tion of 

 direct o 

 duced ph 

 the acid 

 aspects 

 f rui t i s 

 i ncrease 

 Furtherm 

 to resem 

 to virus 

 termi ne 

 of the r 

 tion tha 

 and acid 

 tosh app 

 i nfected 

 toms but 

 both fol 

 trees wi 

 si gns of 

 taken in 

 Septembe 

 using v a 



leaf t 



r i ndi 



otosyn 



and s 



of f ru 



i n f 1 u 



the r 



ore , t 



bl e an 



i nfec 



the ef 



e s p i r a 



t occu 



compo 



le tre 



with 



not f 



i ar an 



th fru 



vi rus 



June , 



r . Su 



ri ous 



issue 

 rect 

 theti 

 ugar 

 it qu 

 enced 

 e s p i r 

 he ge 

 acce 

 t i n s 

 feet 

 to ry 

 rs du 

 s i t i 

 es gr 

 ei the 

 rui t 

 d fru 

 i t fr 

 i nfe 

 July 

 gars 

 chemi 



yery 1 

 effects 

 c abi 1 i ty 

 composi ti 

 a 1 i ty . I 



greatly 

 ation rat 

 neral pat 

 lerated a 

 , and we 

 of virus 

 cl imacter 

 ring a p p 1 

 n of the 

 owing in 

 r appl e m 

 symptoms , 

 it sympto 

 om other 

 cti on . R 



and Augu 

 and acids 

 cal proce 



- 8 



i 1 1 1 e is 

 f virus i 



of the 1 

 ons of th 

 n a d d i t i 

 by i ts re 

 e, they m 

 tern in m 

 ging proc 

 have cond 

 i nfection 

 i c , i.e. 

 e r i p e n i n 

 fruit. F 

 a commerc 

 s a i c V i r 



or wi th 

 ms . We c 

 trees in 

 e s p i r a t i 

 st, as we 



were als 

 dures . 



known, h 

 nfecti on 

 e a f m i g h 

 e fruit, 

 n, the k 

 s p i r a t i 

 i ght sho 

 any vi ru 

 ess. Ap 

 ucted a 

 s on the 

 the rise 

 g , and t 

 or this 

 ial orch 

 us, w h i c 

 russet r 

 ompared 

 the same 

 n was me 

 11 as on 

 measur 



oweve 

 s on 

 t be 



whi c 

 e e p i n 

 n rat 

 rten 

 s di s 

 pie t 

 two-y 



onse 



and 

 he ef 

 study 

 ard t 

 h cau 

 ing v 

 appl e 



orch 

 asure 



samp 

 ed on 



r , ab 

 fruit 

 ref 1 e 

 h are 

 g qua 

 e and 

 the s 

 eases 

 rees 

 ear s 

 t and 

 fall 

 feet 

 , we 

 hat w 

 ses f 

 i r u s , 

 s fro 

 ard t 

 d on 

 1 es c 

 thes 



out th 

 . The 

 cted i 



impor 

 li ty 



if vi 

 torage 



appea 

 are su 

 tudy t 



i n t e n 

 of res 

 on sug 

 used M 

 e knew 

 1 i a r 



whi ch 

 m thes 

 hat sh 

 sampl e 

 ol lect 

 e samp 



e 



re- 

 n 



tant 

 f 

 ruses 



life, 

 rs 

 bject 



de- 

 si ty 

 pi ra- 

 ar 

 cln- 



were 

 symp- 



causes 

 e 



owed no 

 s 

 ed in 



1 es , 



Results of this study showed that neither apple mosaic virus 

 nor russet ring virus affected the respiration rate of the apples. 

 The amount of 0^ used by the fruit, the amount of CO2 they pro- 

 duced and the "respiratory quotient" (the ratio of tnese two values) 

 were about the same whether or not the apples were from virus-in- 

 fected trees. In addition, the respiratory climacteric occurred 

 at just about the same time in all the fruits, indicating that 

 time of ripening was not affected by the virus. The virus-infec- 

 ted fruit did appear to respire more rapidly than the healthy ap- 

 ples during the climacteric, but we do not know the significance 

 of this difference. 



The chemical analyses of the apples showed only two acids in 

 measurable amounts--qui ni c acid and malic acid. The amount of 

 quinic acid was not affected by either virus. However, both vir- 

 uses slightly reduced the amount of malic acid in the apples. 

 Virus infection of trees did not result in any consistent major 

 difference in the relative concentrations of the three main sugars 

 (glucose, fructose, and sucrose) in fruit during either of the two 

 years . 



We concluded from this study that neither apple mosaic virus 

 nor russet ring virus had much effect on the behavior or quality 

 of Mcintosh apples. This is rather surprising since viruses affect 

 both the behavior and chemical composition of leaves. However, we 

 have no information about the concentrations of apple mosaic or 

 russet ring viruses in fruit tissues, and in fact only RRV exhibits 

 fruit symptoms. If virus is present and operates only in the area 

 where symptoms appear on the fruit, its effects might not be measur- 



