Plant virus infection modifies plant pigment and manipulates the host preference behavior of an insect vector

Insect-borne plant viruses may modify the phenotype of their host plants and thus influence the responses of insect vectors. When a plant virus modifies host preference behavior of a vector, it can be expected to influence the rate of virus transmission. In this study, we examined the effect of Maize Iranian mosaic virus (MIMV) infection on host preference behavior of the nymphs and adults of its vector, the small brown planthopper, Laodelphax striatellus Fallén (Hemiptera: Delphacidae), feeding on barley plants (Hordeum vulgare L., Poaceae). We found that both viruliferous nymphs and adults significantly preferred healthy plants, whereas non-viruliferous planthoppers preferred virus-infected barley. Further investigations revealed significant reductions in the chlorophyll and carotenoid contents of infected barley leaves. Based on these results, a possible association between insect host preferences and the pigment contents of the plants was observed. In summary, we suggest that host preference of L. striatellus could be affected by the propagative plant virus, possibly through association of this modification with some phenotypic traits of infected plants. These effects may have a critical impact on MIMV transmission rate, with significant implications for the development of virus epidemics.     

Comparing the plant virus spread patterns of non-persistently transmitted virus and persistently transmitted virus using an individual-based model

To compare the spread patterns between two types of plant viruses, non-persistent virus (NPV) and persistent virus (PV), we developed a spatially-explicit individual-based model. Our probability-based model is driven by the actions of insect vectors that are affected by interactions with host plants and plant viruses, considering both biological and behavioral components of their relationship. As a model system, we used potato virus y and potato leafroll virus, respectively for NPV and PV, potato for host plant, and Myzus persicae for the insect vector; empirical results from previous studies were acquired and adjusted to be used as our parameter values. Our simulation results showed that initial infection of PV in the field resulted in over 1.3 times greater number of insect vectors while causing approximately 7 times greater number of virus-infected plants compared to NPV by the end of simulation. Furthermore, spatial analysis showed that PV-infected plants showed greater aggregation in the field, forming larger patches compared to NPV-infected plants. Our results demonstrated the importance of host plant and insect vector manipulation by plant viruses as well as biological properties such as infectious period in the insect on the difference in overall spread pattern.     

Transmission of carrot mosaic virus by aphids

The transmission of the carrot mosaic virus (CMV) by the aphidsAcyrtJiosiphon pisum HARRÍS,Cavariela aegopodii SCOP, andMyzus persicae SULZ was proved experimentally. It was observed simultaneously that CMV has a non-persistent character. CMV can be transmitted already 2 min after acquisition feeding by the aphidsMyzus persicae SDLZ andCavariella aego-podii Scop. When the time of acquisition feeding is prolonged to 4 min, CMV is transmitted also by aphidAcyrthosiphon pisum HAREÍs. The host range of the investigated virus wasalso determined and its transmission to 8 plant species, belonging to 4 families, was achieved. On the basis of studies of the vector virus relationship and of the host range, further proof was given for the different character of the Australian Carrot motley dwarf virus, theApivm virus 1 Roland and CMV. The experiments showed that preliminary starving of the aphids for 1 h increases their ability to transmit the virus by 3–3%.     

Effect of host plant tissue on the vector transmission of grapevine leafroll-associated virus 3

