembled contig was selected. Reference sequences for the viral contigs were retrieved from GenBank and read mapping to these reference sequences were performed using CLC Genomics Workbench 11.0.1 (Qiagen), with default parameters, individually as well as simultaneously to evaluate the degree of non-target read mapping. No non-target read mapping was observed (Table 1). Due to the relatedness between FBV1 and GBV1, the un-mapped reads of the individual read mapping against each reference sequence were collected and mapped to the other reference sequence to evaluate if data for both FBV1 and GBV1 were present. The number of reads mapped, and the fraction of the reference covered for FBV1 and GBV1-remained constant independently of how the read mapping was performed (Table 1). It was concluded that based on HTS analyses both FBV1 and GBV1 were present in the HTS data. Reads spanning the breakpoint in the circular genome or the start and stop of the accession in its linear form of both badnaviruses were also identified by mapping the reads to two concatenated copies of each reference accession for each virus. This is an indication that the episomal form of both these viruses were present in the sample and that the viruses were replicating in the plant (Geering 2021).
In April 2022, an RT-PCR survey was conducted for the following viruses: FMV, FLMaV1, FLMaV2, FLV1, FBV1, FFkaV, FMMaV, FCV and the genus Badnavirus. Twenty-four leaf samples were collected from fig trees in the same garden as where the original HTS sample was collected. These samples included four asymptomatic and 20 symptomatic samples from nine different fig varieties (Tiger, Greta, Brown Turkey, Cape White, Adams, Black Mission, Smyrna, Eva). The symptomatic trees had FMD-like symptoms including 13 samples with mosaic patterns, three samples with ringspot patterns, and four samples with deformed leaves (Fig. 1). Total RNA was extracted from one gram of leaf tissue from each of the samples using a CTAB extraction protocol (Ruiz-García et al. 2019) and the total RNA extracts were subjected to multiple virus-specific two-step RT-PCRs. Complementary DNA (cDNA) was synthesized from 1 µg of total RNA using 0.15 µg of random hexamer primers (Promega) and Maxima Reverse Transcriptase (Thermo Scientific) in a final reaction volume of 20 µl according to the manufacturer’s instructions. A 2 µl aliquot of cDNA was added to a 23 µl PCR reaction mixture containing 1 X KAPA Taq buffer A (Mg +) (KAPA Biosystems), 0.2 mM dNTPs (Thermo Scientific), 0.4 µM forward and reverse primer (IDT) (Table 2) and 1.25 U/µl KAPA Taq DNA polymerase (KAPA Biosystems). Cycle conditions included an initial denaturation step at 94 °C for 3 min, followed by 35 cycles of 94 °C for 30 s, 50–55 °C for 30 s (dependent on the specific primer set, Table 2), elongation at 72 °C for 10–60 s (dependent on the specific primer set, Table 2) and final elongation at 72 °C for 7 min. Amplicons were visualised on ethidium bromide-stained 1% agarose TAE gels, except for FLV1 and FFkaV which were visualized on 2% agarose TAE gels. The HTS pooled RNA sample was included in all RT-PCR assays. Representative positive amplicons were excised from the agarose gels and DNA was recovered using the Zymoclean Gel DNA Recovery Kit (Zymo Research). Amplicon DNA was bi-directional Sanger sequenced using the amplicon specific primers (Central Analytical Facility (CAF) at Stellenbosch University).
