Plant hosts of the phytoplasmas and rickettsia-like-organisms associated with strawberry lethal yellows and green petal diseases

Candidatus Phytoplasma australiense (Ca. P. australiense) is associated with the plant diseases strawberry lethal yellows (SLY), strawberry green petal (SGP), papaya dieback (PDB), Australian grapevine yellows (AGY) and Phormium yellow leaf (PYL; New Zealand). Strawberry lethal yellows disease is also associated with a rickettsia-like-organism (RLO) or infrequently with the tomato big bud (TBB) phytoplasma, the latter being associated with a wide range of plant diseases throughout Australia. In contrast, the RLO has been identified only in association with SLY disease, and Ca. P. australiense has been detected only in a limited number of plant host species. The aim of this study was to identify plant hosts that are possible reservoirs of Ca. P. australiense and the SLY RLO. Thirty-one plant species from south-east Queensland were observed with disease between 2001 and 2003 and, of these, 18 species tested positive using phytoplasma-specific primers. The RLO was detected in diseased Jacksonia scoparia and Modiola caroliniana samples collected at Stanthorpe. The TBB phytoplasma was detected in 16 different plant species and Ca. P. australiense Australian grapevine yellows strain was detected in six species. The TBB phytoplasma was detected in plants collected at Nambour, Stanthorpe, Warwick and Brisbane. Ca. P. australiense was detected in plants collected at Nambour, Stanthorpe, Gatton and Allora. All four phytoplasmas were detected in diseased Gomphocarpus physocarpus plants collected at Toowoomba, Allora, Nambour and Gatton. These results indicated that the vector(s) of Ca. P. australiense are distributed throughout south-east Queensland and the diversity of phytoplasmas detected in G. physocarpus suggests it is a feeding source for phytoplasma insect vectors or it has a broad susceptibility to a range of phytoplasmas.

Quality of handling and holding yard environment, and beef cattle temperament: 1. Relationships with flight speed and fear of humans.

Numerous tests have been used to measure beef cattle temperament, but limited research has addressed the relationship between such tests and whether temperament can be modified. One-hundred-and-forty-four steers were given one of three human handling and yarding experiences on six occasions during a 12-month grazing period post-weaning (backgrounding): Good handling/yarding, Poor handling/yarding and Minimal handling/yarding. At the end of this phase the cattle were lot-fed for 78 days, with no handling/yarding treatments imposed, before being transported for commercial slaughter. Temperament was assessed at the start of the experiment, during backgrounding and lot-feeding by flight speed (FS) and a fear of humans test, which measured the proximity to a stimulus person (zone average; ZA), the closest approach to the person (CA) and the amount the cattle moved around the test arena (total transitions; TT). During backgrounding, FS decreased for all treatments and at the end of backgrounding there was no difference between them. The rate of decline, however, was greatest in the Good group, smallest in the Minimal group with the Poor intermediate. In contrast, ZA was affected by treatment, with a greater reduction for the Good group than the others (P = 0.012). During lot-feeding, treatment did not affect FS, but all groups showed a decrease in ZA, with the greatest change in the Poor group, the least in the Good and the Minimal intermediate (P = 0.052). CA was positively correlated with ZA (r = 0.18 to 0.66) and negatively with TT (r = -0.180 to -0.659). FS was consistently correlated with TT only (r = 0.17 to 0.49). These findings suggest that FS and TT measure a similar characteristic, as do ZA and CA, but that these characteristics are different from one another, indicating that temperament is not a unitary trait, but has different facets. FS and TT measure one facet that we suggest is general agitation, whilst ZA and CA measure fear of people. Thus, the cattle became less agitated during backgrounding, but the effect was not permanently influenced by the quantity and quality of handling/yarding. However, Good handling/yarding reduced fearfulness of people. Fear of people was also reduced during lot-feeding, probably as a consequence of frequent exposure to humans in a situation that was neutral or positive for the cattle.