[{"@context":"http:\/\/schema.org\/","@type":"BlogPosting","@id":"https:\/\/wiki.edu.vn\/all2en\/wiki32\/virus-and-of-the-pomme-of-land-wikipedia\/#BlogPosting","mainEntityOfPage":"https:\/\/wiki.edu.vn\/all2en\/wiki32\/virus-and-of-the-pomme-of-land-wikipedia\/","headline":"virus and of the pomme of land \u2014 Wikipedia","name":"virus and of the pomme of land \u2014 Wikipedia","description":"Potato virus Y The potato virus (Pevy, ape Potato virus Y ), is a pathogenic phytovirus from the Potyviridae family.","datePublished":"2021-02-02","dateModified":"2021-02-02","author":{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/wiki.edu.vn\/all2en\/wiki32\/author\/lordneo\/#Person","name":"lordneo","url":"https:\/\/wiki.edu.vn\/all2en\/wiki32\/author\/lordneo\/","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/44a4cee54c4c053e967fe3e7d054edd4?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/44a4cee54c4c053e967fe3e7d054edd4?s=96&d=mm&r=g","height":96,"width":96}},"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Enzyklop\u00e4die","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/wiki.edu.vn\/wiki4\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/download.jpg","url":"https:\/\/wiki.edu.vn\/wiki4\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/download.jpg","width":600,"height":60}},"image":{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/upload.wikimedia.org\/wikipedia\/commons\/thumb\/4\/4b\/Necrotic_ringspot.JPG\/220px-Necrotic_ringspot.JPG","url":"https:\/\/upload.wikimedia.org\/wikipedia\/commons\/thumb\/4\/4b\/Necrotic_ringspot.JPG\/220px-Necrotic_ringspot.JPG","height":"381","width":"220"},"url":"https:\/\/wiki.edu.vn\/all2en\/wiki32\/virus-and-of-the-pomme-of-land-wikipedia\/","wordCount":6182,"articleBody":"Potato virus Y The potato virus (Pevy, ape Potato virus Y ), is a pathogenic phytovirus from the Potyviridae family. It is one of the most important viruses affecting potato crops. The infection of potato plants by the virus causes various symptoms there depending on the viral strain. It often results in a simple drop in yield, but also in the appearance of necrotic spots in tubers, which make potatoes unfit for sale and can therefore cause significant loss of income for producers. The latter symptoms are known as &#8220;necrotic pommel annular disease&#8221;. The virus is transmitted to it by various species of aphids which are the most important vector, but it can also remain dormant in the tubers used as seed. It follows that the use of the same potato stump for the production of plants for several generations results in a gradual increase in the viral load and increasingly important losses of products. In South Africa, the production of potatoes has undergone considerable losses due to the y virus these last years [When ?] . This increase in the rate of infection is attributable to several factors: marked decrease in the efficiency and use of APHICIDE insecticides, use of infected potato plants, poorly driven irrigation and absence of sensitive, fast and fast and fast and reliable [ 2 ] . The increase in average temperature in winter due to global warming has also led to a proliferation of aphids, which led to an increase in the diffusion of the virus [ 2 ] .  Virus y of potato, hosts, stumps and symptoms [ modifier | Modifier and code ]  Symptoms of necrotic rings on a potato tuber The virus y of potatoes belongs to the genus Potyvirus. This genus is the most important of phytovirus groups and is considered one of the most destructive virus groups affecting potato crops [ 3 ] .Genre The potentials contains more than 200 members who cause significant losses in agriculture [ 4 ] .The virus affects several species of great economic importance there. These include, in addition to the potato, tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L. ) , from tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill ) and pepper (Capsicum frutesccns L. ) [ 5 ] .The importance of the damage caused to crops depends on the virus strain concerned, the viral load, the moment when the infection occurs as well as the resistance of the host towards the virus [ 6 ] .The resistance of host plants to the virus infection is often low. Infection of a potato field by this virus can cause loss