RT-PCR results indicated that FMV, FLMaV1, FLMaV2, FLV1, FBV1, and FFkaV were present to varying frequencies in the 24 fig leaf samples (Table 3). The presence of FMV, FLMaV1, FLMaV2, FLV1 and FBV1was confirmed in the HTS sample with the RT-PCRs corroborating the HTS data. FMMaV and FCV were absent in all samples according to the RT-PCRs and since the HTS sample was negative for FMMaV, FCV and FFkaV, no RT-PCR positive control was available to verify the validity of these three RT-PCR assays. FFkaV was however detected in three samples other than the HTS sample and Sanger sequencing confirmed the origin of these amplicons. The resulting FFkaV amplicons had an 89–92% sequence identity to FM200426 from Italy, indicating the presence of a potential divergent variant of FFkaV in South Africa. However more sequence information is needed as the amplicon of FFkaV only included 270 nts. FFkaV was not detected in the original sample subjected to HTS, but since FFKaV was previously detected in FMD symptomatic trees, a RT-PCR assay targeting FFKaV was included in the survey. The same rationale was followed for FMMaV and FCV, however no positive samples were identified in this study.
The presence of a GBV1 variant was confirmed in the HTS sample and in seven additional samples (Table 3) using the universal badnavirus primer set RT-PCR (Table 2). Sanger sequencing of the resulting amplicons resulted in the GBV1 annotation. The universal badnavirus RT-PCR amplicons had an identical and highest nt identity to the divergent variant of GBV1 identified in figs (Chirkov et al. 2022) and fig badnavirus 2 (FBV2) (MW842910.1), a sequence recently added to GenBank. Based on nt pairwise comparisons the complete genomes of GBV1 (OP087317.1) and FBV2 (MW842910.1) are 99.48% identical and compared to FBV1 (KT809307.1) the nt identity is 72.71% and 72.88%, respectively. This suggest that FBV2 and the divergent fig variant of GBV1 is the same species and variant, and the names should be consolidated.
FMD is a complex disease associated with mixed virus infections, and the association of a specific virus or virus combination with specific FMD symptoms remains unclear. In the present study, the aim was to determine the prevalence of nine known fig-infecting viruses in FMD affected trees. The results of the survey showed the prevalence of FMV, FLMaV1, FLMaV2, FLV1, FFkaV, FBV1 and GBV1 in garden fig trees with varying infection rates. Mixed infections were present in 100% of the symptomatic and asymptomatic samples evaluated in this study with a minimum of three viruses present per sample (Table 3) with no apparent association with specific disease symptoms.
Based on RT-PCR results, FBV1, GBV1 and FMV were the most common viruses infecting the sampled fig trees. Whether the badnaviruses play a significant role in symptom development will need to be investigated, since no single infections of a badnavirus was identified in this study. The results from this study correlates with previous reports identifying a strong association between FMV and FMD symptoms (Elbeaino et al. 2009; Latinović et al. 2019; Preising et al. 2021). Two of the four asymptomatic samples also tested positive for FMV, suggesting that an additional trigger may be needed for symptom or disease expression or that it is a new infection not yet established in the plant. Fig trees can also display uneven symptom distribution and symptoms can be limited to only one branch. It is therefore possible that a different part of the tree may have been symptomatic.
In this study, the prevalence, and the possible association with FMD-symptoms of seven viruses were investigated. This is the first report of the presence of FMV, FLMaV2, FLV1, FFkaV, FBV1 and GBV1 infecting fig trees in South Africa expanding the data on the incidence and distribution of these fig-infecting viruses and that can aid the propagation of virus free plant material in South Africa.
