Indian cassava mosaic virus (Indian cassava mosaic)
- Summary of Invasiveness
- Taxonomic Tree
- Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
- Distribution Table
- History of Introduction and Spread
- Risk of Introduction
- Hosts/Species Affected
- Growth Stages
- List of Symptoms/Signs
- Means of Movement and Dispersal
- Plant Trade
- Vectors and Intermediate Hosts
- Impact Summary
- Economic Impact
- Social Impact
- Risk and Impact Factors
- Detection and Inspection
- Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
- Prevention and Control
- Principal Source
- Distribution Maps
Don't need the entire report?
Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.Generate report
IdentityTop of page
Preferred Scientific Name
- Indian cassava mosaic virus
Preferred Common Name
- Indian cassava mosaic
International Common Names
- Spanish: mosaico africano de la yuca
- French: mosaïque africaine du manioc
Summary of InvasivenessTop of page
Other than their countries of origin, India and Sri Lanka for ICMV and SLCMV, respectively, SLCMV has also been reported in India (Dutt et al., 2005; Jose et al., 2011) and Cambodia (Wang et al., 2016) while new strains of ICMV have been identified as causative agents of Jatropha curcas mosaic disease in Jatropha curcas from India (Snehi et al., 2012), Nigeria (Kashina et al., 2013) and Singapore (Wang et al., 2014). The primary means of spread of both viruses is via movement of infected cassava cuttings while secondary spread is facilitated by members of the Bemisia tabaci complex. Both ICMV and SLCMV are not on the IUCN or ISSG alert list.
Taxonomic TreeTop of page
- Domain: Virus
- Unknown: "ssDNA viruses"
- Unknown: "DNA viruses"
- Family: Geminiviridae
- Genus: Begomovirus
- Species: Indian cassava mosaic virus
Notes on Taxonomy and NomenclatureTop of page
Indian cassava mosaic virus (ICMV) and Sri Lankan cassava mosaic virus (SLCMV) are members of the genus Begomovirus (family Geminiviridae). Like other cassava mosaic geminiviruses (CMGs) such as African cassava mosaic virus (ACMV) and East African cassava mosaic virus (EACMV), both ICMV and SLCMV posses bipartite ssDNA genomes and are transmitted by whiteflies of the Bemisia tabaci complex. Cassava is also the primary host plant of ICMV and SLCMV but both viruses can experimentally infect Nicotiana spp. In addition, an infectious clone of SLCMV was infective in Arabidopsis inducing symptoms similar to those described on cassava including stunting, leaf deformation and developmental abnormalities (Mittal et al., 2008). Historical accounts attributed the first observation of cassava mosaic disease in India to Abraham (1956) and its official report and description to Alagianagalingam and Ramakrishnan (1966). Subsequent studies documented CMD prevalence (Matthew, 1989) and associated losses (Narasimhan and Arjunan, 1976; Thankappan and Chacko, 1976; Nair and Malathi, 1987; Jeeva, 1997) in India. Ultrastructural abnormalities in Nicotiana benthamiana due to ICMV infection have also been documented (Roberts et al., 1989).
The first empirical evidence for the association of geminivirus particles with CMD-affected cassava in India was recorded by Malathi and Sreenivasan (1983), followed by a demonstration of its serological relatedness to ACMV (Bock and Woods, 1983). It was later shown that CMGs present in CMD-affected cassava in India and Sri Lanka (named as Group C isolates) are distinct from those from Africa based on tests conducted with a panel of monoclonal antibodies and thus named as ICMV (Harrison et al., 1991). Following microscopic and serological characterization of ICMV virions (Matthew and Muniyappa, 1992), the nucleotide sequences of its genome components were determined and shown to be distinct enough from those of ACMV and EACMV to warrant species designation (Hong et al., 1993). By 2002, SLCMV was characterized from CMD-affected cassava in Sri Lanka with its DNA A showing biological similarity to those of monopartite begomoviruses by nature and its recombinant DNA B component acquired from ICMV DNA B (Saunders et al., 2002).
