Elimination of Grapevine fanleaf virus in grapevine by in vivo and in vitro thermotherapy

Abstract

ABSTRACT:In this paper, results of the in vitro treatment are compared with those of in vivo therapy (i.e. treatment of plants in a peat substrate) when eliminating GFLV (Grapevine fanleaf virus) from three grapevine rootstocks. Therapy took 45 days under the temperature of 37°C in both cases. As far as the health condition of treated plants was concerned, no differences were found between the two methods. The differences were manifested in numbers of plants dying during the therapy and in the course of cultivation of apical segments treated with thermotherapy. Based on these results, it can be recommended to apply the thermotherapy in vivo, which -as compared with the in vitro method -enables us to obtain a greater number of apical segments from treated plants and to establish a smaller number of in vitro cultures in the course of the treatment. A shorter period of in vitro cultivation of plants is another advantage of this method because it helps to reduce the risk of somaclonal variability.

Elimination of Eight Viruses and Two Viroids from Preclonal Candidates of Six Grapevine Varieties (Vitis vinifera L.) through In Vivo Thermotherapy and In Vitro Meristem Tip Micrografting

“…According to Křižan et al [5], in vivo thermotherapy is more advisable than in vitro thermotherapy because it is less labor-intensive and provides more apical segments, whereas the shorter duration of in vitro cultivation reduces the risk of somaclonal variability. The regeneration of grapevines directly from the meristem is often difficult [41].…”

“…GFLV is the main causal agent of grapevine fanleaf disease, and is one of the most damaging grapevine viruses [1]. It is not phloem-limited and it is susceptible to heat treatment at approximately 37 • C in several rootstocks [5,6]. A meristem tip culture without thermotherapy also resulted in a high number of GFLV-free plants [8,21].…”

“…This is one of the main reasons why clonal selection is very difficult. Various measures for producing virus-and viroid-free grapevine material have been used, including thermotherapy [5,6], meristem tissue culture [7][8][9][10], micrografting, chemotherapy [11][12][13][14], cryotherapy [15], somaclonal embryogenesis [10,[16][17][18][19], electrotherapy [20], and various combinations of these treatments [21][22][23][24]. Thermotherapy in combination with a meristem tissue culture is a widely used method.…”

The plant germplasm and herbarium (WIR) collections maintained at VIR as contributors to grape genetic diversity conservation, expansion and utilization

“…Получение оздоровленного материала решается различными методами: отбор и тестирование визуально здоровых растений, термо-, крио-, химио-и комплексная терапия, метод апикальных меристем (Abdullahi, Rott, 2007;Křižan et al, 2009;Maliogka et al, 2009;Skiada et al, 2009). Поддержание коллекции in vitro трудоемко, требует профессиональных навыков, а также сопряжено с риском микробного загрязнения и генетической нестабильности (Kulus, Zalewska, 2014;Dalla Costa et al, 2019;Panis et al, 2020).…”

Methods for the Diagnosis of Grapevine Viral Infections: A Review

“…In addition, an infection is far less likely to develop if healthy planting material is used. In order to receive healthy planting material, or to make the existing material healthier, methods of meristem culture, thermotherapy and chemotherapy are used [20][21][22][23].…”