Phytopathology. 2004 May;94(5):527-34. doi: 10.1094/PHYTO.2004.94.5.527.
ABSTRACT Soilborne wheat mosaic virus (SBWMV) and Wheat spindle streak mosaic virus (WSSMV) are putatively transmitted to small grains by the obligate parasite Polymyxa graminis, but little is known about environmental requirements for transmission and the resulting disease incidence. We planted susceptible wheat and triticale cultivars in field nurseries on different autumn dates in 3 years and observed the incidence of symptomatic plants in each following spring. Autumn postplanting environment explained most of the variation in disease caused by both viruses. Little apparent transmission, based on eventual symptom development, of either virus occurred after the average soil temperature dropped below 7 degrees C for the remainder of the winter. To forecast disease, we tested an SBWMV transmission model in the field, based on laboratory results, that predicts opportunities for transmission based on soil temperature and soil moisture being simultaneously conducive. This model was predictive of soilborne wheat mosaic in 2 of 3 years. Zoospores of P. graminis have optimal activity at temperatures similar to those in the SBWMV transmission model. Furthermore, the matric potential threshold (as it relates to waterfilled pore sizes) in the SBWMV transmission model fits well with P. graminis as vector given the size restrictions of P. graminis zoospores. Conditions optimal for SBWMV transmission in the laboratory were not conducive for WSSMV transmission in the laboratory or for wheat spindle streak mosaic development in the field. This differential response to environment after emergence, as indicated by disease symptoms, may be due to virus-specific environmental conditions required to establish systemic infection via the same vector. Alternatively, the differential response may have been due to the involvement of a different vector in our WSSMV nursery than in our SBWMV nursery. Our results suggest that, as a control tactic for SBWMV or WSSMV, earliness or lateness of planting is less important in determining virus transmission and disease than the specific postplanting environment. Improved models based on the postplanting environment might predict virus-induced losses of yield potential, and in some cases, growers might avoid purchase of spring inputs such as pesticides and fertilizer for fields with greatly reduced yield potential.
摘要 土传小麦花叶病毒(SBWMV)和小麦梭条花叶病毒(WSSMV)可能通过专性寄生虫禾谷多黏菌(Polymyxa graminis)传播至小粒谷物,但对传播的环境要求以及由此产生的疾病发病率知之甚少。我们在 3 年内的不同秋季日期在田间苗圃中种植了易感小麦和黑小麦品种,并观察了次年春季出现症状的植株比例。秋季种植后环境解释了这两种病毒引起的疾病变化的大部分原因。在冬季剩余时间土壤平均温度降至 7°C 以下后,几乎没有明显的病毒传播,基于最终症状的发展。为了预测疾病,我们根据实验室结果在田间测试了一个 SBWMV 传播模型,该模型基于土壤温度和土壤湿度同时适宜的条件预测传播机会。该模型在 3 年中的 2 年中预测了土传小麦花叶病。禾谷多黏菌的游动孢子在与 SBWMV 传播模型相似的温度下具有最佳活性。此外,SBWMV 传播模型中的基质势阈值(与充水孔隙大小有关)与作为载体的禾谷多黏菌非常吻合,考虑到禾谷多黏菌游动孢子的大小限制。实验室中 SBWMV 传播的最佳条件不利于实验室中 WSSMV 的传播或田间小麦梭条花叶病的发展。这种对出苗后环境的不同反应(如症状所示)可能是由于通过相同载体建立系统感染所需的病毒特异性环境条件不同。或者,这种差异反应可能是由于我们的 WSSMV 苗圃中的不同载体而不是我们的 SBWMV 苗圃中的不同载体造成的。我们的研究结果表明,作为 SBWMV 或 WSSMV 的控制策略,种植的早晚在确定病毒传播和疾病方面不如特定的种植后环境重要。基于种植后环境的改进模型可能会预测病毒引起的产量潜力损失,在某些情况下,种植者可能会避免为产量潜力大大降低的田地购买春季投入品,如杀虫剂和化肥。