Sweet potato feathery mottle virus (internal cork disease of sweet potato)
- Taxonomic Tree
- Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
- Distribution Table
- Risk of Introduction
- Hosts/Species Affected
- Growth Stages
- List of Symptoms/Signs
- Biology and Ecology
- Means of Movement and Dispersal
- Seedborne Aspects
- Plant Trade
- Vectors and Intermediate Hosts
- Prevention and Control
- Distribution Maps
Don't need the entire report?
Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.Generate report
PicturesTop of page
IdentityTop of page
Preferred Scientific Name
- Sweet potato feathery mottle virus
Preferred Common Name
- internal cork disease of sweet potato
Other Scientific Names
- sweet potato chlorotic leaf spot virus
- sweet potato feathery mottle potyvirus
- sweet potato internal cork virus
- sweet potato ringspot virus
- sweet potato russet crack virus
- sweet potato vein mosaic virus
- sweet potato virus A
- SPFMV0 (Sweet potato feathery mottle potyvirus)
- sweet potato vein clearing virus
Taxonomic TreeTop of page
- Domain: Virus
- Unknown: "Positive sense ssRNA viruses"
- Unknown: "RNA viruses"
- Family: Potyviridae
- Genus: Potyvirus
- Species: Sweet potato feathery mottle virus
Notes on Taxonomy and NomenclatureTop of page Sweet potato feathery mottle virus (SPFMV) is a typical species of the Potyvirus genus (Campbell et al., 1974; Moyer and Cali, 1985; Pozzer et al., 1995), one of six genera included in the family Potyviridae (Berger et al., 2005). Like many other potyviruses, SPFMV has a narrow host range, is transmissible in the non-persistent manner by aphids, induces in infected plants cytoplasmic intracellular inclusions, has flexuous filamentous particles, measuring ca 12 x 810-865 nm, that contain positive-sense single stranded RNA of ca 10 kb and a single coat protein of ca 36 kDa.
Several isolates and strains of SPFMV have been characterized in different parts of the world, perhaps the most important ones being the ordinary (O) (Usugi et al., 1991), russet crack (RC) (Moyer and Salazar, 1989), severe (S) (Mori et al., 1995) and East African (EA) strains because they directly affect root and tuber quality. Virus strains have also been shown to differ genomically (Mori et al., 1995; Colinet et al., 1998); the EA strain is known to occur only in East Africa and is genetically distant to other strains, but the RC strain occurs in Australia, Africa, North America and Asia, the O strain in Africa, Asia and South America and the S strain in Australia, Africa, Asia and North and South America (Tairo et al., 2005). SPFMV is serologically distantly related to Sweet potato latent virus (Hammond et al., 1992) and several other potyviruses (Jain et al., 1993).
DescriptionTop of page Like other potyviruses, SPFMV has flexuous filamentous particles; these mostly measure ca 12 x 810-865 nm and have helical symmetry with a pitch of ca 3.4 nm. The particles have a buoyant density of 1.31g/cm³ and a sedimentation coefficient of ca 150S. Each contains a single, positive-sense RNA of 9.7 kb and a capsid protein of 36 to 38 kDa (Nome et al., 1974; Moyer and Kennedy, 1978; Moyer and Cali, 1985; Clark and Moyer, 1988).
DistributionTop of page Sweet potato probably originated in the Americas (Gibson and Aritua, 2002) and has long been grown in numerous countries worldwide. SPFMV has a very wide geographical distribution and now probably occurs wherever sweet potatoes are grown; this is probably due to inadvertent international distribution of virus-infected tubers for many years before the virus was recognized and/or methods were available for its detection and identification. It is reasonable, therefore, to consider that the virus is native to all countries in which it has been reported.
SPFMV is found with Sweet potato chlorotic stunt virus in many countries; such complex infection causes a severe disease known as sweet potato virus disease. In Argentina, sweet potatoes containing SPFMV, SPCSV and Sweet potato mild speckling virus develop a very severe disease known as sweet potato chlorotic dwarf (Feo et al., 1995, 2000).