of yield between 10 and 100% [ 6 ] . It has been shown that the virus has different isolates causing different symptoms there in potatoes [ 7 ] .The great biological, serological and molecular variability of virus isolates makes their classification in particular strains. The variety of symptoms and the appearance of the virus y Ntn necrotic has led to the search for more reliable classification tools than simple serological identification. Traditionally, there are three main strains of virus y: pvy C , Pvy N and PVY O . Le Pvy C , originally appointed under the name of &#8220;Potato C virus&#8221;, was the first strain recognized and identified in the 1930s [ 8 ] .Le Pvy C induces a hypersensitive response in a wide range of potato cultivars. These reactions include the formation of light mosaic patterns or in dotted nets. Unlike other virus strains, some PVY strains are not transmitted by aphids [ 9 ] Previous studies to screw et al. [ ten ] did not identify any local isolate belonging to the Pvy strain C , but it was reported in South Africa [ 11 ] , [ twelfth ] .A second strain of the virus is PVY there N [ 13 ] , which has been described in cultivated tobacco plants near potato plants < [ 14 ] .The Souche Pvy N causes moderate necrosis of the leaves and not even damage to the tubers.The ordinary strain of the virus is designated there as Pvy O .Infection of a potato plant by the PVY O causes unimportant damage to the tubers but no leaves of the leaves [ 15 ] .Les Deux Souches Pvy N and PVY O are transmitted by aphids and are present in South Africa. In Europe, these two strains were shown to recombine to form the PVY strain Ntn [ 16 ] , [ 17 ] .on attributue au pvy Ntn the ability to trigger the disease of the necrotic rings of the tuber [ 16 ] . The tubers affected by this disease are unsaleable and infection by the Pvy strain Ntn So has a more important economic effect than infection by other strains. Transmission of the potato virus [ modifier | Modifier and code ] The virus can be transmitted to potato plants by transplant, by inoculation of the sap or by aphids. The most common mode of infection through the virus goes through aphids. These stinging insects can also cause direct damage to plants, but it is their role as a viral vector that has the greatest economic impact [ 18 ] , [ 19 ] , [ 20 ] .In cold climates, aphids spend the winter either in the form of apt\u00e8res aphids giving birth to young people (viviparous), or in the form of eggs. Various hosts, weeds or other cultures, serve as breeding tanks and temporary colonies for these aphids before they migrate to the fields of potatoes [ 19 ] .In temperate climates, as in South Africa, aphids reproduce asexually on weeds, other crops, native plants and garden plants. As a result, many aphids are present all year round. A study by Radcliffe and Ragsdale (2002) highlights the importance of rigorous and effective control of aphid populations, insofar as the virions of the virus are introduced into the potato fields almost only by the winged au au au from external virus sources. The intervention of aphids in this transmission of virus y to potato crops has never been demonstrated [ 21 ] . It has been found that the green aphid of the fishing (Myzus peaches) is the most effective in the role of viral vector [ 6 ] , [ 18 ] , [ 22 ] , but other aphids, such Aphls bean , Aphis gossypii , Aphis Nasturtii , Macrosiphum euphorbiae , Myzus sure , Myzus catch And Rhopalosiphum insert , are also strongly associated with viral transmission [ 18 ] , [ 22 ] .In South Africa, the Agricultural Research Council-Vegetable and Ornamental Plant Institute (Arc-Vopi) identified twenty-five species of aphids capable of acting as PVY vectors [ 23 ] . The effectiveness of some of these aphids as a vectors of the PVY has also been established (Ragsdale et al., 2001) and this varies depending on the species. In South Africa, Aphls bean , Aphis gossypii And Aphis Nasturtii are the most common and effective pvy vectors in the field [ 6 ] . In addition to the classification according to their efficiency as vectors, aphids can also be subdivided into two sub-groups, depending on whether or not they are subservient to the potato. Colonizing aphids are those which reproduce and establish