DescriptionTop of page
ICMV and SLCMV each possess bipartite circular, ss(+)DNA genomes that are encapsidated in twin (geminate), small, quasi-isometric particles measuring 20 x 30 nm. Both the DNA A and DNA B genome components are needed for efficient transmission of the virus to healthy cassava plants (Liu et al., 1997). Each species is named after its country of first discovery/characterization although the use of country names in geminivirus nomenclature has been discouraged (Brown et al., 2015). Pseudo-recombination, wherein trans-replication of ICMV DNA B by SLCMV DNA A occurred in co-agroinoculated tobacco plants, has been reported (Karthikeyan et al., 2016). However, these plants showed lower infectivity rate compared to plants inoculated with cognate virus DNA component pairs (Karthikeyan et al., 2016). Studies on virus genetic variability in India report conflicting results with one documenting high variability among isolates of ICMV and SLCMV (Patil et al., 2005) while the other reported low level of genetic variability for SLCMV isolates (Kushawaha et al., 2018).
Distribution TableTop of page
The distribution in this summary table is based on all the information available. When several references are cited, they may give conflicting information on the status. Further details may be available for individual references in the Distribution Table Details section which can be selected by going to Generate Report.
|Continent/Country/Region||Distribution||Last Reported||Origin||First Reported||Invasive||Reference||Notes|
|Cambodia||Present||Introduced||Wang et al., 2015||Only SLCMV currently reported|
|-Andhra Pradesh||Present||Native||Matthew, 1989||Matthew (1989) cited in Thottappilly et al. (2003)|
|-Karnataka||Present||Native||Matthew, 1989||Matthew (1989) cited in Thottappilly et al. (2003)|
|-Kerala||Present||Native||Matthew, 1989; Jose et al., 2011||Matthew (1989) cited in Thottappilly et al. (2003)|
|-Madhya Pradesh||Present||Native||Snehi et al., 2017||SLCMV reported on Chaya (Cnidoscolus acontifolia) based on analysis of coat protein gene sequences.|
|-Tamil Nadu||Present||Native||Matthew, 1989||Matthew (1989) cited in Thottappilly et al. (2003)|
|Sri Lanka||Present||Native||Saunders et al., 2002|
History of Introduction and SpreadTop of page
Cassava is native to South America and was introduced into India during the seventeenth century by the Portuguese (Edison, 2000). Like other CMGs, ICMV and SLCMV have not been reported in the Americas. Likewise, reports of both viruses have so far been confined to few countries in Asia. Therefore, it is plausible to conclude that both ICMV and SLCMV are native to Asia, possibly originating from yet-to-be identified plant hosts and making the jump onto the preferred cassava host post-introduction via whitefly-mediated transmission.
Risk of IntroductionTop of page
As with other CMGs, the major pathways for the introduction of ICMV and SLCMV to new areas are through movement of infected planting materials and by the naturally transmitting whitefly vector. Infected cassava vegetative cuttings contribute to both long and short distance spread of both viruses while whitefly-mediated spread generally occurs over short distances. With increased interest in cassava cultivation for industrial purposes across Asia, the risk of inadvertent spread of CMD to new areas is significant. For instance, the recent report of SLCMV in Cambodia in locations close to Thailand puts neighbouring cassava-growing countries at risk, thus prompting region-wide survey efforts in Thailand, Laos and Myanmar.
Hosts/Species AffectedTop of page
Like the other CMGs, ICMV and SLCMV are primarily borne in cassava vegetative cuttings. Emerging leaves from such cuttings may manifest CMD symptoms and serve as sources of virus inoculum for secondary spread within and across fields by the whitefly vector. CMGs are not known to been borne on true cassava seeds (Dubern, 1994). Depending on the mode of infection, symptoms appear in the first emerging leaves for cutting infection and 12-20 days after inoculation by viruliferous whiteflies (Storey and Nichols, 1938) usually determined by varietal characteristics.
