0919 Does aphid probing behavior explain differences in PVY transmission efficiency on potato?

Tuesday, December 15, 2009: 1:59 PM
Room 207, Second Floor (Convention Center)
Jeffrey A. Davis , Entomology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA
Edward B. Radcliffe , Department of Entomology, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN
Potato virus Y (PVY) is a non-persistent, stylet-borne virus, transmitted by over fifty aphid species. Differences in probing behavior can influence virus transmission. Aphids determine host suitability with brief intracellular probes (potential drops) which can result in acquisition and transmission of PVY. Potential drops are divided into three distinct subphases: II-1, egestion; II-2, unknown function; and II-3, ingestion. Research has shown that non-persistent virus transmission efficiency is increased by: potential drop frequency, long egestion duration, long ingestion duration and frequent ingestion pulses. Experiments were conducted to determine if differences in PVY vector efficiency by Acyrthosiphon pisum (pea aphid), Aphis glycines (soybean aphid), Aphis gossypii (cotton aphid), Aphis nasturtii (buckthorn aphid), Aphis spiraecola (spirea aphid), Macrosiphum euphorbiae (potato aphid), Myzus persicae (green peach aphid), and Rhopalosiphum padi (bird cherry-oat aphid) were due to aphid probing behavior. Parameters scored (per probe) were pre-probe duration, number of potential drops, egestion duration, ingestion duration, and number of ingestion pulses. Pea aphid, an inefficient PVY vector, had the longest pre-probe duration and the shortest egestion duration. Buckthorn aphid, a moderately efficient PVY vector, had the most potential drops and the longest egestion duration. Soybean aphid, an efficient PVY vector, had the shortest pre-probe duration and the longest ingestion duration. Green peach aphid, the most efficient PVY vector, did not score high on any parameter measured. Probing behavior has an effect on PVY transmission efficiency, but the influence is species specific.

doi: 10.1603/ICE.2016.41920