Many biotic and abiotic factors affect the transmission efficiency of vector-borne plant pathogens. Insect vector within-plant distribution and host tissue preference are known to affect pathogen acquisition and inoculation rates. In this study, we first investigated whether feeding tissue affects the transmission of Grapevine leafroll-associated virus 3 by Planococcus ficus (Signoret) (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) and the effect of mealybug within-plant distribution on virus transmission under greenhouse conditions. Results showed no significant effect on transmission efficiency after insect confinement on leaf blades, petioles or stems of virus source or healthy test plants for either acquisition or inoculation trials. Transmission efficiency of a single mealybug varied from 4 to 25% in those trials. Second, we tested whether leaf position affected transmission efficiency due to potentially variable virus populations within acquisition plant tissues. No significant differences of transmission rate among acquisition leaf position were observed, probably because there were no differences in the virus population within source tissues. Finally, we examined the seasonality of the virus in field-collected samples and found that GLRaV-3 prevalence varied along a growing season, such that GLRaV-3 translocated along expanding shoots to leaves. Similarly, mealybug populations are known to increase in spring, and then mealybugs spread to cordons and leaves. This coordination of spatial and temporal dynamics of the virus and its vector may increase the risk of GLRaV-3 transmission during late spring and early summer. Further integration of information about pathogen populations in plants, vector feeding behavior and vector population seasonality could lead to more effective management practices.     

Temporal Effects of a Begomovirus Infection and Host Plant Resistance on the Preference and Development of an Insect Vector,Bemisia tabaci,and Implications for Epidemics

Persistent plant viruses, by altering phenotypic and physiological traits of their hosts, could modulate the host preference and fitness of hemipteran vectors. A majority of such modulations increase vector preference for virus-infected plants and improve vector fitness, ultimately favouring virus spread. Nevertheless, it remains unclear how these virus-induced modulations on vectors vary temporally, and whether host resistance to the pathogen influences such effects. This study addressed the two questions using a Begomovirus-whitefly-tomato model pathosystem. Tomato yellow leaf curl virus (TYLCV) -susceptible and TYLCV-resistant tomato genotypes were evaluated by whitefly-mediated transmission assays. Quantitative PCR revealed that virus accumulation decreased after an initial spike in all genotypes. TYLCV accumulation was less in resistant than in susceptible genotypes at 3, 6, and 12 weeks post inoculation (WPI). TYLCV acquisition by whiteflies over time from resistant and susceptible genotypes was also consistent with virus accumulation in the host plant. Furthermore, preference assays indicated that non-viruliferous whiteflies preferred virus-infected plants, whereas viruliferous whiteflies preferred non-infected plants. However, this effect was prominent only with the susceptible genotype at 6 WPI. The development of whiteflies on non-infected susceptible and resistant genotypes was not significantly different. However, developmental time was reduced when a susceptible genotype was infected with TYLCV. Together, these results suggest that vector preference and development could be affected by the timing of infection and by host resistance. These effects could play a crucial role in TYLCV epidemics.     

Rice stripe virus coat protein induces the accumulation of jasmonic acid,activating plant defence against the virus while also attracting its vector to feed

The jasmonic acid (JA) pathway plays crucial roles in plant defence against pathogens and herbivores. Rice stripe virus (RSV) is the type member of the genus Tenuivirus. It is transmitted by the small brown planthopper (SBPH) and causes damaging epidemics in East Asia. The role(s) that JA may play in the tripartite interaction against RSV, its host, and vector are poorly understood. Here, we found that the JA pathway was induced by RSV infection and played a defence role against RSV. The coat protein (CP) was the major viral component responsible for inducing the JA pathway. Methyl jasmonate treatment attracted SBPHs to feed on rice plants while a JA-deficient mutant was less attractive than wild-type rice. SBPHs showed an obvious preference for feeding on transgenic rice lines expressing RSV CP. Our results demonstrate that CP is an inducer of the JA pathway that activates plant defence against RSV while also attracting SBPHs to feed and benefitting viral transmission. This is the first report of the function of JA in the tripartite interaction between RSV, its host, and its vector.     

The role of visual and olfactory plant cues in aphid behaviour and the development of non-persistent virus management strategies

Non-persistent viruses are transmitted by aphids in short feeding probes during the initial stages of aphid host plant selection behaviour. To control the transmission of these viruses, farmers rely on pesticides and cultural control practices, with varying success rates. As a result, there is a need for novel management practices that are more robust and specific to reducing aphid landing rates in crops. Aphid–plant–virus interactions involve a number of behaviours and processes to ensure survival of the insect vector and virus. So far, virus management tactics focused on reducing immigrating aphids in crops have emphasized the manipulation of visual rather than olfactory stimuli. An improved understanding of the synergistic or additive effects in which aphids use visual and olfactory stimuli to locate host plants could be used to improve on current non-persistent virus management tactics and develop novel strategies. The aim of this review is to evaluate current understanding of aphid vector behaviour and the ways that these behaviours have been exploited to develop management strategies, and to identify areas of research needed to further improve virus management.     