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|
|China||Present||Native||Invasive||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|-Henan||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|-Jiangsu||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|-Shandong||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|India||Present||Jeeva et al., 2004a; Kumar et al., 1991; Jain et al., 1993|
|-Andhra Pradesh||Present||Prasanth and Hegde, 2008|
|-Kerala||Present||Prasanth and Hegde, 2008|
|-Odisha||Present||Prasanth and Hegde, 2008|
|-West Bengal||Present||Sinha and Tarafdar, 2007|
|Israel||Absent, formerly present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|Japan||Present||Native||Invasive||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|-Kyushu||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|-Ryukyu Archipelago||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|Korea, Republic of||Present||Native||Invasive||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|Syria||Present||Akel et al., 2010|
|Taiwan||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|Vietnam||Present||Ha et al., 2008|
|Cameroon||Present||Ngeve and Bouwkamp, 1991|
|Congo Democratic Republic||Present||Atcham et al., 1983|
|Kenya||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|Madagascar||Present||Native||Invasive||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|Niger||Present||Native||Invasive||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|Nigeria||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|Rwanda||Present||Njeru et al., 2008|
|South Africa||Present||Domola et al., 2008; Rännäli et al., 2009|
|South Africa||Present||Domola et al., 2008; Rännäli et al., 2009|
|Tanzania||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|Togo||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|Uganda||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|Zambia||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|Zimbabwe||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|Canada||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|-Ontario||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|USA||Present||Native||Invasive||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|-California||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|-Kansas||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|-Louisiana||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|-Maryland||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|-Mississippi||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|-North Carolina||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
Central America and Caribbean
|Costa Rica||Present||Valverde and Moreira, 2004|
|Puerto Rico||Present||Laakso and Moyer, 1989|
|Argentina||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|Brazil||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|-Goias||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|-Pernambuco||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|-Rio Grande do Sul||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|Chile||Present||Present based on regional distribution.|
|-Easter Island||Present||Rännäli et al., 2009|
|Peru||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|Venezuela||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|Italy||Present||Parrella et al., 2006|
|Spain||Present||Valverde et al., 2004|
|Australia||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|-Australian Northern Territory||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|-New South Wales||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|-Queensland||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|-Western Australia||Present||Jones and Dwyer, 2007|
|Fiji||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|French Polynesia||Present||Rännäli et al., 2009|
|New Zealand||Present||Rännäli et al., 2009|
|Solomon Islands||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
|Tonga||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2003; EPPO, 2014|
Risk of IntroductionTop of page Risk Criteria Category
Economic Importance High
Seedborne Incidence No
Seed Transmitted No
Seed Treatment None
Vector Transmission High
Transmission in planting materials High
Overall Risk High
Hosts/Species AffectedTop of page The main natural host of SPFMV is sweet potato, although the virus also occurs in wild Ipomoea species which are reservoirs of SPFMV (Clark et al., 1986).
The experimental host range of the virus is mainly restricted to species of the Convolvulaceae and Chenopodiaceae; a few strains, however, also infect species of the Solanaceae, of which Nicotiana benthamiana is a good propagation host for purification of the virus (Clark and Moyer, 1988). Several strains induce local lesions on Chenopodium amaranticolor and C. quinoa.
Chenopodiaceae: Chenopodium murale, C. amaranticolor, C. quinoa and Spinacia oleracea (several strains).
Convolvulaceae: Calonyction aculeatum, Ipomoea hederacea, I. incarnata, I. lacunosa, I. purpurea, I. trichocarpa, I. tricolor, I. wrightii, Merremia sibirica and Quamoclit lobata.
Solanaceae: Datura metel, Nicotiana benthamiana, N. clevelandii, N. occidentalis and N. tabacum (some strains).
Growth StagesTop of page Post-harvest, Vegetative growing stage
SymptomsTop of page Leaf symptoms of SPFMV are often inconspicuous or absent. If present, leaf symptoms appear as faint, irregular chlorotic spots occasionally bordered by purplish pigment. The classic irregular chlorotic patterns (feathering) along midribs and faint-to-distinct chlorotic spots, with or without purple margins, occur in some cultivars. Symptom intensity on foliage is influenced by cultivar susceptibility, degree of stress, growth stage and strain virulence. Increased stress can lead to symptom expression, whereas rapid growth may result in symptom remission. Symptoms on storage roots depend on the strain of SPFMV and the sweet potato variety. The common strain causes no symptom on any variety, but the 'russet crack' strain causes external necrotic lesions or internal cork on certain varieties (Clark and Moyer, 1988; Ames et al., 1996).
