Incidence, Distribution and Characteristics of Major Tomato Leaf ...

Incidence, Distribution and Characteristics of Major Tomato Leaf ... Incidence, Distribution and Characteristics of Major Tomato Leaf ...

tropicallab.ugent.be
from tropicallab.ugent.be More from this publisher
11.06.2013 Views

Incidence, distribution and characteristics of major tomato leaf curl and mosaic virus diseases are able to grow tomatoes throughout the year. Such a situation enhances conditions for vector population build up and virus spread to new fields. Rotation with non-susceptible alternative crops, especially during periods of poor returns from the tomato crop and in the absence of susceptible weeds, breaks the epidemiological cycle (Wisler et al., 1997). Therefore, rotation is recommended in such situations. This study led to identification of ten tomato viruses by employing serological and molecular tests to identify causal agents of mosaic, mottling, veinal mottle and leaf curl symptoms on Ugandan tomato, which is grown in farming conditions such as those mentioned in the first two paragraphs above. These ten viruses included potyviruses ToMV, PVMV, ChiVMV and PVY, potexvirus PVX, alfalfamovirus AMV, cucumovirus CMV, tospovirus TSWV, begomovirus TYLCV-UG (TYLCV-Is strain), plus a begomovirus tentatively named ToLCV-UG, and were not very different from what is reported to occur elsewhere in East Africa. Indeed, TSWV was identified in East Africa as early as 1969 (CMI, 1969); ToMV was reported to be seed-borne and occurs worldwide (Brunt et al., 1990); Nono-Womdim et al. (1996) reported ToMV to be widely present in East Africa; finally PVMV was reported to infect pepper in Kenya (Brunt et al., 1990), but Nono-Womdim et al. (1996) did not detect it in Tanzania. However, Nono-Womdim et al. (1993) and Ladipo et al. (1979) reported PVMV to infect pepper in West Africa, while Reccah, (1986) reported PVMV to be (Myzus persicae) aphidtransmitted in a non-persistent manner. AMV was reported to occur in Europe and America where mottling, interveinal yellowing, yellow-whitish mosaic and fruit distortion were observed (Brunt et al., 1990; Jones et al., 1991). Where AMV individually infected tomato in Uganda, symptoms observed were also typically mottling, whitish yellow mosaic and fruit distortion. In our experiments virus incidence was ToMV (31%), AMV (1%), PVMV (13%), CMV (6%), TSWV (1%), and PVY (0.3%), respectively. This was the first research record on tomato viruses in Uganda. It was also the first identification of AMV on tomato in Uganda. PVX was also reported on tomato in Uganda for the first time. The limitation of 92

Incidence, distribution and characteristics of major tomato leaf curl and mosaic virus diseases PVX’s host range to members of family Solanaceae (Green, 1991) may be responsible for its observed low incidence in Uganda. In contrast, the high incidence of ToMV in Uganda, could have been due to its being seed-borne (Brunt et al., 1990), and due to the fact that some farmers, especially in Rakai district, extract their own seed for subsequent cropping cycles (Annex 3). The survey showed that in Iganga district, where farmers only used certified seed, ToMV did not occur. ToMV was observed to cause severe mosaic symptoms, which were earlier on reported by Defrancq (1989) and Hansen (1990). The wide distribution and high incidence of ToMV were considered a big threat to tomato growers, and chances of spreading the disease farther are very high in a situation where farmers collect and preserve their own seeds. Broadbent (1965, 1976) reported that ToMV was easily spread with seed, running water and wind. Consequently, it is recommended to identify ToMV strains existing in Uganda in order to compare them with strains present elsewhere in the region. Furthermore, Tomato spotted wilt virus was detected in only three of the eight districts surveyed despite high thrips populations at the time (Annex 3). It could have been possible that some of these thrips were feeding on tomatoes, and were not carrying any TSWV inoculum. Literature revealed that TSWV was identified in East Africa as early as 1969 (CMI, 1969). Therefore, the need to study the vector Frankliniella spp., and to identify TSWV strains, using procedures reported by Verkleij and Peters (1983), Gonslaves et al. (1989), and Wijkamp et al. (1995), is recommended for future research activities. Likewise, Brunt et al. (1990) reported Pepper veinal mottle virus in Kenya. Even though Kenya is a neighbour of Tanzania, Nono-Womdim et al. (1996) did not detect it on tomato in Tanzania. However, during our study, PVMV was also identified in Ugandan tomato. During the survey, PVMV incidence was only 8%. Most times PVMV was occurring in combination with ToMV. This was the most frequent mixed tomato virus infection, as shown in table 3.8. PVMV symptoms were observed to be mild everytime it was singly infecting a tomato plant, but showed severe green mosaic or mottling 93

<strong>Incidence</strong>, distribution <strong>and</strong> characteristics <strong>of</strong> major tomato leaf curl <strong>and</strong> mosaic virus diseases<br />

PVX’s host range to members <strong>of</strong> family Solanaceae (Green, 1991) may be responsible<br />

for its observed low incidence in Ug<strong>and</strong>a. In contrast, the high incidence <strong>of</strong> ToMV in<br />

Ug<strong>and</strong>a, could have been due to its being seed-borne (Brunt et al., 1990), <strong>and</strong> due to the<br />

fact that some farmers, especially in Rakai district, extract their own seed for subsequent<br />

cropping cycles (Annex 3). The survey showed that in Iganga district, where farmers only<br />

used certified seed, ToMV did not occur. ToMV was observed to cause severe mosaic<br />

symptoms, which were earlier on reported by Defrancq (1989) <strong>and</strong> Hansen (1990). The<br />

wide distribution <strong>and</strong> high incidence <strong>of</strong> ToMV were considered a big threat to tomato<br />

growers, <strong>and</strong> chances <strong>of</strong> spreading the disease farther are very high in a situation where<br />

farmers collect <strong>and</strong> preserve their own seeds. Broadbent (1965, 1976) reported that<br />

ToMV was easily spread with seed, running water <strong>and</strong> wind. Consequently, it is<br />

recommended to identify ToMV strains existing in Ug<strong>and</strong>a in order to compare them<br />

with strains present elsewhere in the region.<br />

Furthermore, <strong>Tomato</strong> spotted wilt virus was detected in only three <strong>of</strong> the eight districts<br />

surveyed despite high thrips populations at the time (Annex 3). It could have been<br />

possible that some <strong>of</strong> these thrips were feeding on tomatoes, <strong>and</strong> were not carrying any<br />

TSWV inoculum. Literature revealed that TSWV was identified in East Africa as early as<br />

1969 (CMI, 1969). Therefore, the need to study the vector Frankliniella spp., <strong>and</strong> to<br />

identify TSWV strains, using procedures reported by Verkleij <strong>and</strong> Peters (1983),<br />

Gonslaves et al. (1989), <strong>and</strong> Wijkamp et al. (1995), is recommended for future research<br />

activities.<br />

Likewise, Brunt et al. (1990) reported Pepper veinal mottle virus in Kenya. Even though<br />

Kenya is a neighbour <strong>of</strong> Tanzania, Nono-Womdim et al. (1996) did not detect it on<br />

tomato in Tanzania. However, during our study, PVMV was also identified in Ug<strong>and</strong>an<br />

tomato. During the survey, PVMV incidence was only 8%. Most times PVMV was<br />

occurring in combination with ToMV. This was the most frequent mixed tomato virus<br />

infection, as shown in table 3.8. PVMV symptoms were observed to be mild everytime it<br />

was singly infecting a tomato plant, but showed severe green mosaic or mottling<br />

93

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!