
%0 Journal Article
%A Pethybridge, S. J. 
%A Wilson, C. R. 
%A Sherriff, L. J. 
%A Leggett, G. W. 
%A Munro, D. 
%T Virus incidence in Australian hop (<emph type="2">Humulus lupulus</emph> L.) gardens and cultivar differences in susceptibility to infection
%J Australian Journal of Agricultural Research
%D 2000/08/07
%V 51
%N 6
%P 685-689
%K viral epidemiology, hop mosaic virus, hop latent virus, Prunus necrotic ringspot virus, varietal resistance.
%R https://doi.org/10.1071/AR99154
%U https://www.publish.csiro.au/paper/AR99154 
%X 0uo;Victoria&#8217; (98%) was significantlyhigher than in &#8216;T11&#8217; (58%), which was higher than&#8216;Opal&#8217; (31%). Results suggested that &#8216;Victoria&#8217;was more susceptible to infection by all 3 viruses than traditionally growncultivars and recently released or experimental cultivars. Planting with elitematerial and roguing of infected plants has been ineffective as a viruscontrol strategy with this cultivar. 