Double agent indole-3-acetic acid: mechanistic analysis of indole-3-acetaldehyde dehydrogenase AldA that synthesizes IAA,an auxin that aids bacterial virulence

The large diversity of organisms inhabiting various environmental niches on our planet are engaged in a lively exchange of biomolecules, including nutrients, hormones, and vitamins. In a quest to survive, organisms that we define as pathogens employ innovative methods to extract valuable resources from their host leading to an infection. One such instance is where plant-associated bacterial pathogens synthesize and deploy hormones or their molecular mimics to manipulate the physiology of the host plant. This commentary describes one such specific example—the mechanism of the enzyme AldA, an aldehyde dehydrogenase (ALDH) from the bacterial plant pathogen Pseudomonas syringae which produces the plant auxin hormone indole-3-acetic acid (IAA) by oxidizing the substrate indole-3-acetaldehyde (IAAld) using the cofactor nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD⁺) (Bioscience Reports (2020) 40(12), https://doi.org/10.1042/BSR20202959). Using mutagenesis, enzyme kinetics, and structural analysis, Zhang et al. established that the progress of the reaction hinges on the formation of two distinct conformations of NAD(H) during the reaction course. Additionally, a key mutation in the AldA active site ‘aromatic box’ changes the enzyme’s preference for an aromatic substrate to an aliphatic one. Our commentary concludes that such molecular level investigations help to establish the nature of the dynamics of NAD(H) in ALDH-catalyzed reactions, and further show that the key active site residues control substrate specificity. We also contemplate that insights from the present study can be used to engineer novel ALDH enzymes for environmental, health, and industrial applications.     

