• Aucun résultat trouvé

Assessing the mismatch between incubation and latency for a vector-borne plant disease

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Partager "Assessing the mismatch between incubation and latency for a vector-borne plant disease"

Copied!
19
0
0

Texte intégral

(1)

HAL Id: hal-02742329

https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-02742329

Submitted on 3 Jun 2020

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access

archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-entific research documents, whether they are pub-lished or not. The documents may come from teaching and research institutions in France or abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.

Assessing the mismatch between incubation and latency

for a vector-borne plant disease

Loup Rimbaud, Agnès Delaunay, Sylvie Dallot, Sonia Borron, Samuel

Soubeyrand, Gael Thébaud, Emmanuel Jacquot

To cite this version:

Loup Rimbaud, Agnès Delaunay, Sylvie Dallot, Sonia Borron, Samuel Soubeyrand, et al.. Assessing the mismatch between incubation and latency for a vector-borne plant disease. 2014 APS-CPS Joint Meeting, The American Phytopathological Society. Saint-Paul, USA., Aug 2014, Minneapolis, United States. �10.1094/PHYTO-104-11-S3.1�. �hal-02742329�

(2)

Loup Rimbaud, Ph.D. student

Montpellier SupAgro

UMR BGPI, Montpellier, France

Assessing the mismatch between incubation

and latency for a vector-borne plant disease

(3)

Latency vs. Incubation

t

i

Symptom expression

t

0

Inoculation

t

L

Infectious plant

t

L

= t

i

t

LATENCY

INCUBATION

t

Transmission

Influenza virus

Hepatitis B virus

Examples

(4)

Latency vs. Incubation

t

L

> t

i

t

LATENCY

INCUBATION

t

t

0

Inoculation

Symptom expression

t

i

t

L

Infectious plant

Transmission

Mycosphaerella fijiensis

Septoria nodorum

Examples

(5)

Latency vs. Incubation

t

L

< t

i

t

LATENCY

INCUBATION

t

t

0

Inoculation

Symptom expression

t

i

t

L

Infectious plant

Transmission

Rabies virus

Hepatitis A virus

Examples

(6)

t

LATENCY

INCUBATION

t

?

t

0

PPV inoculation

Symptom expression

t

i

t

L

Infectious plant

PPV

transmission

(7)

Disease

Sharka

Most damaging disease on Prunus

10 billions Euros of economic losses

worldwide in 30 years

Pathogen

Plum pox virus (PPV)

Potyvirus

Vectors

Aphids: > 20 species

Human: transfer of infected material

Hosts of

economic

interest

Prunus

e.g.: apricot, plum and peach trees

Sc o tt B a u er

(8)

Sharka management strategy in France

Since the 1990’s

 Frequent visual inspections of the orchards

 Removal of the symptomatic trees (or whole orchards)

 Protection of the nurseries

Disappointing outcomes:

Costly strategy

Still many trees infected each year

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Year of prospection

Symptomatic trees detected in Gard (South of France)

(Data from regional offices of French food agency)

N u mbe r o f tr e e s

Infected trees without symptoms

cannot be detected?

(9)

Transmission

rate

Experimental approach

Inoculation

t

0

Transmission 1

t

1

= t

0

+ 7 days

Transmission 2

t

2

= t

0

+ 11 days

Symptom expression

t

i

N. benthamiana

Transmission 3

t

3

= t

0

+ 18 days

Δt

k

= t

k

- t

i

GF 305

A generic approach

for infectious diseases

Inoculation

Transmission

test

(10)

Symptom monitoring

No

symptom

1

2

3

Definition of 5 classes of leaves:

Highly severe

symptoms

Intermediary

symptoms

Light

symptoms

4

0

Severe

symptoms

(11)

Validation of the protocol by simulation

3 transition speeds to

simulate the latency period

3 scenarios for the

mismatch value

Unbiased and precise

estimate of the mismatch

Rimbaud et al., Acta Horticulturae, in press.

2 symptom expression dynamics to

simulate the incubation period

Data Models Fast Intermediate Slow DPI Inf e c ti ous pote nt ia l

(12)

t

m

s

m

e

max

.

