On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 17:19:48 GMT, "Henry Kuska"
wrote:

Shiva, Your statement was: "It remains a fact that we have seen no evidence
at all--so
far--that Rose Mosaic Virus can spread from one plant to another in our
gardens."

Please look up the meaning of each of the words that you utilized
(particularly the "at all").

I looked it up. It is not in my dictionary. Have you got a source for
me?


I suggest that you modify your statement to
say that there is some evidence (or even some preliminary evidence) but it
is not sufficient to convince you..

So you DO consider the link you furnished, in which you or Paul quote
Ann describing a single, never repeated study in which 1 to 2 % of
allegedly virus-free multiflora plants were allegedly infected via
pruners or perhaps simple *proximity* to be "evidence that rose mosaic
virus can be spread in our gardens."

I am surprised. Not only do I not consider it to be sufficient to
convince me, I do not consider it evidence at all. I imagine you must
run yourself ragged keeping up with every unreplicated study that
comes up.





You may be interested in downloading the full paper cited in:
http://www.actahort.org/books/246/246_40.htm
"Incidence of Rose Viruses in Spain", M. Cambra, J.L. Martinez-Torres, M.J.
Benaches, E. Camarasa, and M.T. Gorris, Acta Horticulturae, vol 246,pages
309-312, (1989).
They studied 4,730 rose samples. They found 4.2% of the roses had Prunus
necrotic ring spot virus. The breakdown was: 44.0 % of the minatures, 1.1 %
of the hybrid teas, and 1.5 % of Manetti rootstocks. They state: "The high
rate of PNRSV contamination in minature varieties seems to be associated to
their long existence."
Later in another paragraph they say:"....since this virus is pollen
transmitted (in addition to grafting). They later state: "The rate of
contamination in Manetti rootstock is quite low; this is probably due to the
usual nursery practice of preventing mother plants from flowering." Their
next statement is: "Manetti plants giving PNRSV positive, might have been
graft-contaminated in the most part." "
-------------------------------------------------------------

I think not, as the above apparently does not treat rose mosaic virus.



Also, does it concern you that the virus has been found in naturally
occuring wild roses?

Tell me why it should. Please. I am trying to learn here.




Henry Kuska, retired

http://home.neo.rr.com/kuska/