Growth StagesTop of page Flowering stage, Seedling stage, Vegetative growing stage
SymptomsTop of page
Cassava plants infected by ICMV, SLCMV and other CMGs display diverse foliar symptoms, the type and severity of which are determined by a number of factors. Broadly, symptoms include yellow or green mosaic, mottling, and misshapen and twisted leaves that may be reduced in size. Although these symptoms are characteristic of all CMGs, they may differ in distribution in the fields, from plant to plant, and even on the same plant. Symptom-based field diagnosis of ICMV, SLCMV and other CMGs is impracticable due to similarities of induced symptoms in infected plants regardless of the causative virus. Consequently, it is imperative to confirm virus presence using PCR and/or ELISA methods with species-specific oligonucleotides and discriminating antibodies, respectively. PCR diagnosis is the method of choice due to a considerably high serological relationship among CMGs and cross reactivity of their antibodies.
List of Symptoms/SignsTop of page
|Growing point / dwarfing; stunting|
|Leaves / abnormal colours|
|Leaves / abnormal forms|
|Leaves / abnormal patterns|
|Roots / reduced root system|
|Whole plant / distortion; rosetting|
|Whole plant / dwarfing|
Means of Movement and DispersalTop of page
As with other CMGs, the dispersal of ICMV and SLCMV occurs via movement of infected planting materials (mainly stem cuttings) from field to field and across regions; and via movement of the whitefly vector. The whitefly, B. tabaci complex, has been documented as a vector of CMGs since 1936 (Storey and Nichols, 1938). Following the identification of cassava and sweet potato strains (biotypes) of the B. tabaci complex and the demonstration that individuals belonging to each crop-specific strain are only able to breed and develop on the respective crop hosts in addition to having aubergine and tobacco as their common hosts (Lisha et al., 2003), it was shown that only the cassava-strain whiteflies were able to successfully transmit ICMV from infected to healthy cassava seedlings (Antony et al., 2006). Working with the cassava-adapted individuals of the B. tabaci complex, Duraisamy et al. (2013) confirmed their transmission of both ICMV and SLCMV. The circulative mode of ICMV by the transmission cassava-strain whiteflies was demonstrated via detection of the virus in the insect stylet, salivary gland and digestive tract (Antony et al., 2009).
Plant TradeTop of page
|Plant parts liable to carry the pest in trade/transport||Pest stages||Borne internally||Borne externally||Visibility of pest or symptoms|
|Yes||Pest or symptoms usually invisible|
|Yes||Pest or symptoms usually invisible|
Vectors and Intermediate HostsTop of page
Impact SummaryTop of page
Economic ImpactTop of page
Cassava tuber yield losses due to cassava mosaic disease in India have been reported to vary from negligible to 84% (Thottappilly et al., 2003) but the magnitude of the loss may depend on cultivar type and time of infection (Narasimhan and Arjuan, 1976; Thankappan and Chacko, 1976; Malathi et al., 1985; Nair and Malathi, 1987; Jeeva, 1997). However, it is unclear whether the recorded losses are due to ICMV or SLCMV, or both viruses, in mixed infected plants because most of the yield loss studies relied on natural infections under field conditions.
Social ImpactTop of page
The role of cassava in India and other Asian countries has metamorphosed from a food to an industrial crop (Edison, 2000) hence the social impact of CMD will be indirect in terms of the negative impact of significant yield loss due to the disease on household income.
Risk and Impact FactorsTop of page Invasiveness
- Invasive in its native range
- Host damage
- Negatively impacts agriculture
DiagnosisTop of page
Various forms of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) including double- (DAS) and triple- (TAS) antibody sandwich ELISAs are capable of detecting ICMV and SLCMV in leaf extracts. Distinguishing between both viruses via ELISA could occur using discriminating monoclonal antibodies (Thomas et al., 1986; Harrison and Robinson, 1988; Ogbe et al., 1997). The different forms of ELISA are versatile and can be used to screen large field samples. However, the recombinant nature of CMGs poses a challenge for accurate species-specific detection of CMGs using ELISA (Thottapilly et al., 2003). PCR-based assays with species specific oligonucleotides that target different genes encoded in the DNA A component of CMGs are routinely used for accurate and reliable detection of ICMV and SLCMV (Ogbe et al., 2001; Jose et al., 2008, 2011).
Detection and InspectionTop of page
Symptoms caused by ICMV, SLCMV and other CMGs are not distinguishable from each other by visual inspection. However, mosaic patterns on cassava leaves indicate the presence of one or more of the CMD causal viruses which can be discriminated using serological and molecular diagnostic tools and assays.
