| Literature DB >> 23776450 |
Harsh Garg1, Hua Li, Krishnapillai Sivasithamparam, Martin J Barbetti.
Abstract
Sclerotinia rot caused by Sclerotinia sclerotiorum is one of the most serious diseases of oilseed rape. To understand the resistance mechanisms in the Brassica napus to S. sclerotiorum, comparative disease progression, histological and proteomic studies were conducted of two B. napus genotypes (resistant cv. Charlton, susceptible cv. RQ001-02M2). At 72 and 96 h post inoculation (hpi), lesion size on cotyledons was significantly (P≤0.001) smaller in the resistant Charlton. Anatomical investigations revealed impeded fungal growth (at 24 hpi and onwards) and hyphal disintegration only on resistant Charlton. Temporal changes (12, 24, 48 and 72 hpi) in protein profile showed certain enzymes up-regulated only in resistant Charlton, such as those related to primary metabolic pathways, antioxidant defence, ethylene biosynthesis, pathogenesis related proteins, protein synthesis and protein folding, play a role in mediating defence responses against S. sclerotiorum. Similarly a eukaryotic translation initiation factor 5A enzyme with increased abundance in susceptible RQ001-02M2 and decreased levels in resistant Charlton has a role in increased susceptibility to this pathogen. This is the first time that the expression of these enzymes has been shown to be associated with mediating the defence response against S. sclerotinia in cotyledon tissue of a resistant cultivar of B. napus at a proteomics level. This study not only provides important new insights into the resistance mechanisms within B. napus against S. sclerotiorum, but opens the way for novel engineering of new B. napus varieties that over-express these key enzymes as a strategy to enhance resistance and better manage this devastating pathogen.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23776450 PMCID: PMC3679123 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0065205
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Appearance of Brassica napus resistant Charlton and susceptible RQ001-02M2 when inoculated with Sclerotinia sclerotiorum.
Samples were taken at 24, 48, 72, 96 hours post inoculation (hpi). “Control” represents the mock inoculated control comparison for resistant and susceptible genotypes.
Description of growth of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum isolate MBRS-5 on the cotyledon surface of resistant (Brassica napus Charlton) and susceptible (B. napus RQ001-02M2) genotypes over time (12 to 72 hours post inoculation).
| Hours post inoculation | Resistant Charlton | Susceptible RQ001-02M2 |
| 12 | No increase in hyphal length | No increase in hyphal length |
| 24 | Significantly impeded hyphal growth as compared to susceptible genotype, increase in hyphal cell diameter | Extensive hyphal growth, but confined within the inoculum droplet area |
| 48 | Significantly impeded hyphal growth, increase in hyphal cell diameter | Extensive hyphal growth, hyphae extended beyond the periphery of the inoculum droplet area |
| 72 | Hyphal growth within the confines of the inoculum droplet area and/or disintegration of hyphal cell wall | Whole cotyledon covered with mycelial growth |
Figure 2Histology of resistant and susceptible Brassica napus genotypes in response to Sclerotinia sclerotiorum.
Spring type B. napus resistant Charlton and susceptible RQ001-02M2 were inoculated with S. sclerotiorum isolate MBRS-5. (A)–(C), (F)–(H), (J)–(L) Samples were cleared in acetic acid: ethanol: water (2∶2∶1), stained with 1% cotton blue, and photographed using a Zeiss Axioplan 2 microscope photograph system. (D), (E), (I) 2 μm thick sections obtained and photographed using the same photograph system. (A) Impeded fungal growth on resistant Charlton at 24 hours post inoculation (hpi). Arrow indicates the presence of simple appresoria. (B) Hyphal growth on susceptible RQ001-02M2 at 24 hpi. Arrows indicate the presence of simple appresoria. (C) Increase in hyphal diameter of fungal cells on resistant Charlton at 24 hpi. (D) Cytoplasmic disorganization and necrotic cells (arrows) of palisade mesophyll cells in the susceptible RQ001-02M2 at 24 hpi. (E) Darkly-stained areas (arrows) around the dead cells of palisade mesophyll layer at 24 hpi in the resistant Charlton. (F) Hyphal growth on cotyledons of the susceptible RQ001-02M2. Arrows indicate the extension of hyphal growth beyond the periphery of the inoculum droplet area. (G) Repeated dichotomous branching of the terminal hyphae led to formation of appresoria (arrow) at 48 hpi on susceptible RQ001-02M2. (H) Hyphal growth on resistant Charlton at 48 hpi. (I) Fungal invasion up to palisade mesophyll cells and extensively damaged upper epidermis in the susceptible RQ001-02M2 at 48 hpi. (J) Hyphal growth on susceptible RQ001-02M2 extended across almost whole of the upper surface of the cotyledon at 72 hpi (K) Hyphal growth within the periphery of the inoculum droplet area (arrow) on resistant Charlton at 72 hpi. (L) Disintegration of hyphal cell wall (arrows) on resistant Charlton at 72 hpi.
