Great minds must think alike....Did you see my post only minutes after yours.?

Well at least we are concerned minds.

ak

The miticide/acaricide that used to be approved was Cygon2E and it was systemic. It is no longer available.

Bayer sells an acaricide called "Forbid" and it's being used in some gardens. I don't know any specifics about it. Bayer plans to have an additional acaricide next year that is supposed to be (according to notes I took) all natural, but I don't know any specifics about it.

If I were cleansing canes/stems, I'd probably used horticultural oil on them, applied heavily. The mites transpiration is through their 'skins' or carapaces- they have no respiratory system per se- so hort oil would drown them, as would imersion later in water.

The main thing is to take lots of canes from different canes and then to watch them with extreme vigilance as they root and then start to grow. Be as responsible as you would want your neighbors to be.

In my opinion, there is no "responsible" way to move plant material from a plant known to be infected with mites/pathogens to another area. What rose is worth that, may I ask? Even if it were the last of that clone in the world, it is still not worth that (and I am a total advocate of saving "lost" roses).

It is rather optimistic to assume, I think, that one can "knock down" or drown 100% of the mites and be sure one has done so --even with some hypothetical new "miracle" miticide. They are rather small. Human execution of tasks is not 100% perfect (oops, missed a spot). What about resistant mites? (Genetic variation is always a possibility.) And what if, despite "extreme vigilance", one somehow misses the new infection center on a single overlooked cane that one has brought to the new area?

The chytrid fungus killing frogs and SOD (sudden oak death) are just two of the pathogens wreaking havoc on ecosystems in this area that were thoughtlessly (but not intentionally) introduced. Are you telling me there is someone out there who would deliberately consider risking a similar act?

I don't have that much faith in human "cleverness", personally, to think that this is a good idea.

This post was edited by catspa on Wed, May 29, 13 at 23:31

I second catspa. If your friend knows or even suspects a rose is infected, she should leave it behind. It's relatively easy to get healthy cuttings or bands; it's hell on earth to deal with RRD.

I have to agree. So many plagues have come into CA in the past few years that our agricultural areas are more endangered with every passing day.

I have for years been grateful that RRD has never become well-established here -- because if it did, I don't think I'd have the heart to struggle on. (And, like Catspa, I am a strong advocate of preserving, propagating, and distributing "lost" roses.)

Taking infected material into a new area is, IMHO, irresponsible. If they do it, I hope that for God's sake they don't bring it HERE.

Jeri

Fortunately, this proposal would be taking special varieties from Kentucky to Indiana, so it would keep the RRD within its current range. The person posing the question is sufficiently educated and aware not to risk exposing new areas to the issue. Thanks. Kim

Well, then, at least it is only their own grief they risk, if diligence and vigilance go awry.

A niggling point: movement within an existing range certainly poses less risk of new harm, but may not be without effect. Introduction of novel alleles to new populations of pathogen or vector (mites) are a lesser risk, with unpredictable effects (one can always hope for outbreeding depression, but the alternative might be a new-and-improved population).

Kentucky and Indiana are right next to each other, at least -- and not near California.

Niggle away.

You may not have read the recent paper from the scientists at the University of Arkansas where they tested RRV materials from the east and found essentially a single population across the eastern USA.

No, I have not seen that paper and my search skills have failed me in trying to find it. A single population of virus, per genetic analysis, yes? (not too surprising, actually). It would be interesting to know about the mites, too. On the one hand there is likely to be a lot of gene flow due to their mobility, but populations at distance might still show genetic difference.

The University of Arkansas team's discovery that it's a virus was a huge step forward because it clarified the battlefield, immensely. Unfortunately, the battle does not favor the rose gardener. Of the two halves of the problem, the virus itself is in some ways the lesser half. If the virus' primary or sole mode of movement were through human activities (e.g., grafting, like the mosaic viruses), the solution would be straightforward.

Instead, the primary vector is an elusive, difficult-to-kill, highly mobile insect with fair likelihood of evading or resisting contact poisons/methods of any type because of its behaviors. Without a systemic miticide available, attempting to suppress or eradicate the mite population is most likely futile. Even with a systemic miticide, development of resistance is always a possibility.

So, as you said, Ann, the only real strategy (other than leaving those roses where they are) is to watch closely for infection. It would be great if an accessible test for the virus in tissues were to be developed soon, rather than having to rely on morphological observations.

This post was edited by catspa on Fri, May 31, 13 at 14:30

Now that the virus has been isolated there are efforts in at least three different labs to come up with an ELISA test to confirm the disease.

As of a month ago, no ELISA test. I don't know if AGDIA is also working on it.

AGDIA did have a really good discussion on their website of how ELISA tests worked. If it isn't still there, it may be cached.

"Now that scientists have been able to identify the virus, a specific PCR virus test is available (the current fee is $25. per sample.) from Oklahoma State University ."

http://www.npdn.org/webfm_send/1874.

Here is a link that might be useful: after opening the link scroll down

Interesting.

When I supplied samples to Arkansas (some are referenced in the Laney et al. paper in that link), the samples had to be frozen, shipped with dry ice via FedEx that only allows dry ice on certain of their transports.

Most airlines limit the amount of dry ice which can be sent on their flights, too. I helped a friend pack some lamb for his mother which he took with him on the flight to Washington State as lamb where she is is often difficult to find and very expensive. The limit was one pound of dry ice. More than that and it's considered an "explosive". Kim

Sure. There's a guy in jail in Long Beach, CA -- charged with setting off a Dry Ice bomb at Disneyland.

I think it ships as Hazardous Material.

Jeri

We had a Styro Foam food shipping container left over from a Christmas present, with the outer cardboard box. The lamb was well frozen and freezer packaged. One pound of dry ice and the lamb were all that would fit inside. It was all sealed, then sealed inside the outer cardboard box. His name and address were on it and a nylon strap with metal handle was tied around it so it could be carried on board like luggage. He set it on the belt to be XRayed and the TSA agent got a sick look on his face. You KNOW what he thought it was. My buddy told him it was lamb and why he was flying with it, and that it only contained one pound of dry ice, which they could see in the XRay. The other agent asked if he could open it and began untying the strap, which was tied in multiple knots as it was too long for the package. He told the agent he was welcomed to, as long as HE tied it all back securely as it was. The agent decided it wasn't worth it and the lamb and my friend were on their way to the plane. I still laugh at the thought of the agent seeing 'chopped up meat' inside a box with dry ice going through his machine... They THINK they've seen it all! LOL! Kim