colonies on potato plants, and are specifically subservient to this plant, while non -colonizing aphids do not reproduce and do not establish colonies on potatoes . Colonizing aphids are better suited to life on potato plants and are generally considered to be better vectors of PVY than others. The latter do not feed mainly on potatoes but do it occasionally while they are looking for a more adequate host. However, their lesser efficiency as a PVY vectors can be offset by their strong swarming [ 20 ] , [ 24 ] . As a result, all the aphids present in the potato fields, or around, must be considered as possible vectors and their carefully monitored switch. The transmission of PVY by aphids occurs in a non -persistent, non -circulating mode, which suggests an interaction between the virion and the less intimate vector than in the case of circulating virions [ 25 ] . The fact that the virions are transmitted according to a non -persistent mode indicates that viral replication does not occur in the body of the vector aphid and that, unless the aphid feeds on infected plants, it loses its capacity for Infect plants after two or three feedings [ 6 ] , [ 26 ] .Virions are attached to the stylus of aphids in the space of a few seconds and can remain infectious from four to sevenheads [ 27 ] , [ 28 ] .The distance to which the virions can be transmitted is limited due to the brief period during which they remain infectious [ 24 ] .Although the short lifespan out of plants inhibits long -distance viral transmission, it does not reduce the effectiveness of the transmission allowed by the high rate of viral acquisition and inoculation in the fields. When entering the vegetable cell, the capsid protein of the virus disassembles and releases its genomic RNA. Viral RNA works as an mRNA, and although we don&#8217;t know about the translation in question, we think that the non -coding 5 \u2019region works as a translation amplifier [ 29 ] .The translated mRNA gives polyprotein and each polyprotein is then split into ten different proteins supposed to be multifunctional. These proteins, as well as host proteins, assemble to form a replication complex. This complex synthesizes the simple bit of a negative polarity RNA, using the positive strand of viral RNA as a model. Once produced, copies of the additional RNA code the synthesis of various proteins, as indicated above, as well as for capsid proteins. These capsid proteins will now wrap the newly formed genomes to give birth to new virions.It is assumed that the envelopment of newly formed virions is triggered by the interaction of capsid proteins with the 5 \u2019end and that the capsid protein is built towards the end 3\u2019 [ 30 ] .The entire viral replication process occurs inside the endoplasmic reticulum. These newly synthesized viral particles are then transported through plasmodesmes to adjacent vegetable cells thanks to several assistant proteins The potentials . The distribution of viruses in the plant occurs according to the source-puite relationships between adult tissues and growing tissues [ thirty first ] .The virus concentration throughout the plant is high and this greatly increases the probability of ingestion by aphids. Plant infection by The potentials can produce various symptoms. It can be translated into ribs, mosaic symptoms as well as deformations of the leaves (Boonham et al., 2002). Infected plants that do not show symptoms can have an infected cover and produce a lower quality harvest that their good health aspect does not allow it to be presumed. Molecular description of the virus y of the potato [ modifier | Modifier and code ] The virions of The potentials consist of unwarfted filamentous structures which have 680 to 900 nm long and 11 to 15 nm wide [ 32 ] . Morphologically, The potentials Includes approximately 2,000 copies of Capside protein (CP), which form a cylindrical inclusion body (CIB) [ thirty first ] . The CIB is considered to be the most important phenotypic criterion to distinguish The potentials other virus groups. The CIB encapsulates a single-pointed polarity RNA which has a length of about 10 kb and has an unrelated 5 \u2019terminal region (5&#8242;-NTR) as well as a 3\u2019 poly-a tail \u2019 [ 33 ] , [ 34 ] .The positive polarity genome contains