Data availability
The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
References
Bester R, Cook G, Breytenbach JHJ et al (2021a) Towards the validation of high-throughput sequencing (HTS) for routine plant virus diagnostics: measurement of variation linked to HTS detection of citrus viruses and viroids. Virol J 18:61. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12985-021-01523-1
Bester R, Cook G, Maree HJ (2021b) Citrus tristeza virus genotype detection using high-throughput sequencing. Viruses 13:17. https://doi.org/10.3390/v13020168
Bester R, Karaan M, Cook G, Maree HJ (2021c) First report of citrus virus A in citrus in South Africa. J Citrus Pathol. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5gr6p8zh
Bester R, Lotos L, Vermeulen A et al (2021d) Complete genome sequence of a grapevine Roditis leaf discoloration-associated virus (GRLDaV) variant from South Africa. Arch Virol 166:2041–2044. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00705-021-05079-x
Bester R, Malan SS, Maree HJ (2020) A plum marbling conundrum: Identification of a new viroid associated with marbling and corky flesh in japanese plums. Phytopathology 110:1476–1482. https://doi.org/10.1094/PHYTO-12-19-0474-R
Bester R, Maree HJ (2022) First report of the plum marbling disease associated agent, plum viroid I, in apricots (Prunus armeniaca) in South Africa. Plant Disease PDIS-10-22-2321-PDN. https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-10-22-2321-PDN
Bolger AM, Lohse M, Usadel B (2014) Trimmomatic: a flexible trimmer for Illumina sequence data. Bioinformatics 30:2114–2120. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btu170
Castellano MA, Gattoni G, Minafra A et al (2007) Fig mosaic in mexico and South Africa. J Plant Pathol 89:441–444. https://doi.org/10.4454/jpp.v89i3.780
Castellano MA, Stradis AD, Minafra A et al (2009) Seed transmission of fig latent virus. J Plant Pathol 91:697–700. https://doi.org/10.4454/jpp.v91i3.563
Chirkov S, Sheveleva A, Tsygankova S et al (2022) Characterization of divergent grapevine badnavirus 1 isolates found on different fig species (Ficus spp.). Plants 11:2532. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11192532
Coetzee B, Maree HJ, Stephan D et al (2010) The first complete nucleotide sequence of a grapevine virus E variant. Adv Virol 155:1357–1360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00705-010-0685-1
Elbeaino T, Digiaro M, Alabdullah A et al (2009) A multipartite single-stranded negative-sense RNA virus is the putative agent of fig mosaic disease. J Gen Virol 90:1281–1288. https://doi.org/10.1099/vir.0.008649-0
Elbeaino T, Digiaro M, Heinoun K et al (2010) Fig mild mottle-associated virus, a novel closterovirus infecting fig. J Plant Pathol 92:165–172. https://doi.org/10.4454/jpp.v92i1.26
Elbeaino T, Digiaro M, Martelli GP (2011a) Complete sequence of Fig fleck-associated virus, a novel member of the family Tymoviridae. Virus Res 161:198–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.virusres.2011.07.022
Elbeaino T, Digiaro M, Stradis AD, Martelli GP (2006) Partial characterisation of a closterovirus associated with chlorotic mottling of fig. J Plant Pathol 88:187–192. https://doi.org/10.4454/jpp.v88i2.862
Elbeaino T, Digiaro M, Stradis AD, Martelli GP (2007) Identification of a second member of the family closteroviridae in mosaic-diseased figs. J Plant Pathol 89:119–124. https://doi.org/10.4454/jpp.v89i1.732
Elbeaino T, Kubaa RA, Digiaro M et al (2011b) The complete nucleotide sequence and genome organization of Fig cryptic virus, a novel bipartite dsRNA virus infecting fig, widely distributed in the Mediterranean basin. Virus Genes 42:415–421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11262-011-0581-0
Flock RA, Wallace JM (1957) Fig mosaic transmitted by mite. California Agri 12–13. https://calag.ucanr.edu/archive/?type=pdf&article=ca.v011n01p12
Gattoni G, Minafra A, Castellano MA et al (2009) Some properties of fig latent virus 1, a new member of the family flexiviridae. J Plant Pathol 91:555–564. https://doi.org/10.4454/jpp.v91i3.546
Geering ADW (2021) Badnaviruses (Caulimoviridae). In: Bamford DH, Zuckerman M (eds) Encyclopedia of Virology, 4th edn. Academic Press, Oxford, Fourth Edition, pp 158–168
