# Tospovirus?



## mSummers (Jan 14, 2016)

I think two of my Phalaenopsis have Tospovirus (see attached images). Have I made the correct identification? If so, how long do I have to isolate the plants in the same area to make sure they don't have it as well? I have another Paph and 2 Phals on the same shelf of the plant stand.


----------



## gonewild (Jan 14, 2016)

Definitely virus.

Isolate immediately.


----------



## mSummers (Jan 14, 2016)

Do any other plants carry orchid viruses? In addition to the Paphs and Phals on that shelf I have Cats on another shelf and African Violets and various succulents on another stand adjacent to this one.


----------



## gonewild (Jan 14, 2016)

mSummers said:


> Do any other plants carry orchid viruses? In addition to the Paphs and Phals on that shelf I have Cats on another shelf and African Violets and various succulents on another stand adjacent to this one.



Yes. Cattleya especially are prone to virus infection.
Many other plants, actually most other plants can also get virus.
BUT not all virus species will infect all plants. Viruses can be specific to certain genera of plants. It's possible that the virus you have may only affect Phalaenopsis. But it really takes an expert and lab analysis to id the virus.
So the only safe option is to remove the infected plants.


----------



## mSummers (Jan 14, 2016)

Thanks! I'll destroy the infected plants in the morning. Does the virus look the same in Paphs? I don't see any signs on the virus on those yet


----------



## chrismende (Jan 15, 2016)

I suggest contacting Agdia to purchase test kits. It costs approximately $5 to test a plant and is well worth it. The company is very personable and you can send them pictures like yours to request the correct kits. They are a wealth of information and give talks to orchid societies as well!


----------



## gonewild (Jan 15, 2016)

mSummers said:


> Thanks! I'll destroy the infected plants in the morning. Does the virus look the same in Paphs? I don't see any signs on the virus on those yet



Basically virus is not a great concern for Paphs. Until recently it was assumed that Paphs dont get virus. They do and can get virus but only rarely do symptoms ever show. Dont destroy your paphs just because they were in contact with the Phals. Chances are the phals were infected with the virus before you acquired them.


----------



## Justin (Jan 15, 2016)

I agree discard those plants immediately. If you are concerned about your other plants as chris mentioned test kits for the.most common orchid viruses are inexpensive (also the only way to know for sure). You can also send in leaf samples to critter creek labs who will test them for you (also inexpensive).


----------



## mSummers (Jan 15, 2016)

Thanks for the additional replies. I'll look into the testing kits. I'm leaning toward destroying all the plants in that group. The 2 Paphs are poor quality plants and I would like to grow Phals so I don't want my Paphs to carry the virus and have this happen again


----------



## gonewild (Jan 15, 2016)

mSummers said:


> Thanks for the additional replies. I'll look into the testing kits. I'm leaning toward destroying all the plants in that group. The 2 Paphs are poor quality plants and I would like to grow Phals so I don't want my Paphs to carry the virus and have this happen again



Wise decision.


----------



## SlipperFan (Jan 15, 2016)

Unfortunately, you can't always know that a plant is free from viruses when you purchase it. It's one of the things us orchid addicts live with.


----------



## Hien (Jan 15, 2016)

that is strange.. some of my phals just suddenly develop something too (and very fast) I am not sure what yet..
-spray water temperature damaged
-fungus
-bacteria
-virus
-insect
maybe catching from other plants I bought into the collection recently .
I am searching the internet and found this article

http://www.orchidsocietynsw.com.au/Documents/Orchid_Viruses.pdf


----------



## NYEric (Jan 16, 2016)

Hmmm ELISA, that's the same test I take!


----------



## Ozpaph (Jan 16, 2016)

Hien said:


> http://www.orchidsocietynsw.com.au/Documents/Orchid_Viruses.pdf



Great slide show - thank-you!


----------



## Happypaphy7 (Jan 20, 2016)

mSummers said:


> Thanks for the additional replies. I'll look into the testing kits. I'm leaning toward destroying all the plants in that group. The 2 Paphs are poor quality plants and I would like to grow Phals so I don't want my Paphs to carry the virus and have this happen again



Smart decision!


----------



## SlipperKing (Jan 20, 2016)

The timing is interesting on this topic. I had a recent conversation with Rick Lockwood on treating and curing plants of viruses through nutrition. Interesting stuff, more to come I'm sure.


----------



## mSummers (Jan 20, 2016)

SlipperKing said:


> The timing is interesting on this topic. I had a recent conversation with Rick Lockwood on treating and curing plants of viruses through nutrition. Interesting stuff, more to come I'm sure.




That is interesting. I've always read that viruses are incurable. I guess we'll have to wait for him to publish the findings


----------



## Ray (Jan 20, 2016)

I don't think they are curable, but a strong, healthy plant can subsist just fine. 

Using myself as an example, I had chicken pox as a kid, but my body and the virus coexisted peaceably for many decades. When I got cancer, my immune system was overtaxed by that, and Bingo! - shingles. 