List of Symptoms/SignsTop of page
|Leaves / abnormal colours|
|Leaves / abnormal patterns|
Biology and EcologyTop of page SPFMV has a narrow host range; it is disseminated in infected tubers and cuttings, and is transmitted from infected to healthy plants by aphids in the non-persistent manner. It is not seedborne or soilborne but is experimentally transmissible by grafting and mechanical inoculation.
Means of Movement and DispersalTop of page Vector transmission
Like other potyviruses, SPFMV is transmitted from infected to healthy plants by aphids in the non-persistent manner (Sheffield, 1957; Clark and Moyer, 1988; Pozzer et al., 1993, 1995; Ames et al., 1996). The most important vector species are Myzus persicae, Aphis gossypii, A. craccivora and Lipaphis erysimi, but other species are also vectors (Pozzer et al., 1993, 1995; Ames et al., 1996).
The virus is disseminated in infected tubers and cuttings taken from infected plants.
SPFMV is not seedborne.
The virus is transmissible experimentally by grafting and by mechanical inoculation to its known hosts.
Seedborne AspectsTop of page The virus is not seedborne (Cadena-Hinojosa and Campbell, 1981; Wolters et al., 1990).
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|
|Flowers/Inflorescences/Cones/Calyx||Yes||Pest or symptoms usually invisible|
|Fruits (inc. pods)||Yes||Pest or symptoms usually invisible|
|Leaves||Yes||Pest or symptoms usually visible to the naked eye|
|Roots||Yes||Pest or symptoms usually invisible|
|Seedlings/Micropropagated plants||Yes||Pest or symptoms usually visible to the naked eye|
|Stems (above ground)/Shoots/Trunks/Branches||Yes||Pest or symptoms usually invisible|
|Plant parts not known to carry the pest in trade/transport|
|Growing medium accompanying plants|
|True seeds (inc. grain)|
Vectors and Intermediate HostsTop of page
ImpactTop of page Some isolates of SPFMV cause economic losses (Campbell et al., 1974), especially in intolerant cultivars (Clark and Moyer, 1988; Byamukama et al., 2002; Bryan et al., 2003a,b; Carroll et al., 2004; Njeru et al., 2004; Zhang et al., 2005). SPFMV is very damaging when it occurs in complex with Sweet potato chlorotic stunt virus (e.g., Schaeffers and Terry 1976; Karyeija et al., 2000b; Yun et al., 2002; Gutierrez et al., 2003) and especially so in Argentina when Sweet potato mild fleck virus is also present in complex with both of the other viruses (Feo et al., 1995, 2000).
Virus-free sweet potato plants yield significantly more than those infected in the field (e.g., Pozzer et al., 1995; Bryan et al., 2003a,b; Zhang et al., 2005).
DiagnosisTop of page
SPFMV is mechanically transmissible to, and induces conspicuous symptoms in, the following useful indicator plants:
Ipomoea nil - systemic infection causing vein-clearing, vein banding, epinasty and crinkling of leaves. Some severe strains induce stunting, necrosis and the death of the plant.
Ipomoea setosa - systemic infection causing chlorotic vein-clearing, vein-banding and chlorotic spots of leaves. This plant is used as an indexing host when infected by grafting.
Chenopodium amaranticolor and C. quinoa - chlorotic lesions on inoculated leaves, but no systemic infection.