4

max

1

Maximum

transmission rate

(plateau)

Transition speed

(slope at the

inflection point)

Mismatch between

incubation and latency

(abscissa of the inflection point)

Binomial generalized linear model

Parameters estimated by maximum likelihood

,

~

tested

infected

B

n

N

Pr o p o rtion o f in fec te d te st p lan ts

Day after symptom expression

(13)

Result: a 0.85 day mismatch at the leaf scale

Symptoms appear on a

leaf 1 day before it rapidly

becomes infectious

INCUBATION

LATENCY

m = 0.85 day [0.51 ; 1.22]

τ

max

= 0.84

[0.78 ; 0.89]

s

m

= 0.40 day

-1

[0.22 ; 0.61]

(14)

Symptom severity class

Symptom category

No symptom Highly severe

symptoms Intermediary symptoms Light symptoms Severe symptoms

A correlation with symptom severity

Binomial generalized linear model:

The more severe the symptoms, the

higher the transmission rate

No

symptoms

Severe

symptoms

a

b

c

d

d

R

2 McF

= 0.41

Vertical bars: CI

95%

(15)

Conclusions

A generic experimental approach has been developed to assess precisely

the mismatch between incubation and latency

Symptom severity and transmission rate are correlated

 As suggested for Cucumber mosaic virus on Cucurbita pepo

(Zitter & Gonsalves, 1990)

Cauliflower mosaic virus on Brassica rapa

(Doumayrou et al., 2012)

Under our experimental conditions, latency and incubation of PPV

infection of young peach plants are almost synchronized

 Symptomatic plants are efficient sources of PPV

(Manachini et al., 2004; Damsteegt et al., 2007;

Moreno et al., 2009)

 Beet mosaic virus: latency shorter than incubation of 1 day in Beta vulgaris

(Dusi &

Peters, 1999)

A strategy based on visual detection of plants infected by PPV could be efficient if

symptoms are detected without delay?

(16)

Future works

Modeling the epidemiological impact of the delay between symptom

expression and tree removal

Development of an early diagnosis procedures

 Detect an infection before symptom expression

LATENCY

INCUBATION

Delay before detection

Delay before removal

Symptom expression

Infectious plant

Inoculation

t

Transmission

Detection

Removal

Transmission

(17)

Thank you for your attention

Financial supports:

Direction Générale de l’Armement

Société Française de Phytopathologie

FranceAgriMer

UR BioSP:

Samuel Soubeyrand

UMR BGPI - Epi2V Team

:

Emmanuel Jacquot

Gaël Thébaud

Sylvie Dallot

Agnès Delaunay

Sonia Borron

Isabelle Abt

Marlène Souquet

Acknowledgments:

(18)

Bonus: impact of the maximum transmission rate

The absissa of the

inflection point is a

robust estimator of the

mismatch between

incubation and latency

(simulated experiment)

(19)

Bonus: generalization to older trees

t

0

Inoculation

LATENCY INCUBATION

t

LATENCY INCUBATION

Latency longuer than incubation by less than 1 day

Références

Documents relatifs

In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy, WHO is issuing this position statement to clarify its stance on the evaluation and use

Every year more than one billion people are infected and more than one million people die from vector-borne diseases including malaria, dengue, schistosomiasis, leishmaniasis,

In this work, we propose and investigate a modified SIR model which integrates the effect of temperature on spreading of vector-borne diseases. Here, we con- sider two type

For soilborne plant pathogens, for which a SID epidemiological model is often appropriate (Fig. 2A) [8,30] we implement the adaptation by dividing the non- symptomatic infectious

We propose a model that can translate the dynamics of vector-borne diseases, for this model we compute the basic reproduction number and show that if R 0 &lt; ζ &lt; 1 the DFE

In the present study, we provide evidence linking host phenology to pathogenic spread, using R. Pathogenic spread depends on host/pathogen interaction, which is notably affected by

Water contamination, chemical factors: Some species (A. funestus) breed in clear fresh water with vegetation, whereas others are adapted to breeding in brackish water (A. sundaicus)

However, when mechanisms of human DENV emergence due to host range expansion of sylvatic strains by adaptation to use humans as reservoirs (via increased magnitude of