Re: Variegation and viruses--addition.
- Subject: Re: Variegation and viruses--addition.
- From: "Julius Boos" <email@example.com>
- Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 09:47:16 -0600 (CST)
----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Marak <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: Multiple recipients of list AROID-L <email@example.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 03, 2002 11:39 PM
Subject: Re: Variegation and viruses
Just a couple quick points that I will add to Steve`s excellent note on
virus`/varigated aroids (below)--- I have noted that in MOST cases when an
aroid has been or is infected by Dasheen (or 'taro') mosiac virus, it goes
into a decline, leaves begin to be produced at a smaller size, then as
deformed smaller leaves, and the plant becomes smaller/weaker over time,
while in aroids like some Philodendrons and Monstera that do occur in
varigated leaf clones, these plants do NOT decline in condition or size,
each new leaf is generally larger (if it is a young plant) and more healthy
than the previous leaf. I hope that this discussion has helped all out
there that grow and enjoy varigated aroids.
>>Plant viruses seem to be the subject of as much interest and concern, and
in some cases paranoia and misinformation as computer viruses. They come
up regularly on two other lists I'm on, and occasionally elsewhere.
Obviously, they do exist and do damage, in some cases (TMV) serious
economic damage. Every serious orchid grower I know takes a variety of
precautions. (If only they took the same degree of precaution against
John, I am not an expert but I do recall a study of variegated plants
which showed that the vast majority are not the result of any disease but
are rather "chimeras", multiple cell lines growing and dividing in the
plant, one of which is colored differently than the other. There is an
excellent discussion of variegation out on the net, if memory serves on
the TAMU web site (Texas A&M University, where there is a lot of good
botanical and horticultural information.)
There was also some discussion of the old Rembrandt type tulips, which did
have a virus (some unimaginative name like "tulip color-break virus", I
think), and the newer, non-virused tulips which are now being sold. The
breeders have gone to great lengths to produce tulips which look similar
to the old virused ones, and also to ensure that none of their stocks are
virused. (There are a few die-hards who feel the new varieties just don't
have the same subtlety of color, and still grow the old virused ones. No
reputable grower will sell one, of course, so they have to keep them alive
As far as I know, you're correct in that there is no cure for a virused
plant. Practically everyone recommends destroying it.
But - harking back to the paranoia I mentioned earlier - do be sure a
plant really is virused before you sentence it to death. As with computer
viruses, there seems often to be a rush to judgement.
On another list a while back, a grower and breeder decided to give away
his collection. It was a valuable one, representing years of work.
However, somehow someone heard a rumor that "his collection is virused".
The rumor surfaced on that list. Suddenly, with no real evidence, people
were rushing to destroy not just the plants they'd gotten from the grower,
but even ones which had been near them, despite the counsel of cooler
heads. Someone took samples and had them tested (one of the difficulties
with plant viruses is that knowing for sure requires testing). Result: no
sign of virus in any of the samples.
On Sun, 3 Mar 2002, john s. smolowe wrote:
> Do the various common variegated Philodendrons and Monstera harbor
> are they safe in my collection?
> John Smolowe
-- Steve Marak