SPFMV is readily detected and identified by several serological techniques using polyclonal or monoclonal antibodies (Hammond et al., 1992; Muller et al., 2002) including Immunobsorbent electron microscopy (ISEM), Double antibody sandwich (DAS-) and Nitrocellulose membrane (NCM-) ELISA (Abad and Moyer, 1992; Kroth et al., 2001; Bryan et al., 2003a; Jeeva et al., 2004a; Tairo et al., 2004), Western blotting (Yun et al., 2002) and Dot Immunobinding Assay (Dje and Diallo, 2005). Detection of virus in sweet potatoes, however, is more difficult, especially in symptomless tissues or plants (Cadena-Hinojosa and Campbell, 1981; Kumar et al., 1991; Abad and Moyer, 1992; Gibb and Padovan, 1993; Jeeva et al., 2004a; Zhang et al., 2005).
Nucleic acid Spot Hybridization (NASH)
Early detection of SPFMV is not usually possible using serological techniques. However, symptomless infection can be detected using NASH with strain-specific or wide spectrum non-radioactive (Abad and Moyer, 1992) or radioactive probes (Querci et al., 1992).
Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR)
SPFMV can be detected and identified by PCR using virus- or genus-specific primers (Colinet et al., 1994, 1998; Tanaka et al., 2001; Ryu and Choi, 2002; Mukasa et al., 2003a; Iwanami, 2004; Valverde et al., 2004; Zhang et al., 2005). Due to its great sensitivity and reliability, this is now the preferred method of detecting SPFMV where appropriate facilities are available.
More recently, Reverse Transcriptase-PCR (RT-PCR) has been employed for diagnosis. An immune-capture RT-PCR method of SPFMV diagnosis was developed by Kroth et al. (2005). A multiplex RT-PCR assay was used to detect SPMFV in sweet potato in Uganda (Rukarwa et al., 2010).
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.As SPFMV is transmitted in the non-persistent manner by aphids, control of the aphid vectors in field crops is not economically feasible. The main control measures are the production and use of virus-free planting material, sanitation, and the use of resistant varieties (Kai et al., 2000; Karyeija et al., 2000b; Gibson et al., 2004; Iwanami, 2004). Virus-free plants have been obtained in many countries by meristem tip culture (e.g., Wambugu, 1991; Mason and Beetham, 1998; Gao et al., 2000; Carroll et al., 2004; Jeeva et al., 2004b; Zhang et al., 2005) and thermotherapy (Jeeva et al., 2004b). Resistance to SPFMV is conferred by two recessive genes (Mwanga et al., 2002).
SPFMV is perpetuated between cropping cycles in infected cuttings, the lack of symptoms in the foliage makes it difficult for farmers to select SPFMV-free cuttings. Some wild species of Ipomoea are reservoirs of SPFMV and, if present, should be removed (Clark et al., 1986).
There is a possibility that transgenic resistant plants may in future be useful in limiting the deleterious effects of SPFMV (Cipriani et al., 2001; Okada et al., 2001, 2002; Wambugu, 2003).
ReferencesTop of page
Abad JA; Moyer JW, 1992. Detection and distribution of sweetpotato feathery mottle virus in sweetpotato by in vitro-transcribed RNA probes (riboprobes), membrane immunobinding assay, and direct blotting. Phytopathology, 82(3):300-305
Akel E; Ismail ID; Al-Chaabi S; Fuentes S, 2010. New natural weed hosts of Sweet potato feathery mottle virus in Syria. Arab Journal of Plant Protection, 28(1):96-100. http://www.asplantprotection.org/PDF/AJPP/28-1_2010/96-100.pdf
Ames T; Smit NEJM; Braun AR; O'Sullivan JN; Skoglund LG, 1996. Sweet potato: Major Pests Diseases, and Nutritional Disorders. Lima, Peru: Internacional Potato Center (CIP), 152 pp.
Atcham T; Lockhart B; Banttari E, 1983. Identification and characterization of a virus in sweet potato found in South-east Zaire, Central Africa. Phytopathology, 73:787.
Ateka EM; Njeru RW; Kibaru AG; Kimenju JW; Barg E; Gibson RW; Vetten HJ, 2004. Identification and distribution of viruses infecting sweet potato in Kenya. Annals of Applied Biology, 144(3): 371-379.