Aphid transmission of cauliflower mosaic virus: The role of the host plant

Transmission of plant viruses is the result of interactions between a given virus, the host plant and the vector. Most research has focused on molecular and cellular virus-vector interactions, and the host has only been regarded as a reservoir from which the virus is acquired by the vector more or less accidentally. However, a growing body of evidence suggests that the host can play a crucial role in transmission. Indeed, at least one virus, Cauliflower mosaic virus, exploits the host''s cellular pathways to form specialized intracellular structures that optimize virus uptake by the vector and hence transmission.Key words: virus, vector, host plant, transmission, interactionsTransmission is a step in a virus''s life cycle that is often neglected. Nonetheless, it is obvious that also this step is obligatory for a virus, as it could not maintain itself without dispersing to other hosts and infecting them. Most plant viruses are transmitted by insects, using two different strategies: “circulant transmission” where the virus, once taken up by the vector during feeding on an infected plant, passes from the intestine via the body lumen to the salivary glands and is finally inoculated with the saliva into a new host plant; the second strategy is “non-circulant transmission” where transmissible virus particles attach only to the exterior mouthpieces of the insect from which they are released into a new host. Whereas the first strategy obviously requires highly specific interactions between the virus and the vector to allow for passage of the virus through the vector, non-circulant transmission was initially thought of as a more or less accidental event, where virus sticks non-specifically to the mouthpieces. However, it becomes more and more evident that also non-circulant transmission is the result of sophisticated interactions between a given virus, a host and a vector. The vectors are most often aphids that, due to their non-destructive feeding behavior, are ideally suited as virus vectors. In fact, once landed on a plant, aphids first probe the prospective food source by short, only seconds lasting intracellular punctures in epidermis and mesophyll cells that do not even kill the punctured cells.¹ After these exploratory punctures and when they judge the plant as suited, the aphids insert their proboscis-like mouthpieces (stylets) into the phloem and feed from its sap for time spans that may exceed several hours. Depending on the tissues they infect, plant viruses can be acquired by aphids during either or only one of the two puncture phases. For example, Luteoviruses are only acquired from the vascular tissues,² whereas Cauliflower mosaic virus is acquired from both tissues.³Cauliflower mosaic virus (CaMV) is one of the best studied viruses on what concerns non-circulant transmission, the most often used transmission mode employed by plant viruses. For its transmission, a transmissible complex must form that attaches to a protein receptor located in the stylets of the aphid.⁴ This complex is not only, as for some viruses, composed of the virus particle, but also, as for many non-circulantly transmitted plant viruses, of a viral helper protein that with one domain interacts with the virus particle and with another with the stylet receptor⁵ (Fig. 1A). The helper protein of CaMV, P2, seems to have no other function but to assist in transmission as CaMV mutants deleted of P2 are perfectly infectious but not transmissible.⁶ A puzzling fact is that P2 may be acquired independently of the virus particle, meaning that it alone can bind to the stylet receptor and that virus particles either attach concomitantly with P2 onto the stylets or later attach to pre-bound P2. This has consequences for the composition of the transmitted viral population as it can be compiled of virus particles originating from the same cell from which P2 was acquired, but also from other cells and even sieve tubes that themselves do not contain P2.³ In fact, this potentially sequential acquisition mode of CaMV by the vector is controlled by the intracellular⁷ and tissue-specific localization of P2 that is only found in epidermis and parenchyma cells.³ In these cells, P2 localizes exclusively in a single viral inclusion, the transmission body, that has been proposed and recently been shown to be specialized for transmission:^8–10 if this structure does not form, CaMV can not be taken up by the aphid, even if functional P2 is present in the infected cell.Open in a separate windowFigure 1(A) The different strategies of non-circulant transmission: Viruses (V) using the capsid strategy (CS) attach directly to a receptor (R) in the tip of the a proboscis forming aphid stylets (blue), whereas in the helper strategy (HS) this interaction is mediated by the viral helper protein (H) that binds the virus particle to the receptor. Note that the helper protein can bind independently of the virus to the stylets. Whether the same receptor is used by different viruses as presented in the schema, is not known. (B) A turnip protoplast transfected with CaMV was double-labelled late in infection for CaMV helper protein P2 (red) and the marker protein for the virus factories P6 (green). It is visible that P2 localizes in a single, large transmission body, whereas the numerous virus factories are devoid of P2 (Colocalization would be revealed by yellowish color (M) in this superposition). (C and D) Turnip protoplasts were cotransfected with CaMV and TBK5-GFP and immunolabelled for P2 (red) and TBK5 was detected by GFP fluorescence. (C) shows a cell early in infection, where P2 and TBK5-GFP colocalize on a network that we identified as the microtubule cytoskeleton (unpublished data). (D) shows a cell later in infection where P2 and TBK5-GFP colocalize, as indicated by the yellowish color, in a transmission body. Note that TBK5-GFP also strongly labels the nucleus (N).This posed the interesting question how the transmission body forms during infection because elucidating this mechanism would show that CaMV hijacks cellular pathways for the sole purpose to ensure its transmission. It was known that besides the single transmission body a second type of viral inclusion bodies is found in infected cells: the numerous “electron-dense inclusions” that are assumed to be the virus factories (Fig. 1B) where all viral synthesis occurs¹¹ and where most virus particles accumulate. However, P2 was never described in the factories, presenting the paradox: if it is translated in the factories why is it not found there? Of different possible scenarios we chose to test the hypothesis that P2 is produced in the factories and then exported. Protoplasts were transfected with CaMV particles and kinetics of P2 accumulation followed by immunofluorescence. The results showed that P2 is indeed translated in the viral factories but then associates temporally with microtubules before finally condensing into a single transmission body. Also the other known components of the transmission body, the viral protein P3 and to a lesser degree, some virus particles, followed the same route from viral factories to the transmission body.Experiments with cytoskeleton drugs confirmed that transient localization of transmission body components with microtubules, but not with actin filaments, is necessary for transmission body formation. The results also indicated that both microtubules and actin filaments are apparently not required for other steps of the intracellular infection cycle because formation of viral factories was only slightly inhibited by the drugs.The results show that CaMV specifically uses the microtubule cytoskeleton to form the transmission body and thus enable vector transmission. Consequently, non-circulant transmission of at least this virus is not a random event where the vector takes up some transmissible complexes by chance. It is rather the result of highly specific interactions, where the virus “intentionally” (ab)uses cellular pathways to optimize acquisition by the vector, and this long before arrival of the latter on an infected plant.A lot of questions remain open, though. Are P2 and the other components of the transmission body actively transported on microtubules, or is their transient colocalization with microtubules part of an alternative transport mode? We started to more closely examine interaction between P2 and microtubules and privileged the hypothesis that the protein might be transported by a motor activity on microtubules. As preliminary data indicated that P2 does not possess an innate translocating activity, we looked for a cellular motor protein and tested as a candidate the kinesin TBK5.¹² This transport protein is, when overexpressed, able to bundle microtubules into a single focus, just as transmission bodies are singular structures in the cell. When healthy protoplasts were cotransfected with TBK5 and CaMV, TBK5 localized transiently with P2 on microtubules and in transmission bodies (Fig. 1C and D). This might be taken as the first evidence that a kinesin might be involved in formation of transmission bodies, but more experimentation is needed to confirm this hypothesis.A by far more important question is: Have also other viruses, whether from the plant or the animal kingdoms, that are noncirculantly (or mechanically, as animal virologists call this mode of transmission) transmitted, developed similar strategies that fine-tune interactions between the host and the virus to prepare and perfect transmission?     

