2019
DOI: 10.1007/s41348-019-00219-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Beet soil-borne mosaic virus: development of virus-specific detection tools

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The accuracy of the ELISA is less than molecular-based detection methods, however, being fast, cheap and the presence of commercial kits make the ELISA a preferred assay for the routine detection of BNYVV. RT-PCR is a more accurate tool compared to ELISA and is considered a more reliable method in virus detection studies 22,[30][31][32][33][34] hence, it is increasingly used in the detection of BNYVV [35][36][37] . The use of nucleic acid-based methods such as RT-PCR and qRT-PCR has increased the sensitivity of the virus detection by up to 100-10,000 times 27 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The accuracy of the ELISA is less than molecular-based detection methods, however, being fast, cheap and the presence of commercial kits make the ELISA a preferred assay for the routine detection of BNYVV. RT-PCR is a more accurate tool compared to ELISA and is considered a more reliable method in virus detection studies 22,[30][31][32][33][34] hence, it is increasingly used in the detection of BNYVV [35][36][37] . The use of nucleic acid-based methods such as RT-PCR and qRT-PCR has increased the sensitivity of the virus detection by up to 100-10,000 times 27 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Panel performed the pest categorisation for beet necrotic yellow vein virus, following guiding principles and steps presented in the EFSA guidance on quantitative pest risk assessment (EFSA PLH Panel, 2018) and in the International Standard for Phytosanitary Measures No 11 (FAO, 2013) and No 21 (FAO, 2004).…”
Section: Methodologiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, foliar symptoms including wilting can be confused with those resulting from other biotic or abiotic stresses. Since other soil‐borne viruses may be found in association with rhizomania, such as beet soil‐borne virus (BSBV), beet soil‐borne mosaic virus (BSBMV) (Meunier et al., 2003b), beet virus Q (BVQ) and beet black scorch virus (BBSV) (Mehrvar et al., 2009), a correct virus detection and identification relies on serological and molecular methods (Fomitcheva and Kühne, 2019). Serological methods based on enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) are sensitive and robust for virus detection in particular when large sample numbers are to be tested.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The qRT-PCR relies on specific primers and probes for the virus: in the case of new mutations or whenever discrimination among different strains of the virus is needed, the use of new or different probes would be sufficient to accurately detect the strain. It has also been challenging, in some cases, to distinguish between BNYVV and BSBMV (Beet soil-borne mosaic virus) applying the ELISA test, because the structure of the two viruses is similar [ 9 ]. This problem no longer exists with the qRT-PCR targeting specific nucleic acids.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%