Berger PH; Adams MJ; Barnett OW, Brunt AA et al. , 2005. Potyviridae. In: Fauquet CM, Mayo MA, Maniloff J, Desselberger U, Ball LA, eds. Virus Taxonomy, VIIIth Report of the ICTV. London, UK: Elsevier/Academic Press, 819-841.
Binoy Babu; Vinayaka Hegde; Makeshkumar T; Jeeva ML, 2012. Rapid and sensitive detection of potyvirus infecting tropical tuber crops using genus specific primers and probes. African Journal of Biotechnology, 11(5):1023-1027. http://www.academicjournals.org/AJB/full%20text/2012/16Jan/Babu%20et%20al.htm
Bryan AD; Pesic-VanEsbroeck Z; Schultheis JR; Pecota KV; Swallow WH; Yencho GC, 2003. Cultivar decline in sweetpotato: I. Impact of micropropagation on yield, storage root quality, and virus incidence in ’Beauregard’. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 128(6): 846-855.
Bryan AD; Schultheis JR; Pesic-VanEsbroeck Z; Yencho GC, 2003. Cultivar decline in sweetpotato: II. Impact of virus infection on yield and storage root quality in ’Beauregard’ and ’Hernandez’. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 128(6): 856-863.
Byamukama E; Gibson RW; Aritua V; Adipala E, 2004. Within-crop spread of sweet potato virus disease and the population dynamics of its whitefly and aphid vectors. Crop Protection, 23(2): 109-116.
Campbell RN; Hall DH; Mielines NM, 1974. Etiology of sweet potato russet crack disease, Phytopathology, 64:210-218.
Carroll HW; Villordon AQ; Clark CA; Bonte DRla; Hoy MW, 2004. Studies on Beauregard sweetpotato clones naturally infected with viruses. International Journal of Pest Management, 50(2): 101-106.
Cipriani G; Fuentes S; Bello V; Salazar LF; Ghislain M; Zhang DP, 2001. Transgene expression of rice cysteine proteinase inhibitors for the development of resistance against sweetpotato feathery mottle virus. Scientist and farmer: partners in research for the 21st Century. Program Report 1999-2000, 267-271; 14 ref.
Clerk GC, 1960. A vein-clearing virus of sweet potato in Ghana. Plant Disease Reporter, 44:931-933.
Colinet D; Kummert J; Lepoivre P; Semal J, 1994. Identification of distinct potyviruses in mixedly-infected sweetpotato by the polymerase chain reaction with degenerate primers. Phytopathology, 84(1):65-69
Colinet D; Nguyen M; Kummert J; Lepoivre P; Xia FengZu, 1998. Differentiation among potyviruses infecting sweet potato based on genus- and virus-specific reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. Plant Disease, 82(2):223-229; 23 ref.
COPR, 1978. Sweet potato diseases. In: Pest control in tropical tuber crops. PANS Manual No. 4. London, UK: Centre for Overseas Pest Research.
Dje Y; Diallo HA, 2005. Detection and distribution of sweet potato feathery mottle virus in sweet potato using membrane immunobinding assay. African Journal of Biotechnology, 4(7): 717-723.
Domola MJ; Thompson GJ; Aveling TAS; Laurie SM; Strydom H; Berg AAvan den, 2008. Sweet potato viruses in South Africa and the effect of viral infection on storage root yield. African Plant Protection, 14:15-23. http://journals.sabinet.co.za/WebZ/AdvancedQuery?sessionid=01-33950-156879858&termA=2008&indexA=py%3A&format=B&advancednumrecs=50&entitytoprecno=1&entitycurrecno=1&entitytempjds=true&dbgroup=plantprog&next=/app/plantpro_abresult.html&bad=error/badsearchframe.html
EPPO, 2014. PQR database. Paris, France: European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization. http://www.eppo.int/DATABASES/pqr/pqr.htm
Feo Ldi; Biderbost E; Racca R; Nome S; Mollinedo V; Lopez-Lambertini P, 1995. Effect of ontogeny and chlorotic dwarf, a viral disease, on the productivity of sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam.) cv. Morada-INTA. Fitopatologi^acute~a, 30(2):96-99; 16 ref.
