For some reason the edit is not working. The correct link above is:

http://www.rose.org/rose-care-articles/rose-rosette-disease-sadly/

Also, the "do" should be replaced by "due".

--------------------------------------------------------------

Another reference to root to root spread:

"Rose rosette disease is spread in three ways and is a lethal disease for roses. RRD is spread by wind gusts, root to root spread, or a mite that carries the disease."

http://southbranchnursery.com/blog/2015/08/03/rose-rosette-a-recent-surge-in-knock-out-roses/

Barbara,

Your obervations are contrary to what Mark Windham says about replanting. What we need to remember about his test plots is that they are at most three years old and the root to root grafting may take longer in some conditions than in others.

I won't replant for two years in my own gardens because I've seen sick materials come up from left behind roots as much as 18 months after the removal of a sick plant.

Back to my original comments: I had talked with Dr. Giolino after I read her paper. At that time she didn't know much about RRD, because she was monitering her clean roses to keep other viruses out. She was at the RRD summit. I don't know if she's on any of the committees that have come out of/ emerged from/been funded by efforts that came from it.

This what the Golino research group published in a reviewed, accepted by the editor scientific paper about root grafting and virus spread in their virus free gardens:

"RSDaV was detected mainly in two rows of the Foundation Rose Collection. This distribution is suggestive of root grafting in addition to the possibility of vector spread. Earlier work suggested that root grafting is a mechanism of virus spread in roses for viruses associated with rose mosaic (10)"

http://apsjournals.apsnet.org/doi/pdf/10.1094/PDIS-92-4-0508

Ann, I did not read Windham's comments before posting. I am not a scientist, just a gardener. For the past five years I have volunteered in an afflicted public garden and reported what I was seeing.

Not at all surprised that you are waiting 24 months to replant; our director felt we had to replant immediately. Sickening feeling. He did give up on the boundary hedge of red and pink KO's, and replaced them with hollies.

When it became clear that staff was not monitoring the garden and promptly removing the infected roses, I ceased volunteering there. Did not want to spend my time there wielding a shovel and wrestling roses into body bags..

Sorry, neglected to mention that the garden is in coastal SE Virginia, similar in climate to Charleston, SC.

" Do not replant immediately as any infected roots left behind by the infected rose may root graft to the recently planted rose and cause infection."

ALSO

" The disease can also be transmitted by pruning shears."

The above are from a new post (Oct 5, 2017) from Kansas State Extension.

http://www.ruralmessenger.com/kansas-news/horticulture/rose-disease/#

The disease can be spread by pruning shears.

Then surely it can be spread when digging out infected roses. When roses are planted closely together or have an extensive root system. You will be slicing thru sick roots right into the roots of another rose. Would this be correct or not.

Funny about the KState thing is they give no reference to a study proving pruning shear transmission.
A Masters Thesis by Doderick attempted mechanical transmission and did not succeed. It was later published in a juried j ournal (References in my Ebook).

He even tried injecting the sap into stems of un-infected roses.

Most blades seal xylem and phloem vascular tissue as they are cut across. Don't know how to inject disease carrying 'juice' into a pinched off phloem cell.

Earlier there was a thread that brought up the possibility that mycorrhizae fungi could assist in RRD transfer.

" Last there is discussions being theorized through acedemia of RRD traveling down through the plant to the roots. Once in the roots there are mycorrhizae that make nutrient exchanges between root and soil. This mycorrhizae webbing becomes a vector that can stay in the soil and cause additional infections to other roses"

http://forums2.gardenweb.com/discussions/1715763/heavy-new-growth-possible-rrd?n=9

Nature is complex.

Apparently mechanical transmission is not always successful. I wonder if the mites contribute a cofactor that helps the virus overcome
the immune system.

The following may apply to this point: "but no consistent method of mechanical inoculation has
been developed for both wheat and maize that can satisfactorily bypass the use
of the wheat curl mite as a vector (Mirabile, 2001; Seifers et al., 1997; Skare
et al.,
2003)."

http://amarillo-tamu-edu.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/files/2010/12/A-new-eriophyid-mite-borne-membrane-enveloped-virus-like-complex-isolated-from-plants.pdf

----------------------------------------------

"We are beginning to determine what proteins are present in the
mite saliva, in order to determine how the mites are suppressing the immune
reactions. In collaboration with Doug Cavener and Kaori Iida, we have isolated
the genes for several genes involved in honeybee immunity.

Not all invaders are met with a well-defined immune response, as during
disease transmission by insect vectors. Understanding the mechanisms that
underlie co-evolution between the vector and disease organism is critical to
understanding how the disease transmission cycle might be disrupted. Through
interdisciplinary collaboration with Drs. F. Gildow (PSU) and S. Gray (Cornell),
we are examining the mechanisms underlying virus/vector specificity in aphids at
the accessory salivary gland, the primary site determining transmission of
different species of luteoviruses. In my lab, we have identified several
proteins that bind to luteovirus in a vector-specific manner and that are also
recognized by antibodies that mimic the virus. We are isolating the genes
encoding these proteins for studies of the evolution of these virus/vector
interactions, among different aphid and viral species. This research may further
understanding of mechanisms underlying the vector-specificity of mosquitoes for
transmission of alphaviruses."

http://ento.psu.edu/directory/dxc12

The serious rose gardener who looks at their roses several times a week can replant after one week, according to Mark Windham, the expert who drove 14 hours to give a presentation on RRV to our club. You are going to be checking the nearby roses anyway for RRV, so it makes sense to re-use that rose hole as soon as it is practical. As he pointed out at the beginning of his talk, what is practical varies tremendously on who you are. Public gardeners and landscapers have real problems monitoring roses for RRV. When RRV showed up in my garden it was less than a week between "maybe, I better watch that" and "that's obviously RRV and needs to be removed." That sort of vigilance is quite effective at controlling RRV. No need to spray toxic chemicals that will wipe out beneficial insects if you can live with losing the occasional rose. But, you can easily lose the entire garden if you let this disease fester, as the mites can spread the disease to all the roses.

This is easier to do with some gardens that others, and should influence how you design your garden. You may not want to make a large specimen rose the focal point of your garden, though this may be practical if you can get the engineering expertise to create an effective barrier that will prevent nearly weightless mites from landing on it.