Figure 3Representative image of resistant cv. Charlton cotyledon proteins separated by two-dimensional electrophoresis (2-DE).
The 2-DE was performed for both Brassica napus resistant Charlton and susceptible RQ001-02M2 at 12, 24, 48 and 72 hours post inoculation (hpi) by using 11 cm immobilized-pH-gradient (IPG) strips. Gels were stained with Coomassie Brilliant Blue (CCB) and their images were acquired by GS-800 imaging densitometer (Bio-Rad) with a red filter (wavelength 595–750 nm) and a resolution of 63.5×63.5 µm. The numbers shown correspond with the spot numbers mentioned in Table 2.
Details of the proteins identified in Brassica napus resistant Charlton and susceptible RQ001-02M2 at various times after inoculation with Sclerotinia sclerotiorum.
| Spot no | Protein name | hpi | Resistant | Susceptible | ||
| Expression | SE | Expression | SE | |||
| 1 | 50S ribosomal protein L12-C [ | 72 | −4.9 | ±0.9 | +4.4 | ±0.1 |
| 2 | Protein grpE [ | 48 | * | * | −1.5 | ±0.0 |
| 3 | Protein disulfide isomerase [ | 12 | +1.8 | ±0.2 | * | * |
| 48 | * | * | +2.1 | ±0.3 | ||
| 72 | +2.4 | ±0.3 | +2.5 | ±0.3 | ||
| 4 | Light-harvesting complex I chlorophyll a/b binding protein 1 [ | 12 | +3.1 | ±0.2 | * | * |
| 24 | −3.7 | ±0.3 | −2.5 | ±0.5 | ||
| 48 | −3.9 | ±0.2 | −7.1 | ±0.8 | ||
| 72 | −4.7 | ±0.4 | * | * | ||
| 5 | Superoxide dismutase [ | 48 | * | * | −2.3 | ±0.3 |
| 72 | * | * | −1.9 | ±0.2 | ||
| 6 | Glutathione-S-transferase [ | 48 | +2.5 | ±0.6 | * | * |
| 72 | +2.6 | ±0.2 | * | * | ||
| 7 | Chloroplast stem-loop binding protein-41 [ | 72 | +1.8 | ±0.2 | * | * |
| 8 | Chloroplast stem-loop binding protein-41 [ | 12 | +1.9 | ±0.1 | * | * |
| 72 | +2.0 | ±0.2 | −1.6 | ±0.0 | ||
| 9 | Cysteine synthase [ | 12 | +1.9 | ±0.2 | * | * |
| 48 | +1.4 | ±0.1 | * | * | ||
| 72 | +5.3 | ±1.7 | * | * | ||
| 10 | S-adenosylmethionine synthetase [ | 72 | +5.9 | ±1.1 | * | * |
| 11 | Monodehydroascorbate reductase [ | 72 | +4.0 | ±0.5 | * | * |
| 12 | Malate dehydrogenase [ | 12 | +2.4 | ±0.3 | * | * |
| 72 | +2.4 | ±0.5 | * | * | ||
| 13 | Major latex-related protein [ | 12 | +8.5 | ±3.8 | * | * |
| 24 | +2.1 | ±0.1 | * | * | ||
| 48 | +2.2 | ±0.3 | −2.0 | ±0.0 | ||
| 72 | +1.3 | ±0.0 | * | * | ||
| 14 | 20 kDa chaperonin, chloroplastic [ | 12 | +3.9 | ±0.4 | * | * |
| 48 | +3.6 | ±0.8 | * | * | ||
| 72 | +2.4 | ±0.8 | * | * | ||
| 15 | Putative elongation factor P (EF-P) [ | 12 | +3.0 | ±0.6 | * | * |
| 24 | −2.3 | ±0.0 | * | * | ||
| 48 | −3.6 | ±0.7 | −3.0 | ±0.6 | ||
| 16 | Putative uncharacterized protein At3g52150 [ | 48 | * | * | −4.8 | ±0.1 |
| 17 | ATP synthase (Fragment) [ | 12 | +4.6 | ±1.6 | * | * |
| 48 | −3.3 | ±0.6 | −3.5 | ±0.3 | ||
| 72 | −8.0 | ±0.0 | * | * | ||
| 18 | RuBisCO large subunit-binding protein subunit alpha, chloroplastic [ | 12 | * | * | * | * |
| 24 | * | * | −1.7 | ±0.2 | ||
| 48 | * | * | −2.1 | ±0.4 | ||