Population dynamics of botanical epidemics involving primary and secondary infection

In this paper we study the dynamical properties of models for botanical epidemics, especially for soil-borne fungal infection. The models develop several new concepts, involving dual sources of infection, host and inoculum dynamics. Epidemics are modelled with respect to the infection status of whole plants and plant organs (the G model) or to lesion density and size (the SW model). The infection can originate in two sources, either from the initial inoculum (primary infection) or by a direct transmission between plant tissue (secondary infection). The first term corresponds to the transmission through the free-living stages of macroparasites or an external source of infection in certain medical models, whereas the second term is equivalent to direct transmission between the hosts in microparasitic infections. The models allow for dynamics of host growth and inoculum decay. We show that the two models for root and lesion dynamics can be derived as special cases of a single generic model. Analytical and numerical methods are used to analyse the behaviour of the models for static, unlimited (exponential) and asymptotically limited host growth with and without secondary infection, and with and without decay of initial inoculum. The models are shown to exhibit a range of epidemic behaviour within single seasons that extends from simple monotonic increase with saturation of the host population, through temporary plateaux as the system switches from primary to secondary infection, to effective elimination of the pathogen by the host outgrowing the fungal infection. For certain conditions, the equilibrium values are shown to depend on initial conditions. These results have important consequences for the control of plant disease. They can be applied beyond soil-borne plant pathogens to mycorrhizal fungi and aerial pathogens while the principles of primary and secondary infection with host and inoculum dynamics may be used to link classical models for both microparasitic and macroparasitic infections.     