Similarities to Other Species/ConditionsTop of page
CMD symptoms in cassava due to ICMV and SLCMV are indistinguishable from each other, and from other CMGs. Both viruses can be distinguished from each other and from other CMGs using molecular diagnostics with virus-specific oligonucleotides.
Prevention and ControlTop of page
Due to the variable regulations around (de)registration of pesticides, your national list of registered pesticides or relevant authority should be consulted to determine which products are legally allowed for use in your country when considering chemical control. Pesticides should always be used in a lawful manner, consistent with the product's label.
Management of CMD, caused by ICMV and/or SLCMV, follows the same approach as in other viral diseases on crops other than cassava. Vector control via use of insecticides is cost prohibitive and environmentally unsustainable. Therefore, the main approaches to CMD management are phytosanitation through selection and propagation of disease-free cuttings and breeding/cultivation of CMD-resistant cassava cultivars (Thresh and Otim-Nape, 1994). The combined use of both strategies is expected to result in a more reliable control strategy. According to Calvert and Thresh (2002), not much attention has been devoted to the use of these strategies for CMD management in India primarily due to the fact that the disease is largely ignored by farmers and minimal CMD-associated losses recorded due to implementation of more intensive production practices in Asia compared to their African counterparts.
ReferencesTop of page
Abraham, A., 1956. Tapioca cultivation in India. Farm Bulletin, No. 17. Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi, India, 20 pp
Alagianagalingam, M. N., Ramakrishnan, K., 1966. Cassava mosaic disease in India. South Indian Horticulture 14, 71-72
Antony, B., Lisha, V. S., Palaniswami, M. S., 2009. Evidences for transmission of Indian cassava mosaic virus through Bemisia tabaci - cassava biotype. Archives of Phytopathology and Plant Protection, 42(10), 922-929. doi: 10.1080/03235400701541321
Antony, B., Lisha, V. S., Palaniswami, M. S., Sugunan, V. S., Makeshkumar, T., Henneberry, T. J., 2006. Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) and Indian cassava mosaic virus transmission. International Journal of Tropical Insect Science, 26(3), 176-182. http://journals.cambridge.org/download.php?file=%2FJTI%2FJTI26_03%2FS1742758407183430a.pdf&code=d28614e77cd6386d5eecd461067b11c3
Brown, J. K., Zerbini, F. M., Navas-Castillo, J., Moriones, E., Ramos Sobrinho, R., Silva, J. C. F., Fiallo-Olivé, E., Briddon, R. W., Hernández-Zepeda, C., Ali Idris, Malathi, V. G., Martin, D. P., Rivera-Bustamante, R., Ueda, S., Varsani, A., 2015. Revision of Begomovirus taxonomy based on pairwise sequence comparisons. Archives of Virology, 160(6), 1593-1619. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00705-015-2398-y doi: 10.1007/s00705-015-2398-y
Böttcher, B., Unseld, S., Ceulemans, H., Russell, R. B., Jeske, H., 2004. Geminate structures of African cassava mosaic virus. Journal of Virology, 78(13), 6758-6765. http://jvi.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/78/13/6758 doi: 10.1128/JVI.78.13.6758-6765.2004
Calvert, L. A., Thresh, J. M., 2001. The viruses and virus diseases of cassava. In: Cassava: biology, production and utilization, [ed. by Hillocks, R. J., Thresh, J. M.]. Wallingford, UK: CABI. 237-260. http://www.cabi.org/cabebooks/ebook/20073012665 doi: 10.1079/9780851995243.0237