a unique reading frame extended and acts directly as mRNA. The 5&#8242;-NTR end at 144 nucleotides is particularly rich in adenine residues and has very few guanine residues. Rather than a conventional headdress structure, the 5&#8242;-NTR end is associated with a protein linked to the viral RNA (VPG protein) which is supposed to act as a transcription amplifier [ 29 ] . The sequence of the 5th end has an internal entry site for ribosomes (IRES) and regulatory elements of independent translation of the cap (waxes) [ 35 ] .IRES guides the independent translation of the headdress by a mechanism similar to that used by eukaryotes [ 36 ] .The extended reading frame codes a polyprotein of 350 kda.This polyprotein is proteolysis by viral proteases (NIA, HC-Pro and P1) and undergoes a cleavage during and after translation to produce several multifunctional proteins. These include the following: P1 (Protein P1), HC-Pro (Proteinase Factor Assistant), P3 (Protein P3), 6k1 (Protein 1, 6-KDA), CIB (cylindrical inclusion body), 6k2 (protein 2, 6 -KDA), VPG (protein linked to the viral genome), NIA -Pro (protein A &#8211; nuclear inclusion), NIB (protein B &#8211; Nuclear inclusion) and CP (Capside protein) [ thirty first ] . Interaction between potatoes and pvy necrotic strains Ntn [ modifier | Modifier and code ] Du Fait that you are souches of pvy Ntn cause significant economic losses in potato production, research on the interaction between potato plants and these viral strains is intense. Potato sensitive cultivars respond to inoculation with PVY necrotic strains Ntn by the development of characteristic symptoms.On inoculated leaves, necrotic and chlorotic rings develop 5 to 7 days after inoculation. As the virus spreads in the plant tissues, systemic symptoms appear on non -inoculated leaves.Ten days after inoculation, wrinkles and mosaic chlorosis appear, leading to a palm aspect (wasting of leaves). Plant viral defense mechanisms try first to restrict the movement of viruses.In case of failure, they can seek to induce the death of cells in infected tissues, thus preventing the dissemination of virions [ 37 ] . Although the precise mechanism of induction of the disease by The potentials Among plants is unknown, we know that these viruses cause a significant stop in the expression of the host genes during viral replication [ 38 ] , [ 39 ] , [ 40 ] . Physiological changes in potato plants in response to a PVY strain infection Ntn were intensively studied. We have shown that at the early stages of infection, that is to say during the first twelve hours, genes related to photosynthesis, genes involved in perception, reporting and defensive response are expressed differentially [ 40 ] . Twenty-four hours after inoculation, the rate of salicylic acid increases [ 41 ] . A disturbance of the expression of genes disruptions the normal cellular functioning of cells, which can be the cause of the physical symptoms visible on the plant. Research on interaction, at the time of the development of symptoms, between sensitive potato cultivars and pvy strains Ntn have shown changes in the level of cytokinin [ 42 ] . In inoculated leaves showing symptomatic changes in the structure and size of chloroplasts [ 43 ] , lower levels of chlorophyll and a differential activity of soluble and ionic peroxidases [ 44 ] were detected. At the later stages of a pvy strains infection Ntn , the concentration of total protein increases in sensitive potato cultivars, while such pronounced changes are not observed in tolerant or moderately tolerant cultivars [ 45 ] . Studies on the expression of genes reveal changes in the expression of the genes of thermal shock proteins (HSP), Catalase, \u03b2-1,3-glucanase and genes involved in photosynthesis [ 39 ] . \u2191 ICTV. International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses. Taxonomy history. Published on the Internet https:\/\/talk.ictvonline.org\/., consult\u00e9 le 1er f\u00e9vrier 2021  \u2191 a et b Coetsee, J. (2005). Viruses threaten entire potato industry, Landbouweekblad, 61637: 44-45.  \u2191 Ward, C.W. and Shukla, D.D. (1991). Taxonomy of potyviruses: current problems and possible solutions. Intervirology, 32: 269-296.  \u2191 Jawaid, A. Khan A.J and Dijkstra J. (2002). Plant Viruses as Molecular Pathogens. Food Products Press, The Haworth Press Inc., N.Y.  \u2191 McDonald, J.G. and Singh, R.P. (1996). Host range, symptomology and serology of isolates of Potato virus Y (PVY) that share properties with both the PVY N and Pvy O strain groups. Amer. Pot. J., 73: 309- 314.  \u2191 A B C D and E Warren, M., Kr\u00fcger, K. and Schoeman, A.S. (2005). Potato virus Y (PVY) and potato leaf roll virus(PLRV): Literature review for potatoes South Africa. Department of Zoology and Entomology, Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences, University of Pretoria.  \u2191 Delgado-Sanchez, S. and Grogan, R.G. (1970). Potato virus Y. CMI\/AAB Descriptions of plant viruses. 37: CMI\/AAB, Kew, Surrey, England, 4 pp.  \u2191 Salaman, R.N. (1930). Virus diseases of potato: Streak. Nature, 126: 241.  \u2191 Blanco-urgoiti, B., tribodet, M., Leclere, S., Ponz, F., Perez d\u00e9 St. Roman, C., Legoburu, F.J. and Kerlan, C. (1998). CHARACTERIZATION OF POTATO POTOTO ON ISOLATES FROM SEED Potato Batches. Situation of the NTN, WITURE AND Z ISOLATES. Eur. J. pl. Path., 104: 811-8  \u2191 Visser, J.C., Rothmann, A.H. and Bellstedt, D.U. (Unpublished). An assessment of recombination patterns in South African strains of potato virus Y (PVY). Honours thesis.  \u2191 Brunt, A.A. (2001). Potyviruses. In: Loebenstein G., Berger, P.H., Brunt, A.A. and Lawson, R.H. (eds), Virus and virus-like diseases of potatoes and production of seed-potatoes. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 77-86.  \u2191 De Bokx, J.A. (1981). CMI\/AAB Descriptions of plant viruses. Potato virus Y. 37: 242. Downloaded from the worldwide web: www.dpvweb.net\/dprv\/showdpv.php?dpvno=242  \u2191 Smith, K.M. and Dennis, R.W.G. (1940)  \u2191 Crosslin, J., Ham, P., Shiel, P., Hane, D., Brown, C. and Berger, P. (2005). Serological and molecular detection of Tobacco Veinal Necrosis Isolates of Potato Virus y (pvy N ) from Potatoes Grown in the Western United States. Amer. J. Pot. Res., 82: 263-269.  \u2191 Boonham, N., Walsh, K., Hims, M., Preston, S., North, J. and Barker, I. (2002). Biological and sequence comparisons of Potato virus Y isolates associated with potato tuber necrotic ringspot disease. Pl. Path., 51: 117-126.  \u2191 a et b Boonham, N., Walsh, K., Preston, S., North, J., Smith, P. and Barker, I. (2002). The detection of tuber necrotic isolates of Potato Virus Y, and the accurate discrimination of PVY O , Pvy N and Pvy C strains using RT-PCR. J. Virol. Meth., 102: 103\u2013112.  \u2191 Lorenzen, J.H., Meacham, T., Berger, P.H., Shiel, P.J., Crosslin, J.M., Hamm, P.B. and Kopp, H. (2006). Whole genome characterization of Potato virus Y isolates collected in the western USA and their comparision to isolates from Europe and Canada. Arch. Virol., 151: 1055-1074.  \u2191 A B and C (in) Halbert, S.E., Corsini, D.L. and Wiebe, M.A. (2003). Potato virus Y transmission efficiency for some common aphids in Idaho. Amer. J. Pot. Res., 80: 87-91.  \u2191 a et b Radcliffe, E.B. and Ragsdale, D.W. (2002). Aphid-transmitted potato viruses: The importance of understanding vector biology. Amer. J. Pot. Res. 79: 353-386.  \u2191 a et b (in) Radcliffe, E.B. (1982). Insect pests of potato. Ann. R. Ento., 27: 173-204.  \u2191 (in) Ragsdale, D.W., Radcliffe, E.B., DiFonzo, C.D. (1994). Action thresholds for an aphid vector of potato leaf roll virus, pp. 99-110. In: Zehnder, G.W., Powelson, M.L., Jansson, R.K. and Raman, K.V. [ed.], Advances in potato pest biology and management. American Phytopathological Society, Minnesota, USA.  \u2191 a et b (in) Van Hoof, H.A. (1980). Aphid vectors of potato virus YN. Neth. J. Pl. Path., 86: 159.  \u2191 (in) Thompson, G.J. (1997). Study and Control of Virus Disease or Potatoes. In: Agricultural Research Council Roodeplaat: Potato Research 1996\/1997. Agricultural Research Council, Pretoria.  \u2191 a et b (in) Robert, Y., Woodford, J.A.T. and Ducray-Bourdin, D.G. (2000). Some epidemiological approaches to the control of aphid-borne virus diseases in seed potato crops in northern Europe. Vir. Res. 71: 33-47.  \u2191 (in) Gray, S.M. (1996). Plant virus proteins involved in natural vector transmission. Trends Microbiol. 4: 259-264.  \u2191 (in) Bradley, R.H.E. and Rideout, D.W. (1953). Comparative transmission of Potato virus Y by four aphid species that infect potatoes. Can. J. Zool., 31: 333-341.  \u2191 (in) Harrison, B.D. (1984). CMI\/AAB Descriptions of plant viruses. Potato leafroll virus 291 (no. 36 revised). www.dpvweb.net\/dpv\/showdpv.php?dvpno=291.  \u2191 (in) Kostiw, M. (1975). Investigation on the retention of potato viruses M and Y in two species of aphids (Myzus persicae Sulz. and Aphis nasturtii Kalt.). Pot. Res., 18: 637\u2013640.  \u2191 a et b (in) Carrington, J.C. and Freed, D.D. (1990). Cap-independent enhancement of translation by a plant potyvirus 5\u2019 nontranslated region. J. Virol., 64: 1590-1597.  \u2191 (in) Wu, X and Shaw, J.G. (1998). Evidence that assembly of a potyvirus begins near the 5\u2019terminus of the viral RNA. J. Gen. Virol., 79: 1525\u20131529.  \u2191 A B and C (in) Talbot, N.J. (2004). Plant-Pathogen Interaction. Blackwell Publishing. CRC Press.  \u2191 (in) J.R. Edwardson, \u00ab\u00a0Some Properties of the Potato Virus Y Group\u00a0\u00bb, Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations Monograph Series , vol. 4, 1947, p. 398.  \u2191 (in) Dougherty, W.G. and Carrington, J.C. (1988). Expression and function of potyviral gene products. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol., 26: 123-143.  \u2191 Apeal Vuugt, .., all men,. and golden, and golden, 1999). Scleooon Suk that Arw of the 3\u201d 3\u201d Thunister of Treetay of Tregredient. J. cha. Aumtal., 70:229-233.  \u2191 (in) Dallaire, B.J., Charest, P.J., Devantier., Y. And Lalibert\u00e9, J.-F. (1994). Evidence for an internal ribosome entry site within the 5&#8242; Non-Translated Region of Turnip Mosaic Potyvirus RNA. J. Gen. Virol., 75: 3157-3  \u2191 (in) Niepel, M. and Gallie, D.R. (1999). Identification and characterization of the functional elements within the tobacco etch virus 5&#8242; leader required for cap-independent translation. J. Gen. Virol., 79: 897-904.  \u2191 (in) Bagnall, R.H. and Bradley R.H.E. (1958). Resistance to virus Y in the potato. Phytopathology, 48: 61-120.  \u2191 (in) Bushell, M. and Sarnow, P. (2002). Hijacking the translation apparatus by RNA viruses. J. Cell Biol.,158: 395-399.  \u2191 a et b (in) Pompe-novak, M., Gruden, K., Baebler, S., Kre\u010di\u010d-Stres, H., Kova\u010d, M., Jongsma, M. and Ravnikar, M. (2006). Potato virus y induced changes in the gene extension of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.). Physio. and MOL. Pls., 67: 237-247.  \u2191 a et b (in) Baebler \u0160, Kre\u010di\u010d-Stres H, Rotter A, Kogov\u0161ek P, Cankar K, Kok Ej, Gruden K, Kova\u010d M, \u017del j, Pompe-novak M, Ravnikar M, 2009. Pvyntn elicits a diverse Gene Expression Response and Diffo Potato Genotypes In the first 12 h after inoculation. MOL Plant Pathol 10, 263-275.  \u2191 (in) Kre\u010di\u010d-Stres H., Vu\u010dak C., Ravnikar M., Kova\u010d M. 2005. Systemic Potato virus y Ntn infection and levels of salicylic and gentisic acids in different potato genotypes. Plant Pathol, 54: 441-447  \u2191 (in) Dermastia M., Ravnikar M. 1996. Altered cytokinin pattern and enhanced tolerance to potato virus Y NT N in the susceptible potato cultivar (Solanum tuberosum L.) grown in vitro. Physiol Mol Plant P, 48: 65-71  \u2191 (in) Pompe-Novak M., Wrischer M., Ravnikar M. 2001. Ulrastructure of chloroplasts in leaves of potato plants infeceted by potato virus Y Ntn . Phyton, 41: 215-226  \u2191 Milavec M., Ravnikar M., Kova\u010d M. 2001. Peroxidases and photosynthetic pigments in susceptible potato infected with potato virus YNTN. Plant Physiol Bioch 39: 891-898  \u2191 (in) Gruden K., \u0160trukelj B., Ravnikar M., Herzog-Veronja B. 2000. A Putative Virial Resistance-Connected Protein Isolated from Potato Cultivar Sant\u00e9 Resistant To Pvy Ntn infection. Phyton, 40: 191-200  Related articles [ modifier | Modifier and code ] external links [ modifier | Modifier and code ]  "},{"@context":"http:\/\/schema.org\/","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"item":{"@id":"https:\/\/wiki.edu.vn\/all2en\/wiki32\/#breadcrumbitem","name":"Enzyklop\u00e4die"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"item":{"@id":"https:\/\/wiki.edu.vn\/all2en\/wiki32\/virus-and-of-the-pomme-of-land-wikipedia\/#breadcrumbitem","name":"virus and of the pomme of land \u2014 Wikipedia"}}]}]