Fortunately, antivirals knocked it back. 


Ray Barkalow (via Tapatalk)


----------



## SlipperKing (Jan 21, 2016)

"Fortunately, antivirals knocked it back. " That's the key Ray. It will happen in the plant kingdom as well.


----------



## Ray (Jan 21, 2016)

Yeah, but "knocking it back" is not the same as a "cure". I'm still susceptible to future shingles outbreaks if my immune system wanes.


----------



## SlipperFan (Jan 21, 2016)

There's an anti-viral shot for shingles prevention. Would that be possible for plants?


----------



## Happypaphy7 (Jan 22, 2016)

Short answer is no, it's impossible.
Anti-Shingles shot is a vaccine, which only works for thing with immune systems with antibodies, which plants do not have.

However, if there could be a way to somehow inject into plants which would go after virus and destroy them, that might be high risk of also interfering with plants' own cells in negative ways. 

I have no idea what the latest update on this, but don't think I've heard anything miraculous coming yet.

Just think about some horrible side effects of antibiotic or chemo therapy against cancer. They don't just go after the "bugs".


----------



## gonewild (Jan 22, 2016)

Happypaphy7 said:


> However, if there could be a way to somehow inject into plants which would go after virus and destroy them, that might be high risk of also interfering with plants' own cells in negative ways.



Plants have the ability to absorb and translocate chemicals throughout their cellular system (systemic). So it is possible to vaccinate a plant or treat a pathogen after an infection has occurred.


----------



## Happypaphy7 (Jan 22, 2016)

I know that, but you are not understanding.
Reread my last post.
Vaccines only work with living organisms which have an immune system where anti-bodies are made. Plants do not have such system. So no, it is impossible to vaccinate plants. Vaccination and systemic treatment are not the same thing.


----------



## gonewild (Jan 22, 2016)

Happypaphy7 said:


> I know that, but you are not understanding.
> Reread my last post.
> Vaccines only work with living organisms which have an immune system where anti-bodies are made. Plants do not have such system. So no, it is impossible to vaccinate plants. Vaccination and systemic treatment are not the same thing.



Actually I do understand or I would not have made a comment.
Plants do not have immune systems in the strict sense but they do have immune responses which can be triggered by introduced substances. If you introduce a substance into a plant and the result is that the plant gains resistance to a disease then in essence it has been vaccinated.


----------



## Happypaphy7 (Jan 22, 2016)

Clearly, you do not understand.


----------



## gonewild (Jan 22, 2016)

Happypaphy7 said:


> Clearly, you do not understand.



You said "Plants don't have an immune system"....

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v444/n7117/full/nature05286.html

and

http://nopr.niscair.res.in/bitstream/123456789/23379/1/IJEB 42(3) 244-252.pdf

You said "plants can't be vaccinated".......

http://utahpests.usu.edu/htm/utah-pests-news/spring2011/immunized/

and

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1309008?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents


----------



## Happypaphy7 (Jan 22, 2016)

Lance, maybe I should have been more specific when I said you are not understanding, but there was not a whole lot of information I dealt with, so I didn't feel it really was necessary.
Perhaps, I should have said you are "stretching" the meaning of vaccination.

What you shared here are nothing new to me, and I have no problem with them. But none of them are actually about vaccination.
Plus, I have never said that plants do not have an immune system. 
You took that part of out the context. Maybe that's the problem?
I said plants do not have an immune system where antibodies are produced. 
Please read the whole thing. This system, an adaptive immune system, is only found in vertebrates (notice one of your sources points this out, too), and vaccination is what takes advantage of such system in dealing with diseases.

I'm sure you are aware, but there are different types of immune system.
Even the fact that plants are covered with layers sort of like animals being covered in skin, is part of innate immune system blocking foreign unwanted and potentially harmful materials from coming inside the tissues.

Look at some of the lines on those sources you provided.
They used quotation marks when they used the words like immunize or vaccinate, because they were using those words not in their original accurate meaning, but to get their points across.
Hopefully it's clear this time around.


----------



## gonewild (Jan 22, 2016)

Happypaphy7 said:


> Perhaps, I should have said you are "stretching' the meaning of vaccinating.



What's wrong with that? 
Most people would consider immunization and vaccination as the same thing. 
No more stretching than "weakly weekly" 

The point is that it may be possible to immunize plants against a virus because plants do have a type of immune system and viruses can be keep in check by certain introduced substances.


----------



## Ozpaph (Jan 22, 2016)

It would be cheaper and easier to replace the plant (most times) that 'treat' it hoping for a cure. And that plant would still be an infection source.


----------



## gonewild (Jan 22, 2016)

Ozpaph said:


> It would be cheaper and easier to replace the plant (most times) that 'treat' it hoping for a cure. And that plant would still be an infection source.



Agree completely. However the idea of immunizing would be to prevent an infection from occurring in the first place.


----------



## Happypaphy7 (Jan 22, 2016)

What's wrong with that? Everything! oke:
Look what just happened in the last few posts.
It interferes with efficient exchange of ideas. 