West Nile virus epidemics in North America are driven by shifts in mosquito feeding behavior

West Nile virus (WNV) has caused repeated large-scale human epidemics in North America since it was first detected in 1999 and is now the dominant vector-borne disease in this continent. Understanding the factors that determine the intensity of the spillover of this zoonotic pathogen from birds to humans (via mosquitoes) is a prerequisite for predicting and preventing human epidemics. We integrated mosquito feeding behavior with data on the population dynamics and WNV epidemiology of mosquitoes, birds, and humans. We show that Culex pipiens, the dominant enzootic (bird-to-bird) and bridge (bird-to-human) vector of WNV in urbanized areas in the northeast and north-central United States, shifted its feeding preferences from birds to humans by 7-fold during late summer and early fall, coinciding with the dispersal of its preferred host (American robins, Turdus migratorius) and the rise in human WNV infections. We also show that feeding shifts in Cx. tarsalis amplify human WNV epidemics in Colorado and California and occur during periods of robin dispersal and migration. Our results provide a direct explanation for the timing and intensity of human WNV epidemics. Shifts in feeding from competent avian hosts early in an epidemic to incompetent humans after mosquito infection prevalences are high result in synergistic effects that greatly amplify the number of human infections of this and other pathogens. Our results underscore the dramatic effects of vector behavior in driving the transmission of zoonotic pathogens to humans.     

Vector preference and host defense against infection interact to determine disease dynamics

Vector preference based on host infection status has long been recognized for its importance in disease dynamics. Prior theoretical work has assumed that all hosts are uniformly susceptible to the pathogen. Here we investigated disease dynamics when this assumption is relaxed using a series of vector–host epidemiological compartment models with variable levels of host resistance or tolerance to infection – collectively termed defense. In our models, vectors cannot acquire the infection from resistant hosts but can acquire from tolerant hosts. Specifically, we investigated the interacting effects of vector preference and host defense in a series of single‐ and two‐patch models. Results indicate that resistant host types generally reduce disease prevalence and pathogen spillover, independent of vector preference. The epidemiological consequences of host tolerance, however, depended on vector preference. When vectors preferred diseased hosts, tolerance reduced incidence compared to susceptible hosts; when vectors avoided diseased hosts, tolerance enhanced disease prevalence. Finally, a variation of the model that included preference‐based vector patch leaving rates suggests that both resistance and tolerance can promote pathogen spillover if vectors prefer diseased hosts, because of increased vector dispersal into susceptible patches. Collectively, we found complex, context‐dependent effects of vector preference and host defense on disease dynamics. In the context of management programs for vector‐borne diseases, managers should consider both the precise form of host defense present in a population, breed, or cultivar, as well as vector feeding behavior.     

Effect of Watermelon Silver Mottle Virus on the Life History and Feeding Preference of Thrips palmi

Thrips-borne tospoviruses cause numerous plant diseases that produce severe economic losses worldwide. In the disease system, thrips not only damage plants through feeding but also transmit causative agents of epidemics. In addition, thrips are infected with tospoviruses in the course of virus transmission. Most studies on the effect of tospoviruses on vector thrips have focused on the Tomato spotted wilt virus–Frankliniella occidentalis system. Thus, we focused on another thrips-borne tospovirus, Watermelon silver mottle virus (WSMoV), to examine the effect of virus infection on its vector, Thrips palmi. In this study, the direct and indirect effects of WSMoV on the life history traits and feeding preference of T. palmi were examined. The survival rate and developmental time of the WSMoV-infected larval thrips did not differ significantly from those of the virus-free thrips. Comparing the developmental time of larval thrips fed on the healthy plants, thrips-damaged plants, and thrips-inoculated plants (the WSMoV-infected plants caused by thrips feeding), feeding on the thrips-damaged plants reduced the developmental time, and the WSMoV infection in host plants partially canceled the effect of thrips damage on the developmental time. In addition, no significant variations between the virus-free and WSMoV-infected adult thrips regarding longevity and fecundity were observed. These results implied that WSMoV did not directly affect the life history traits of T. palmi, but the WSMoV infection indirectly affected the development of T. palmi through the virus-infected plants. Furthermore, feeding preference tests indicated that T. palmi preferred feeding on either the thrips-damaged plants or the thrips-inoculated plants to the healthy plants. The effect of tospoviruses on the life history and feeding preference of vector thrips might vary among host plants, virus species, vector species, and environmental factors.     