Gao F; Gong YF; Zhang PB, 2000. Production and deployment of virus-free sweetpotato in China. Crop Protection, 19(2): 105-111.
Gibb KS; Padovan AC, 1993. Detection of sweet potato feathery mottle potyvirus in sweet potato grown in northern Australia using an efficient and simple assay. International Journal of Pest Management, 39(2):223-228
Gibson RW; Aritua V, 2002. The perspective of sweetpotato chlorotic stunt virus in sweetpotato production in Africa: a review. African Crop Science Journal, 10(4): 281-31.
Gibson RW; Aritua V; Byamukama E; Mpembe I; Kayongo J, 2004. Control strategies for sweet potato virus disease in Africa. Virus Research, 100(1): 115-122.
Ha C; Revill P; Harding RM; Vu M; Dale JL, 2008. Identification and sequence analysis of potyviruses infecting crops in Vietnam. Archives of Virology, 153(1):45-60. http://springerlink.metapress.com/content/90316764184520r2/fulltext.pdf
Hammond J; Jordan RL; Larsen RC; Moyer JW, 1992. Use of polyclonal antisera and monoclonal antibodies to examine serological relationships among three filamentous viruses of sweetpotato. Phytopathology, 82(6):713-717
Iwanami T, 2004. Recent progress in characterization and control of virus disease. Sweetpotato Research Front, 18: 3.
Jeeva ML; Balakrishnan S; Edison S; Rajmohan K, 2004. Meristem culture and thermotherapy in the management of sweet potato feathery mottle virus (SPFMV). Journal of Root Crops, 30(2): 135-142.
Jeeva ML; Balakrishnan S; Edison S; Umamaheswaran K; Makeshkumar T, 2004. Characterization, purification and serology of sweet potato feathery mottle virus in India. Journal of Root Crops, 30(1): 24-30.
Jones RAC; Dwyer GI, 2007. Detection of Sweet potato chlorotic fleck virus and Sweet potato feathery mottle virus - strain O in Australia. Australasian Plant Pathology, 36(6):591-594. http://www.publish.csiro.au/nid/39/paper/AP07069.htm
Kai Y; Onuki M; Yamakawa O, 2000. Selection of varieties resistant to SPFMV-S using the method of graft-inoculation to seedlings. Report of the Kyushu Branch of the Crop Science Society of Japan, No. 66:41-43; 3 ref.
Karyeija RF; Kreuze JF; Gibson RW; Valkonen JPT, 2000. Two serotypes of Sweetpotato feathery mottle virus in Uganda and their interaction with resistant sweetpotato cultivars. Phytopathology, 90(11):1250-1255; 33 ref.
Kreuze JF; Karyeija RF; Gibson RW; Valkonen JPT, 2000. Comparisons of coat protein gene sequences show that East African isolates of sweet potato feathery mottle virus form a genetically distinct group. Archives of Virology, 145(3):567-574; 25 ref.
Kroth LL; Daniels J; Pierobom CR, 2005. Detection of sweet potato feathery mottle virus by a simplified method of RT-PCR. (Utilização de um método simplificado de RT-PCR para detecção do Sweet potato feathery mottle virus.) Revista Brasileira de Agrociência, 11(1):109-111. http://www.ufpel.tche.br/faem/agrociencia/v11n1/artigo19.pdf
Kroth LL; Fuentes S; Salazar LF; Daniels J, 2001. Serological virus detection (NCM-ELISA) in sweet potato fields at Rio Grande do Sul State, Brazil. Revista Brasileira de Agrocie^circumflex~ncia, 7(2):117-119; 8 ref.
Kumar CA; Mandal BB; Chandel KPS; Jain RK; Varma A; Srivastava M, 1991. Ocurrence of sweet potato feathery mottle virus in germplasm of Ipomoea batatas (L.) in India. Current Science, 60:321-325.
Laakso M; Moyer JW, 1989. A virus disease complex of sweet potato from Puerto Rico. Phytopathology, 79:188-89.
Mason A; Beetham P, 1998. Virus elimination and virus detection. Newsletter of the International Working Group on Sweet Potato Viruses, 1:5.