Kislev ME, Hartmann A, Bar-Yosef O (2006) Early domesticated fig in the Jordan valley. Science 312:1372–1374. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1125910
Latinović J, Radišek S, Bajčeta M et al (2019) Viruses associated with fig mosaic disease in different fig varieties in Montenegro. Plant Pathol J 35:32–40. https://doi.org/10.5423/PPJ.OA.04.2018.0058
Maliogka V, Minafra A, Saldarelli P et al (2018) Recent advances on detection and characterization of fruit tree viruses using high-throughput sequencing technologies. Viruses 10:436. https://doi.org/10.3390/v10080436
Maree HJ, Fox A, Al Rwahnih M et al (2018) Application of HTS for routine plant virus diagnostics: State of the art and challenges. Front Plant Sci 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.01082
Massart S, Olmos A, Jijakli H, Candresse T (2014) Current impact and future directions of high throughput sequencing in plant virus diagnostics. Virus Res 188:90–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.virusres.2014.03.029
Navarro B, Minutolo M, De Stradis A et al (2018) The first phlebo-like virus infecting plants: a case study on the adaptation of negative-stranded RNA viruses to new hosts: citrus concave gum-associated virus. Mol Plant Pathol 19:1075–1089. https://doi.org/10.1111/mpp.12587
Nurk S, Bankevich A, Antipov D et al (2013) Assembling genomes and mini-metagenomes from highly chimeric reads. In: Deng M, Jiang R, Sun F, Zhang X (eds) Research in Computational Molecular Biology. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 158–170
Olmos A, Boonham N, Candresse T et al (2018) High-throughput sequencing technologies for plant pest diagnosis: challenges and opportunities. EPPO Bullet 48:219–224. https://doi.org/10.1111/epp.12472
Preising S, Borges DF, de Queiroz Ambrósio MM, da Silva WL (2021) A fig deal: A global look at fig mosaic disease and its putative associates. Plant Dis 105:727–738. https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-06-20-1352-FE
Rott M, Xiang Y, Boyes I et al (2017) Application of next generation sequencing for diagnostic testing of tree fruit viruses and viroids. Plant Dis 101:1489–1499. https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-03-17-0306-RE
Ruiz-García AB, Bester R, Olmos A, Maree HJ (2019) Bioinformatic tools and genome analysis of citrus tristeza virus. In: Catara AF, Bar-Joseph M, Licciardello G (eds) Citrus Tristeza Virus: Methods and Protocols. Springer, New York, New York, NY, pp 163–178
SAFPA (2021) Industry statistics & AGM presentation 2021. https://www.safigs.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Figs-AGM-07-DESEMBER-2021.pdf
Stover E, Aradhya M, Ferguson L, Crisosto CH (2007) The fig: Overview of an ancient fruit. Horts 42:1083–1087. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.42.5.1083
Tzanetakis IE, Laney AG, Keller KE, Martin RR (2010) New viruses found in fig exhibiting mosaic symptoms. In: 21st International Conference on Virus and other Graft Transmissible Diseases of Fruit Crops. Julius-Kühn-Archiv, pp 79–82
Villamor DEV, Ho T, Al Rwahnih M et al (2019) High throughput sequencing for plant virus detection and discovery. Phytopathology 109:716–725. https://doi.org/10.1094/PHYTO-07-18-0257-RVW
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the landowners for allowing access to their premises. Computations were performed using Stellenbosch University’s HPC2: http://www.sun.ac.za/hpc.
Funding
Open access funding provided by Stellenbosch University.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Rachelle Bester: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis and investigation, Project administration, Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review & Editing. Carla van Niekerk: Formal analysis and investigation, Writing - Original Draft. Hans J. Maree: Conceptualization, Methodology, Project administration, Writing, Reviewing and Editing.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical approval
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Bester, R., van Niekerk, C. & Maree, H.J. Analyses of fig (Ficus carica L.) leaves for virome profiling of mosaic diseased trees from the Western Cape Province (South Africa). J Plant Pathol 105, 1115–1121 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42161-023-01405-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42161-023-01405-1