Barley yellow dwarf virus, wheat, and Sitobion avenae: a case of trilateral interactions

We analysed interactions in the system of two Barley Yellow Dwarf Virus (BYDV) strains (MAV and PAV), and wheat (cv. Tinos) as host plant for the virus, and the cereal aphid Sitobion avenae (F.) as vector, in particular whether or not infection by the virus might alter host plant suitability in favour of vector development. By measuring the amino acid and sugar content in the phloem sap of infected and non‐infected wheat plants we found a significant reduction in the concentration of the total amount of amino acids on BYDV‐infected plants. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of honeydew and honeydew excretion indicated a lower efficiency of phloem sap utilisation by S. avenae on infected plants. In addition, S. avenae excreted less honeydew on infected plants. Both BYDV strains significantly affected aphid development by a reduction in the intrinsic rate of natural increase. Hence, infection by the virus reduced the host suitability in terms of aphid population growth potential on BYDV‐infected plants. However, more alate morphs developed on virus‐infected plants. These findings are discussed in relation to the population dynamics of S. avenae, and, as a consequence, the spread of BYDV.     

Tomato yellow leaf curl virus infection of tomato does not affect the performance of the Q and ZHJ2 biotypes of the viral vector Bemisia tabaci

Abstract To better understand the etiology of begomovirus epidemics in regions under invasion we need to know how indigenous and invasive whitefly vectors respond to virus infection. We investigated both direct and indirect effects of infection with Tomato yellow leaf curl virus (TYLCV) on the performance of the invasive Q biotype and the indigenous Asian ZHJ2 biotype of whitefly Bemisia tabaci. The Q biotype performed better than the ZHJ2 biotype on either uninfected or virus‐infected tomato plants. However, virus‐infection of host plants did not, or only marginally affected, the performance of either biotype of whiteflies in terms of fecundity, longevity, survival, development and population increase. Likewise, association of the vectors with TYLCV did not affect fecundity and longevity of the Q or ZHJ2 biotypes on cotton, a non‐host of TYLCV. These results indicate that the alien Q biotype whitefly, but not the indigenous ZHJ2 biotype, is likely to become the major vector of TYLCV in the field and facilitate virus epidemics.     

Cucurbit aphid‐borne yellows virus (CABYV) modifies the alighting,settling and probing behaviour of its vector Aphis gossypii favouring its own spread

Plant pathogens are able to influence the behaviour and fitness of their vectors in such a way that changes in plant–pathogen–vector interactions can affect their transmission. Such influence can be direct or indirect, depending on whether it is mediated by the presence of the pathogen in the vector's body or by host changes as a consequence of pathogen infection. We report the effect that the persistently aphid‐transmitted Cucurbit aphid‐borne yellows virus (CABYV, Polerovirus) can induce on the alighting, settling and probing behaviour activities of its vector, the cotton aphid Aphis gossypii. Only minor direct changes on aphid feeding behaviour were observed when viruliferous aphids fed on non‐infected plants. However, the feeding behaviour of non‐viruliferous aphids was very different on CABYV‐infected than on non‐infected plants. Non‐viruliferous aphids spent longer time feeding from the phloem in CABYV‐infected plants compared to non‐infected plants, suggesting that CABYV indirectly manipulates aphid feeding behaviour through its shared host plant in order to favour viral acquisition. Viruliferous aphids showed a clear preference for non‐infected over CABYV‐infected plants at short and long time, while such behaviour was not observed for non‐viruliferous aphids. Overall, our results indicate that CABYV induces changes in its host plant that modifies aphid feeding behaviour in a way that virus acquisition from infected plants is enhanced. Once the aphids become viruliferous they prefer to settle on healthy plants, leading to optimise the transmission and spread of this phloem‐limited virus.     