Mnller G; Fuentes S; Salazar LF, 2002. Detection of sweetpotato chlorotic stunt crinivirus (SPCSV) by non-radioactive Nucleic Acid Spot Hybridization (NASH) technique. Acta Horticulturae, No.583:129-133; 16 ref.
Mori M; Sakai J; Kimura T; Usugi T; Hayashi T; Hanada K; Nishiguchi M, 1995. Nucleotide sequence analysis of two nuclear inclusion body and coat protein genes of a sweet potato feathery mottle virus severe strain (SPFMV-S) genomic RNA. Archives of Virology, 140(8):1473-1482; 31 ref.
Moyer JW; Cali BB, 1985. Properties of sweet potato feathery mottle virus RNA and capsid protein. Journal of General Virology, 66:1185-1189.
Mukasa SB; Tairo F; Kreuze JF; Kullaya A; Rubaihayo PR; Valkonen JPT, 2003. Coat protein sequence analysis reveals occurrence of new strains of sweet potato feathery mottle virus in Uganda and Tanzania. Virus Genes, 27(1): 49-56.
Mwanga ROM; Kriegner A; Cervantes-Flores JC; Zhang DP; Moyer JW; Yencho GC, 2002. Resistance to sweet potato chlorotic stunt virus and sweet potato feathery mottle virus is mediated by two separate recessive genes in sweet potato. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 127(5):798-806; many ref.
Nakano M; Fuentes S; Salazar LF, 1994. Sweetpotato virus diseases detected in the tropics of South and Central America and South East Asia. JIRCA Workshop, paper No. 1. Tsukuba, Japan: Japan International Research Center for Agricultural Services, 58-65.
Njeru RW; Bagabe MC; Nkezabahizi D; Kayiranga D; Kajuga J; Butare L; Ndirigue J, 2008. Viruses infecting sweet potato in Rwanda: occurrence and distribution. Annals of Applied Biology, 153(2):215-221. http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/120119751/HTMLSTART
Njeru RW; Mburu MWK; Cheramgoi E; Gibson RW; Kiburi ZM; Obudho E; Yobera D, 2004. Studies on the physiological effects of viruses on sweet potato yield in Kenya. Annals of Applied Biology, 145(1): 71-76.
Nome SF; Shalla TA; Petersen LJ, 1974. Comparison of virus particles and intercellular inclusions associated with vein mosaic, feather mottle, and russet crack diseases of sweet potato. Phytopathologische Zeitschrift, 79(2):169-178
Okada Y; Nishiguchi M; Saito A; Kimura T; Mori M; Hanada K; Sakai J; Matsuda Y; Murata T, 2002. Inheritance and stability of the virus-resistant gene in the progeny of transgenic sweet potato. Plant Breeding, 121(3):249-253; 25 ref.
Okada Y; Saito A; Nishiguchi M; Kimura T; Mori M; Hanada K; Sakai J; Miyazaki C; Matsuda Y; Murata T, 2001. Virus resistance in transgenic sweet potato [Ipomoea batatas L. (Lam)] expressing the coat protein gene of sweet potato feathery mottle virus. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 103(5):743-751; 35 ref.
Parrella G; Stradis Ade; Giorgini M, 2006. Sweet potato feathery mottle virus is the casual agent of sweetpotato virus disease in Italy. Plant Pathology, 55(6):818. http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/servlet/useragent?func=showIssues&code=ppa
Pio-Ribeiro G; Assis Filho FM; Paz CD da; Pires CRC, 1993 Occurrence of sweet potato feathery mottle virus in sweet potato germplasm in the state of Pernambuco. Fitopatologia Brasileira, 18:458-460.
Pozzer L; Dusi AN; Kitajima EW, 1993 Aphid transmission of sweet potato feathery mottle virus. Fitopatologia Brasileira, 18:274.
Querci M; Fuentes S; Salazar LF, 1992. Construction, cloning and use of radioactive RNA probes for the detection of the Peruvian strain C1 of sweet potato feathery mottle virus. Fitopatologia, 27(2):93-97
Rossel HW; Thottappilly G, 1988. Complex virus diseases of sweet potato. Pages 291-302 in: Exploration, Maintenance and Utilization of Sweet Potato Genetic Resources. Report of the First Sweet Potato Planning Conference. Lima, Peru: International Potato Center.
