ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Prevalence and phylogenetic analysis of Fig mosaic virus and Fig badnavirus-1 in Iran
1
Department of Plant Pathology, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, 14515-775, Iran
2
Department of Plant Pathology, Faculty of Agriculture, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, 14115-111, Iran
Submission date: 2015-09-14
Acceptance date: 2016-04-18
Corresponding author
Farshad Rakhshandehroo
Department of Plant Pathology, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, 14515-775, Iran
Department of Plant Pathology, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, 14515-775, Iran
Journal of Plant Protection Research 2016;56(2):122-128
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Fig mosaic virus (FMV) and Fig badnavirus-1 (FBV-1) are two of the most important fig infecting viruses. The incidence and distribution of FBV-1 and FMV were determined by testing in PCR 138 asymptomatic and symptomatic samples. These samples were
collected from 60 fig gardens and agricultural fields in three provinces of Iran. The fig infecting viruses FBV-1 and FMV, respectively, were detected in 92 (66.6%) and 34 (24.6%) samples collected from all the surveyed fields. Overall, 24 out of 138 (17.3%) samples showed mixed infections. The sequence analysis of a genomic fragment of 922 nt, comprising the entire ORF-2 and part of the 5’ termini of the ORF-3 of 10 selected FBV-1 Iranian isolates from different provinces, and of the type member from GenBank (Acc. No: JF411989), showed a variation ranging from 1 to 3% at nucleotide level and 1% at the amino acid level. The phylogenetic analysis grouped the FBV-1 isolates into two groups, with the Iranian isolates clustered in two distinct subgroups of group I, according to their geographical origin. In our research, the prevalence and sequence analysis of FBV-1 as the only identified DNA virus infecting fig trees, was studied for the first time in Iran.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors have declared that no conflict of interests exist.
REFERENCES (40)
1.
Acosta-Leal R., Duffy S., Xiong Z., Hammond R., Elena S.F. 2011. Advances in plant virus evolution: translating evolutionary insights into better disease management. Phytopathology 101 (10): 1136–1148.
2.
Altschul S.F., Madden T.L., Schäffer A.A., Zhang J., Zhang Z., Miller W., Lipman D.J. 1997. Gapped BLAST and PSIBLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Research 25 (17): 3389–3402.
3.
Bouhida M., Lockhart B.E.L., Olszewski N.E. 1993. An analysis of the complete sequence of a sugarcane bacilliform virus genome infectious to banana and rice. Journal of General Virology 74 (1): 15–22.
4.
Chabannes M., Iskra-Caruana M.L. 2013. Endogenous pararetroviruses a reservoir of virus infection in plants. Current Opinion in Virology 3 (6): 615–620.
5.
Condit I.J., Horne W.T. 1933. A mosaic of the fig in California. Phytopathology 23 (11): 887–896.
6.
Danesh-Amuz S., Rakhshandehroo F., Rezaee S. 2014. Prevalence and genetic diversity of fig mosaic virus isolates infecting fig tree in Iran. Acta Virologica 58 (3): 245–252.
7.
Dellaporta S.L., Wood J.Y., Hicks J.B. 1983. A plant DNA minipreparation: version II. Plant Molecular Biology Reporter 1 (4): 19–21.
8.
Dallot S., Acuna P., Rivera C., Ramirez P., Cote F., Lockhart B.E.L., Caruana M.L. 2001. Evidence that the proliferation stage of micropropagation procedure is determinant in the expression of Banana streak virus integrated into the genome of the FHIA 21 hybrid (Musa AAAB). Archive of Virology 146 (11): 2179–2190.
9.
Elbeaino T., Digiaroa M., Martelli G.P. 2011a. Complete sequence of Fig fleck-associated virus, a novel member of the family Tymoviridae. Virus Research 161 (2): 198–202.
10.
Elbeaino T., Kubaa R.A., Digiaro M., Minafra A., Martelli G.P. 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 (3): 415–421.
11.
Elbeaino T., Gonzalez-Rodríguez A.M., Grajal-Martín M.J., Digiaro M. 2011c. Survey of fig viruses in the Canary Islands. Journal of Plant Pathology 93 (3): 737–739.
12.
Elbeaino T., Abou Kubaa R., Ismaeil F., Mando J., Digiaro M. 2012. Viruses and hop stunt viroid of fig trees in Syria. Journal of Plant Pathology 94 (3): 687–691.
13.
Elbeshehy E.K.F., Elbeaino T. 2011. Viruses infecting figs in Egypt. Phytopathologia Mediterranea 50 (2): 327–332.
14.
Elci E., Ulubas Srce C., Gazel M., Caglayan K. 2012. Molecular detection and comparative sequence analysis of viruses infecting fig trees in Turkey. Journal of Phytopathology 160: 418–423.
15.
Foissac X., Svanella-Dumas L., Dulucq M.J., Candresse T., Gentit P. 2001. Polyvalent detection of fruit tree tricho, capillo and foveavirus by nested RT-PCR using degenerated and inosine containing primers (DOP RT-PCR). Acta Horticulturae 550: 37–44.
16.
Flock R., Wallace J. 1955. Transmission of fig mosaic by the eriophyid mite Aceria ficus. Phytopathology 45 (1): 52–54.
17.