Effects of the pyrethroid deltamethrin on the acquisition and inoculation of viruses by Myzus persicae

The pyrethroid, deltamethrin, alone or as an emulsifiable formulation, hindered infection of healthy plants with the persistent beet mild yellowing virus (BMYV) and both acquisition of, and infection with, the non-persistent potato virus Y (PVY) and the semi-persistent sugar beet yellows virus (BYV) by Myzus persicae in glasshouse tests.
Another pyrethroid, RU-15525, also protected against infection with PVY. Even sub-lethal amounts of deltamethrin decreased virus transmission by rapidly incapacitating the aphids, the effect being least with aphids most resistant to organophosphorous insecticides and to certain pyrethroids including deltamethrin. Demeton-S-methyl hindered infection only with BMYV. This work shows that deltamethrin restricts transmission of persistent, semi-persistent and perhaps more importantly of non-persistent viruses in the glasshouse, and has potential for doing the same in the field.     

Coinfection with a virus constrains within‐host infection load but increases transmission potential of a highly virulent fungal plant pathogen

The trade‐off between within‐host infection rate and transmission to new hosts is predicted to constrain pathogen evolution, and to maintain polymorphism in pathogen populations. Pathogen life‐history stages and their correlations that underpin infection development may change under coinfection with other parasites as they compete for the same limited host resources. Cross‐kingdom interactions are common among pathogens in both natural and cultivated systems, yet their impacts on disease ecology and evolution are rarely studied. The host plant Plantago lanceolata is naturally infected by both Phomopsis subordinaria, a seed killing fungus, as well as Plantago lanceolata latent virus (PlLV) in the Åland Islands, SW Finland. We performed an inoculation assay to test whether coinfection with PlLV affects performance of two P. subordinaria strains, and the correlation between within‐host infection rate and transmission potential. The strains differed in the measured life‐history traits and their correlations. Moreover, we found that under virus coinfection, within‐host infection rate of P. subordinaria was smaller but transmission potential was higher compared to strains under single infection. The negative correlation between within‐host infection rate and transmission potential detected under single infection became positive under coinfection with PlLV. To understand whether within‐host and between‐host dynamics are correlated in wild populations, we surveyed 260 natural populations of P. lanceolata for P. subordinaria infection occurrence. When infections were found, we estimated between‐hosts dynamics by determining pathogen population size as the proportion of infected individuals, and within‐host dynamics by counting the proportion of infected flower stalks in 10 infected plants. In wild populations, the proportion of infected flower stalks was positively associated with pathogen population size. Jointly, our results suggest that the trade‐off between within‐host infection load and transmission may be strain specific, and that the pathogen life‐history that underpin epidemics may change depending on the diversity of infection, generating variation in disease dynamics.     

Characteristics and drivers of plant virus community spatial patterns in US west coast grasslands

The spatial distribution of disease risk caused by multi‐pathogen infections is not frequently characterized, limiting understanding of the drivers of infection and thwarting prediction of future risk in a changing environment. Further complicating this predictive understanding is that interactions among multiple pathogens within a host commonly alter transmission success, infection risk, and disease dynamics. By characterizing spatial patterns of Barley and Cereal Yellow Dwarf Virus (B/CYDV) infections that range from the scale of an individual plant to thousands of neighboring plants, we examined the contributions of spatial processes to the distribution of disease risk. In a two‐year field experiment, we planted grass hosts of B/CYDVs into fertilized plots of US west coast grasslands. We determined how vector‐sharing, environmental conditions and spatial variation in host quality affected spatial patterns of single viruses, pairs of viruses and the whole virus community across out‐planted grass hosts. We found that single viruses and virus communities were spatially random, indicating that infection does not solely spread through the community in a wave‐like manner. On the other hand, we found that pairs of viruses, especially those that share a vector species, were aggregated spatially. This suggests that if within‐host competition exists, it is not strong. Aggregation in one pair of viruses was more frequent due to environmental conditions and spatial variation in out‐planted host quality, measured as vector preference. These results highlight the importance of insect vectors for predicting the spatial distribution of coinfection risk by B/CYDVs.