Ryu KiHyun; Choi SunHee, 2002. Molecular detection and analysis of sweet potato feathery mottle virus from root and leaf tissues of cultivated sweet potato plants. Plant Pathology Journal, 18(1):12-17; 15 ref.
Rännäli M; Czekaj V; Jones RAC; Fletcher JD; Davis RI; Mu L; Valkonen JPT, 2009. Molecular characterization of Sweet potato feathery mottle virus (SPFMV) isolates from Easter Island, French Polynesia, New Zealand, and southern Africa. Plant Disease, 93(9):933-939. http://apsjournals.apsnet.org/loi/pdis
Sheffield FM, 1957. Virus diseases of sweet potato in East Africa. Identification of the viruses and their insect vectors. Phytopathology, 47:582-590.
Sinha B; Tarafdar J, 2007. Occurrence and detection of sweet potato virus disease (SPVD) in West Bengal. Journal of Applied Horticulture (Lucknow), 9(2):123-126. http://www.horticultureresearch.net/jah92.pdf
Skoglund LG; Smit NEJM, 1994. Major Diseases and pests of Sweetpotato in Eastern Africa. Lima, Peru: International Potato Center.
Souto ER; Sim J; Chen J; Valverde R-A; Clark CA, 2003. Properties of strains of sweet potato feathery mottle virus and two newly recognized potyviruses infecting sweet potato in the United States. Plant Disease, 87(10): 1226-1232.
Tairo F; Kullaya A; Valkonen JPT, 2004. Incidence of viruses infecting sweetpotato in Tanzania. Plant Disease, 88(9): 916-920.
Tairo F; Mukasa SB; Jones RAC; Kullaya A; Rubaihayo PR; Valkonen JPT, 2005. Unravelling the genetic diversity of the three main viruses involved in Sweet Potato Virus Disease (SPVD), and its practical implications. Molecular Plant Pathology, 6(2): 199-211.
Tanaka Y; Onishi K; Okuda M; Sakai J; Onuki M; Hanada K, 2001. Detection of SPFMV from sweet potato leaves by using RT-PCR and fusion protein antiserum. Kyushu Plant Protection Research, 47:13-15; 7 ref.
Valverde R; Moreira MA, 2004. Identification of sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas L.) viruses in Costa Rica. (Identificación de virus en el cultivo de camote (Ipomoea batatas L.) en Costa Rica.) Agronomía Mesoamericana, 15(1):1-7.
Valverde R; Moreira MA, 2004. Identification of sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas L.) viruses in Costa Rica. Agronomia Mesoamericana, 15(1): 1-7.
Valverde RA; Lozano G; Navas-Castillo J; Ramos A; Valdes F, 2004. First report of sweet potato chlorotic stunt virus and sweet potato feathery mottle virus infecting sweet potato in Spain. Plant Disease, 88(4): 428.
Valverde RA; Lozano G; Navas-Castillo J; Ramos A; Valdés F, 2004. First report of sweet potato chlorotic stunt virus and sweet potato feathery mottle virus infecting sweet potato in Spain. Plant Disease, 88(4):428.
Vetten HJ, 1988. Characterization of an isolate of sweet potato feathery mottle virus from Tongo. In: International Working Group on Sweet Potato Viruses (IWSPV). Newsletter, 1:9-10.
Wambugu FM, 1991. In vitro and epidemiological studies of sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas L. Lam.) virus diseases in Kenya. PhD Thesis, University of Bath, UK.
Wambugu FM, 2003. Development and transfer of genetically modified virus-resistant sweet potato for subsistence farmers in Kenya. Nutrition Reviews, 61(6(2)): S110-S113.
Zhang LM; Wang QM; Ma DF; Wang Y, 2005. Major viruses and effect of major virus diseases and virus-eliminating meristem culture on sweetpotato yield and quality in China. Acta Botanica Boreali Occidentalia Sinica, 25(2): 316-320.
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/