Gayral P., Noa-Carrazana J.C., Lescot M., Lheureux F., Lockhart B.E.L., Matsumoto T., Piffanelli P., Iskra-Caruana M.L .A single banana streak virus integration event in the banana genome as the origin of infectious endogenous pararetrovirus. Journal of Virology 82 (13): 6697–6710.
18.
Grenfell B.T., Pybus O.G., Gog J.R., Wood J.L.N., Daly J.M., Mumford J.A., Holmes E.C. 2004. Unifying the epidemiological and evolutionary dynamics of pathogens. Science 303 (5656): 327–332.
19.
Hearon S.S., Locke J.C. 1984. Graft, pollen, and seed transmission of an agent associated with top spotting in Kalancöe blossfeldiana. Phytopathology 74 (4): 347–350.
20.
Iskra-Caruana M.L., Chabannes M., Duroy P.O., Muller E. 2014. A possible scenario for the evolution of Banana streak virus in banana. Virus Research 86: 155–162.
21.
Laney A.G., Hassan M., Tzanetakis I.E. 2012. An integrated badnavirus is prevalent in fig germplasm. Phytopathology 102 (12): 1182–1189.
22.
Liu R., Koyanagi K.O., Chen S., Kishima Y. 2012. Evolutionary force of AT-richrepeats to trap genomic and episomal DNAs into the rice genome: lessons fromendogenous pararetrovirus. Plant Journal 72 (5): 817–828.
23.
Martelli G.P. 2011. Fig mosaic disease and associated pathogens. p. 281–287. In: “Virus and Virus-like Diseases of Pome and Stone Fruits” (A. Hadidi, M. Barba, T. Candresse, W. Jelkmann, eds.). APS Press, St. Paul, MN, USA, 428 pp.
24.
Martin E.M., Kim K.S. 1987. A new type of virus causing striped chlorosis of mimosa. Phytopathology 77 (7): 935–940.
25.
Medberry S.L., Lockhart B.E.L., Olszewski N.E. 1990. Properties of Commelina yellow mottle virus complete DNA sequence, genomic discontinuities and transcript suggest that it is a pararetrovirus. Nucleic Acids Research 18 (24): 5505–5513.
26.
Meyer J.B., Kasdorf G.G.F., Nei L.H., Pietersen G. 2008. Transmission of activated-episomal Banana streak OL (badna) virus (BSOLV) to cv. Williams banana (Musa sp.) by three mealybugs species. Plant Disease 92 (8): 1158–1163.
27.
Minafra A., Chiumenti M., Elbeaino T., Digiaro M., Bottalico G., Pantaleo V., Martelli G.P. 2012. Occurrence of Fig badnavirus 1 in fig trees from different countries and symptomless seedlings. Journal of Plant Pathology 94 (S4): 105.
28.
Nei M., Kumar S. 2000. Molecular Evolution and Phylogenetics. Oxford University Press, New York, 339 pp.
29.
Norozian E., Rakhshandehroo F., Shams-bakhsh M. 2014. Presence of Fig leaf mottle associated virus 3 in an Iranian fig orchard. Journal of Plant Pathology 96 (S4): 113–131.
30.
Nouri Ale-Agha G., Rakhshandehroo F. 2014. Detection and molecular variability of Fig fleck-associated virus and Fig cryptic virus in Iran. Journal of Phytopathology 162 (7–8): 417–425.
31.
Oluwafemi S., Thottappilly G., Alegbejo M.D. 2008. Search for variability among masterviruses showing symptoms of Maize streak virus from different regions of Nigeria by polymerase chain reactions. Journal of Plant Protection Research 48 (4): 529–539.
32.
Pamilo P., Bianchi N.O. 1993. Evolution of the Z fx and Z fy genes: rates and interdependence between the genes. Molecular Biology and Evolution 10 (2): 271–281.
33.
Pearson W.R., Lipman D.J. 1988. Improved tools for biological sequence comparison. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 85 (8): 2444–2448.
34.
Saitou N., Nei M. 1987. The neighbor-joining method: A new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Molecular Biology and Evolution 4 (4): 406–425.
35.
Shahmirzaie M., Rakhshandehroo F., Zamanizadeh H.R., Elbeaino T. 2012. Current status of fig mosaic disease in Iran. Journal of Phytopathology 160 (8): 324–330.
36.
Staginnus C., Iskra-Caruana M.L., Lockhart B., Hohn T., Richert-Poggeler K.R. 2009. Suggestions for a nomenclature of endogenous pararetroviral sequences in plants. Archive of Virology 154 (7): 1189–1193.
37.
Tamura K., Peterson D., Peterson N., Stecher G., Nei M., Kumar S. 2011. MEGA5: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis using maximum likelihood, evolutionary distance, and maximum parsimony methods. Molecular Biology and Evolution 28 (10): 2731–2739.
38.
Tajima F. 1989. Statistical method for testing the neutral mutation hypothesis by DNA polymorphism. Genetics 123 (3): 585–595.
39.
Walia J.J., Salem N.M., Falk B.W. 2009. Partial sequence and survey analysis identify a multipartite, negative-sense RNA virus associated with fig mosaic. Plant Disease 93 (1): 4–10.
40.
Walia J.J., Willemsen A., Elci E., Caglayan K., Falk B.W., Rubio L. 2014. Genetic variation and possible mechanisms driving the evolution of worldwide Fig mosaic virus isolates. Phytopathology 104 (1): 108–114.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| eISSN: | 1899-007X |
| ISSN: | 1427-4345 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
