Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T11:15:02.715Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Evaluation of USDA Lupinus sp. collection for seed-borne potyviruses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 May 2009

N. L. Robertson
Affiliation:
Arctic Plant Germplasm Research and Introduction Project, Subarctic Agricultural Research Unit, Agricultural Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, 533 East Fireweed Avenue, Palmer, AK 99645-6629, USA
C. J. Coyne*
Affiliation:
Western Regional Plant Introduction Station, Agricultural Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington State University, 59 Johnson Hall, Pullman, WA 99164-6402, USA
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: coynec@wsu.edu

Abstract

Plant viruses pose a threat to the acquisition, maintenance and distribution of lupin germplasm (genus Lupinus, family Fabaceae). The availability of sufficient quantities of healthy and virus-free seeds from maintained lupin collections is mandatory for conducting lupin research. The objective of this research was to determine which lupin species were potentially infected with potyviruses (presumably seed-borne) upon germination in the greenhouse. The procedure for screening lupin seedlings in the greenhouse for potyviruses incorporated enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay followed by elimination or segregation of infected seedlings from the population before transplantation into the field plots for regeneration and accession characterization. None of the accessions in this evaluation had been tested previously for virus. From 2002 to 2005, 15 perennial (30 accessions) and 6 annual lupin species (213 accessions) were evaluated on site at the Western Regional Plant Introduction Station in Pullman, WA, USA. While none of the greenhouse perennial seedlings tested positive for potyvirus, seedlings in three annual species (Lupinus albus, Lupinus angustifolius and Lupinus luteus) were infected by potyviruses, presumably by seed transmission. Future testing may focus on the annual species, thus saving limited germplasm maintenance resources.

Type
Short Communication
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009 This is a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alconero, R, Weeden, NF, Gongalves, D and Fox, DT (1985) Loss of genetic diversity in pea germplasm by the elimination of individuals infected by pea seedborne mosaic virus. Annals of Applied Biology 106: 357364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corbett, MK (1958) A virus disease of lupines caused by bean yellow mosaic virus. Phytopathology 48: 8691.Google Scholar
Decker, P (1950) Lupine Investigations University of Florida Agricultural Research Station Annual Report for 1950, p. 89..Google Scholar
Gillaspie, AG Jr, Hopkins, MS, Pinnow, DL and Jordan, RL (1998) Characteristics of a potyvirus of the bean yellow mosaic virus subgroup in Sesbania speciosa germ plasm. Plant Disease 82: 807810.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gladstone, JS, Atkins, C and Hamblin, J (1998) Lupins as Crop Plants: Biology, Production, and Utilization. Wallingford: CAB International, p. 465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hampton, RO (1983) Seed-borne viruses in crop germplasm resources: disease dissemination risks and germplasm-reclamation technology. Seed Science & Technology 11: 535546.Google Scholar
Jones, RAC and McLean, GD (1989) Virus diseases of lupins. Annals of Applied Biology 114: 609637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merkel, L (1929) Beitrage zur Kenntnis der Mosaikkrankheit der familie der Papilionaceae. Zeitschrift für Pflanzenkrankheiten und Pflazenschutz 39: 97118.Google Scholar
Weimer, JL (1950) Two viruses of blue lupine. Plant Disease Reporter 34: 376378.Google Scholar