Chockalingam Karthikeyan, Patil, B. L., Borah, B. K., Resmi, T. R., Turco, S., Pooggin, M. M., Hohn, T., Karuppannan Veluthambi, 2016. Emergence of a latent Indian cassava mosaic virus from cassava which recovered from infection by a non-persistent Sri Lankan cassava mosaic virus. Viruses, 8(10), 264. http://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915/8/10/264/htm doi: 10.3390/v8100264
Dheeraj Mittal, Borah, B. K., Indranil Dasgupta, 2008. Agroinfection of cloned Sri Lankan cassava mosaic virus DNA to Arabidopsis thaliana, Nicotiana tabacum and cassava. Archives of Virology, 153(11), 2149-2155. http://springerlink.metapress.com/content/007528630353r071/?p=b626ccdce00f49bd8d6edea119659fb3&pi=22 doi: 10.1007/s00705-008-0238-z
Dutt, N., Briddon, R. W., Dasgupta, I., 2005. Identification of a second begomovirus, Sri Lankan cassava mosaic virus, causing cassava mosaic disease in India. Archives of Virology, 150(10), 2101-2108. http://springerlink.metapress.com/link.asp?id=100423 doi: 10.1007/s00705-005-0579-9
Edison, S., 2000. Present situation and future potential of cassava in India. In: Howeler RH, Tan SL, eds. Cassava’s Potential in Asia in the 21st Century: Present Situation and Future Research and Development Needs. Proc. 6th Regional Workshop, held in Ho Chi Minh city, Vietnam. Feb. 21-25, 2000
EFSA Panel on Plant Health, 2013. Scientific Opinion on the risks to plant health posed by Bemisia tabaci species complex and viruses it transmits for the EU territory. EFSA Journal, 11(4). 3162. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/scientific_output/files/main_documents/3162.pdf
Harrison BD, Robinson DJ, 1988. Molecular variation in vector-borne plant viruses: epidemiological significance. The epidemiology and ecology of infectious disease agents. Proceedings of a Royal Society discussion meeting, held on 17 and 18 February 1988 [edited by Anderson, R. M.; Thresh, J. M.] London, UK; Royal Society, 121-136
Harrison, B. D., Swanson, M. M., McGrath, P. F., Fargette, D., 1991. Patterns of antigenic variation in whitefly-transmitted geminiviruses. Report of Scottish Crop Research Institute 1990, Dundee, 88-90
Jose A, Makeshkumar T, Edison S, 2008. Host range of Sri Lankan cassava mosaic virus. Journal of Root Crops, 34(1), 21-25.
Jose, A., Makeshkumar, T., Edison, S., 2011. Survey of cassava mosaic disease in Kerala. Journal of Root Crops, 37(1), 41-47.
Kashina, B. D., Alegbejo, M. D., Banwo, O. O., Nielsen, S. L., Nicolaisen, M., 2013. Molecular identification of a new begomovirus associated with mosaic disease of Jatropha curcas L. in Nigeria. Archives of Virology, 158(2), 511-514. http://rd.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00705-012-1512-7 doi: 10.1007/s00705-012-1512-7
Kushawaha, A. K., Ramalingam Rabindran, Indranil Dasgupta, 2018. Rolling circle amplification-based analysis of Sri Lankan cassava mosaic virus isolates from Tamil Nadu, India, suggests a low level of genetic variability. VirusDisease, 29(1), 61-67. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13337-018-0432-x doi: 10.1007/s13337-018-0432-x
Lisha, V. S., Antony, B., Palaniswami, M. S., Henneberry, T. J., 2003. Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) biotypes in India. Journal of Economic Entomology, 96(2), 322-327. doi: 10.1603/0022-0493-96.2.322
Liu SiJun, Bedford, I. D., Briddon, R. W., Markham, P. G., 1997. Efficient whitefly transmission of African cassava mosaic geminivirus requires sequences from both genomic components. Journal of General Virology, 78(7), 1791-1794.
Malathi, V. G., Nair, N. G., Shanta, P., 1985. Cassava mosaic disease. Technical Bulletin Series-5, Central Tuber Crops Research Institute, Trivandrum, pp.18
Malathi, V. G., Sreenivasan, M. A., 1983. Association of Gemini particles with cassava mosaic disease in India. J. Root Crops, 9, 69-73.