Immunization can mean basically the same thing as vaccination in a context where it is clear that it means "to give someone a vaccine to prevent infection by a disease", but immunize can also mean something more general than just being vaccinated.
So it should be clear in the context of what is being discussed, but if you use immunize to mean something more general (just to mean to make immune) than just vaccinate but present it as they are the same, then obviously a problem will occur because they are not.

The "weakly, weekly" is nothing like this.
There is no stretching there. It is just an overly simplified and hence convenient way for many people to remind themselves to not overdo with fertilizing their plants. Nothing more, nothing less. 
Ray just came in to twist things around.


----------



## Happypaphy7 (Jan 22, 2016)

Ozpaph said:


> It would be cheaper and easier to replace the plant (most times) that 'treat' it hoping for a cure. And that plant would still be an infection source.



When we talk about hobby flower plants, yes, true. Just toss the sick ones and start new. 

These ideas and scientific research aim something much bigger though.
Damage to crops by these pathogenic organisms can be pretty severe costing lots of money, or in case of food crops, putting lots of lives in danger.
So tossing sick ones out is not really an option.

Hence, all these spraying of toxic chemicals and such that harms the environment and everything in it.
It would be nice to eventually one day to come up with a way to somehow "program" plants to better fight off diseases on their own.
That unfortunately is still far into the future (if ever!) as we are just beginning to better understand how plants do their things regarding this matter.


----------



## naoki (Jan 23, 2016)

If you have enough money, you can completely cure orchids with virus (CymMV and ORSV). Basically you use antiviral drug to make a small meristematic cells free of virii, and you use tissue culture (several rounds of sub-sampling). You need quite a few try to get clean samples. But it is not practical unless it is a very valuable plant.

Also it has been shown that SA reduces the viral transmission rate (I forgot the details, but it is scientifically shown). I'm not sure if it works for orchids, though.

Here is a recent review paper:
Alessandra Panettoni, Andrea Luvisi & E. Triolo . 2013. Review. Elimination of viruses in plants: twenty years of progress. SPANISH JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH 11(1):173-188. DOI: 10.5424/sjar/2013111-3201

Kai-Wen Chien, Dinesh Chandra Agrawal, Hsin-Sheng Tsay, Chin-An Chang, 2015. Elimination of mixed ‘Odontoglossum ringspot’ and ‘Cymbidium mosaic’ viruses from Phalaenopsis hybrid ‘V3’ through shoot-tip culture and protocorm-like body selection. Crop Protection 67: 1–6 (abstract only)

Pattent for ribavirin

Aspirin vs TMV (abstract only): http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0042682279900199


----------



## Ray (Jan 23, 2016)

Happypaphy7 said:


> Ray just came in to twist things around.




Yeah. I'm bad about that, wanting things to be factual and precise....


----------



## Happypaphy7 (Jan 23, 2016)

I actually have no problems with being factual and precise, but here you are again, the way you put it sounds like your opinions are factual and precise, but I am here spreading the opposite, which is not true.

Rather tiring since everything was already dealt with in the other thread I thought. That particular phrase of weakly weekly, sure, it is vauge. Everyone knows that!!! Are you dumb or something? 
It is just a general guideline or advise, and that is how it's understood, and it's not my invention, either. Yes, it is imprecise, hence general guideline. 
But can't really say unfactual because of it being imprecise.

My main issue was one, you being rude, and here again with the tone of your comment. I have no problem with your own "theory" on certain things, and that is not what I meant by "twisting". Adding your own opinion is welcome. The whole intention, context was twisted with a touch of putting others down.

Plus, since you want to be factual and precise the way you see it, when you introduce terms like semi-hydro, it is also imprecise since it was not clear what it really is. Not everyone understands semi-hydro culture setup and maintenance the way you practice it. Also, your claim on "underaeration" being the reason for roots being killed off is not only just a single sided way to view the issue, but not totally factual nor precise.
Again, adding your opinion is welcome. Try to be factual and precise, great!
I am perfectly fine with that, but when you leave remarks dissing others when you have your own flaws as I have just pointed out here briefly, it is not appreciated.


----------



## Happypaphy7 (Jan 23, 2016)

Thanks for the info.
It is great to know this!
I've read in the older orchid magazine that one of those two viruses can be removed in meristematic cells but not the other. This was years ago.

Is this in practice at all, though?
I mean, how expensive is it? I would think that it should still be profitable to put in a bit more investment initially to produce virus free plants? That is, if the day comes when this will work for orchids.



naoki said:


> If you have enough money, you can completely cure orchids with virus (CymMV and ORSV). Basically you use antiviral drug to make a small meristematic cells free of virii, and you use tissue culture (several rounds of sub-sampling). You need quite a few try to get clean samples. But it is not practical unless it is a very valuable plant.
> 
> Also it has been shown that SA reduces the viral transmission rate (I forgot the details, but it is scientifically shown). I'm not sure if it works for orchids, though.
> 
> ...


----------

