J Gen Virol Tips for Better Browsing
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Gen Virol 71 (1990), 1865-1868; DOI 10.1099/0022-1317-71-8-1865
© 1990 Society for General Microbiology

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Zheng, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Edwards, M. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Zheng, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Edwards, M. C.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Zheng, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Edwards, M. C.

Expression of Resistance to Barley Stripe Mosaic Virus in Barley and Oat Protoplasts

Yuzhi Zheng and Michael C. Edwards

United States Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service Cereal Crops Research Unit, Northern Crop Science Laboratory, P.O. Box 5677, State University Station, Fargo, North Dakota 58105, U.S.A.

Mesophyll protoplasts from both susceptible and resistant hosts were inoculated with RNA purified from barley stripe mosaic virus (BSMV) strains CV52 and CV42 using the polyethylene glycol (PEG) method. Protoplasts derived from the susceptible Hordeum vulgare L. cv. Black Hulless were susceptible to both BSMV strains, as indicated by fluorescein isothiocyanate staining and ELISA. More than 80% of protoplasts derived from an oat cultivar resistant to CV52, but not to CV42, were readily infected by either CV52 or CV42. Protoplasts from 10 barley lines resistant to CV42 remained resistant to CV42, although a limited number of protoplasts were infected. Functional resistance in the cultured barley protoplasts, but not in those from oat plants, suggests that resistance in these barley lines may be the result of restriction of replication, whereas resistance in oat plants is more likely due to restriction of cell-to-cell movement.

Received 20 February 1990; accepted 9 April 1990.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
INT J SYST EVOL MICROBIOL MICROBIOLOGY J GEN VIROL
J MED MICROBIOL ALL SGM JOURNALS
Copyright © 1990 by the Society for General Microbiology.