chemical, biological, and ecological controls have been implemented over the past few years [3]. However, no single method can effectively reduce the losses caused by _M. micrantha_[1; 2; 3]. The majority of plant-infecting viruses are transmitted to their host plants by vectors [6]. Modes of insect-transmitted plant viruses are categorized into four types: (a) Non-persistently transmitted, stylelet-borne; (b) semi-persistently transmitted, foregut-borne; (c) persistently transmitted, circulative; and (d) persistently transmitted, propagative [7]. Non-persistently transmitted (e.g., _Cucumber mosaic virus_ (CMV)) and semi-persistently transmitted (e.g., _Tomato chlorosis virus_ (ToCV)) viruses do not breach the gut barrier in their vectors; rather they are retained in the insect stylet or foregut prior to transmission [8]. Such viruses can be transmitted within seconds to hours after acquisition [8]. Persistent transmission, however, requires days to weeks [6; 7]. Persistently transmitted circulative viruses (e.g., _Potato leafroll virus_ (PLRV)) are able to cross the gut barriers and circulate in the insect hemolymph, but do not replicate in the insect vector. Persistently transmitted propagative viruses (e.g., _Southern rice black streaked dwarf virus_ (SRBSDV) circulate and replicate in the insect vector [8]. Non-persistently transmitted viruses are acquired via short epidermal probes, which occur on the host and non-host plants of the vector during host selection, whereas persistently-transmitted viruses require phloem ingestion to be transmitted, which needs a specific vector of a suitable host-plant [6; 7; 8]. It is known that insect-transmitted plant viruses have developed different strategies to manipulate host-vector interactions and that the transmission mechanism greatly influences the strategies [9]. Persistently transmitted viruses tend to improve the host quality and promote long-term feeding, leading to higher reproductive rate, crowding, accelerated use of host resources, and eventual dispersal of viuliferous vectors [9; 10; 11]. Non-persistently transmitted viruses, on the other hand, often reduce plant quality, which inevitably increases vector restlessness and opportunities for virus acquisition and promotes rapid dispersal [9; 10; 11]. Infection of _Camelina sativa_ by _Turnip yellow virus_ (TuYV, circulative-persistent, non-propagative) enhanced palatability for _Myzus persicae_ ([PERSON]) [12]. The intrinsic growth rate of _M. persicae_ was significantly higher and the pre-reproductive period was significantly shorter on plants infected by TuYV compared to uninfected plants [12]. Similarly, the pre-reproductive period of _Bemisia tabaci_ females fed on tobacco plants infected with _Tomato yellow leaf curl China virus_ (TYLCCNV, transmitted in a circular, persistent manner) was drastically improved, being 7-fold higher in longevity and 18-fold higher in fecundity than those on non-infected plants [13]. _Aphis gossypii_ ([PERSON]) and _M. persicae_ grew more slowly on CMV-infected cucumber plants than those on uninfected plants indicative of reduced host quality [14]. Plant viruses, regardless of their mode of transmission, influence host-derived cues which tend to enhance vector attraction to infected hosts [9]. For example, _A. gossypii_ and _M. persicae_ preferred CMV-infected cucumber plants to healthy and mocked-inoculated plants [14]. More aphids were found to be attracted to tobacco plants infected with the _Tobacco etch virus_ (TEV, transmitted in a non-persistent manner) than to healthy plants in a field evaluation experiment [15]. Virus-infected plants emit volatiles to makes them more attractive to insect vectors, which obviously would promote virus acquisition. However, after virus acquisition, the relative preference of the vector may shift to uninfected plants [14; 16; 17; 18]. _M. persicae_ reared on healthy _Physalis floridana_ Rydb plants preferred to settle on potato plants infected by PLRV, whereas viuliferous _M. persicae_ reared on PLRV-infected _P.