| 19 | Cytochrome b6-f complex iron-sulfur subunit, chloroplastic [ | 24 | +1.5 | ±0.1 | * | * |
| 20 | Predicted protein Tax_Id = 3694 [ | 12 | +2.0 | ±0.0 | * | * |
| 24 | +1.8 | ±0.1 | * | * | ||
| 72 | * | * | +2.5 | ±0.4 | ||
| 21 | Eukaryotic translation initiation factor-5A [ | 12 | * | * | +3.9 | ±0.8 |
| 24 | −7.2 | ±1.3 | * | * | ||
| 22 | Ribulose bisphosphate carboxylase large chain [Brassica juncea] | 12 | +5.5 | ±0.4 | +3.1 | ±1.2 |
| 48 | +1.6 | ±0.1 | * | * | ||
| 23 | Putative p-nitrophenylphosphatase [ | 12 | +2.1 | ±0.1 | * | * |
| 24 | −1.6 | ±0.0 | * | * | ||
| 48 | * | * | −2.6 | ±0.3 | ||
| 72 | * | * | −1.6 | ±0.2 | ||
| 24 | Chloroplast fructose-1,6-bisphosphatase I [ | 12 | +2.6 | ±0.2 | * | * |
| 25 | ATP synthase subunit beta [ | 12 | +2.3 | ±0.1 | +2.7 | ±0.2 |
| 26 | Ribulose bisphosphate carboxylase large chain [ | 12 | +5.0 | ±0.5 | +4.1 | ±0.4 |
| 48 | +2.5 | ±0.2 | * | * | ||
| 27 | Dihydrolipoyl dehydrogenase 1, mitochondrial [ | 12 | +8.5 | ±0.9 | +3.0 | ±0.3 |
| 28 | Carbonic anhydrase, chloroplast [ | 12 | +2.9 | ±0.2 | * | * |
| 48 | * | * | −2.2 | ±0.1 | ||
| 29 | Putative uncharacterized protein [ | 72 | * | * | +0.03 | ±0.00 |
| 30 | Elongation factor 1-beta [ | 48 | +0.01 | ±0.00 | +0.01 | ±0.00 |
| 72 | +0.01 | ±0.00 | +0.05 | ±0.01 | ||
| 31 | Aspartate protease [ | 48 | * | * | +0.02 | ±0.00 |
| 72 | +0.01 | ±0.00 | +0.09 | ±0.01 | ||
| 32 | Putative uncharacterized protein [ | 48 | +0.01 | ±0.00 | +0.03 | ±0.00 |
| 72 | +0.01 | ±0.00 | +0.14 | ±0.01 | ||
| 33 | Putative uncharacterized protein [ | 48 | * | * | +0.03 | ±0.00 |
| 72 | +0.01 | ±0.00 | +0.25 | ±0.02 | ||
| 34 | ATP synthase subunit beta [ | 48 | * | * | +0.05 | ±0.01 |
| 72 | * | * | +0.33 | ±0.01 | ||
| 35 | Malate dehydrogenase [ | 72 | * | * | +0.21 | ±0.04 |
| 36 | Glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase [ | 48 | +0.07 | ±0.00 | +0.06 | ±0.00 |
| 72 | +0.06 | ±0.00 | +0.28 | ±0.04 | ||
| 37 | Putative uncharacterized protein [ | 72 | 0.04 | ±0.01 | 0.17 | ±0.02 |
Spot numbers as given on the 2-D gel image (Figure 3) that were significantly affected in response to the pathogen challenge.
hpi = hours post inoculation.
Expression ratios (fold changes) for each protein was calculated from the average of spot intensities values of treatment with respect to their control genotype at each time point. However, spots 30–37 represent the actual values of the spot density data in the absence of detection of any protein in the control genotype (for these spots). These spot densities were measured from the filtered 2-DE images and each spot density value comprises the sum of the signal intensities (expressed as spot/optical density units) of all the pixels that make up the object.
SE represents the standard error associated with the mean value of expression ratio for each spot and for each genotype at different time points separately.