Matthew, A. V., 1989. Studies on Indian cassava mosaic virus disease. PhD Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore, 237 pp
Ogbe, F. O., Atiri, G. I., Thottappilly, G., Dixon, A. G. O., Mignouna, H. D., Quin, F. M., 2001. Evidence of double infection and random occurrence of cassava begomoviruses in sub-Saharan Africa. In: Akoroda MO, Ngeve JM, eds. Root Crops in the 21st Century. Proc. Seventh Triennial Symp. International Society for Tropical Root Crops African Branch (ISTRC-AB), Cotonou, Benin Republic, 524-529
Patil, B. L., Rajasubramaniam, S., Bagchi, C., Dasgupta, I., 2005. Both Indian cassava mosaic virus and Sri Lankan cassava mosaic virus are found in India and exhibit high variability as assessed by PCR-RFLP. Archives of Virology, 150(2), 389-397. http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00705/ doi: 10.1007/s00705-004-0399-3
Raghu Duraisamy, Senthil Natesan, Raveendran Muthurajan, Karthikayan Gandhi, Pugalendhi Lakshmanan, Nageswari Karuppusamy, Mohan Chokkappan, 2013. Molecular studies on the transmission of Indian cassava mosaic virus (ICMV) and Sri Lankan cassava mosaic virus (SLCMV) in cassava by Bemisia tabaci and cloning of ICMV and SLCMV replicase gene from cassava. Molecular Biotechnology, 53(2), 150-158. http://rd.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12033-012-9503-1 doi: 10.1007/s12033-012-9503-1
Saunders, K., Nazeera Salim, Mali, V. R., Malathi, V. G., Briddon, R., Markham, P. G., Stanley, J., 2002. Characterisation of Sri Lankan cassava mosaic virus and Indian cassava mosaic virus: evidence for acquisition of a DNA B component by a monopartite begomovirus. Virology , 293(1), 63-74. doi: 10.1006/viro.2001.1251
Snehi, S. K., Purvia, A. S., Gupta, G., Parihar, S. S., Singh, V., 2017. Molecular Detection of a Begomovirus Species on Chaya (Cnidoscolus acontifolia) from Madhya Pradesh, India which is Distantly Related to Sri Lankan Cassava Mosaic Virus. Virol-mycol, 6, 164. doi: 10.4172/2161-0517.1000164
Snehi, S. K., Ashish Srivastava, Raj, S. K., 2012. Biological characterization and complete genome sequence of a possible strain of Indian cassava mosaic virus from Jatropha curcas in India. Journal of Phytopathology, 160(10), 547-553. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1439-0434 doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0434.2012.01948.x
Storey HH, Nichols RFW, 1938. Studies of the mosaic diseases of cassava. Annals of Applied Biology, 25:790-806
Thomas, J. E., Massalski, P. R., Harrison, B. D., 1986. Production of monoclonal antibodies to African cassava mosaic virus and differences in their reactivities with other whitefly-transmitted geminiviruses. Journal of General Virology, 67, 2739-2748.
Thottapilly, G., Thresh, J., Calvert, L. A., Winter, S., 2003. Cassava. In: Virus and virus-like diseases of major crops in developing countries, [ed. by Loebenstein, G., Thottapilly, G.]. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 107-165.
Wang Gang, Sun YanWei, Xu RuiRui, Qu Jing, Tee ChuanSia, Jiang XiYuan, Ye Jian, 2014. DNA-A of a highly pathogenic Indian cassava mosaic virus isolated from Jatropha curcas causes symptoms in Nicotiana benthamiana. Virus Genes, 48(2), 402-405. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11262-014-1034-3 doi: 10.1007/s11262-014-1034-3
Wang, H. L., Cui, X. Y., Wang, X. W., Liu, S. S., Zhang, Z. H., Zhou, X. P., 2016. First report of Sri Lankan cassava mosaic virus infecting cassava in Cambodia. Plant Disease, 100(5), 1029. http://apsjournals.apsnet.org/loi/pdis doi: 10.1094/PDIS-10-15-1228-PDN
Principal SourceTop of page
Draft datasheet under review.
ContributorsTop of page
07/03/18 Original text by:
Olufemi J Alabi, Department of Plant Pathology & Microbiology, Texas A&M University AgriLife Research & Extension Center, Weslaco, USA
Distribution MapsTop of page
Unsupported Web Browser:
One or more of the features that are needed to show you the maps functionality are not available in the web browser that you are using.
Please consider upgrading your browser to the latest version or installing a new browser.
More information about modern web browsers can be found at http://browsehappy.com/