| Literature DB >> 25658943 |
Arnaud T Djami-Tchatchou1, Mmapula P Maake1, Lizelle A Piater1, Ian A Dubery1.
Abstract
Plants respond to various stress stimuli by activating broad-spectrum defense responses both locally as well as systemically. As such, identification of expressed genes represents an important step towards understanding inducible defense responses and assists in designing appropriate intervention strategies for disease management. Genes differentially expressed in tobacco cell suspensions following elicitation with isonitrosoacetophenone (INAP) were identified using mRNA differential display and pyro-sequencing. Sequencing data produced 14579 reads, which resulted in 198 contigs and 1758 singletons. Following BLAST analyses, several inducible plant defense genes of interest were identified and classified into functional categories including signal transduction, transcription activation, transcription and protein synthesis, protein degradation and ubiquitination, stress-responsive, defense-related, metabolism and energy, regulation, transportation, cytoskeleton and cell wall-related. Quantitative PCR was used to investigate the expression of 17 selected target genes within these categories. Results indicate that INAP has a sensitising or priming effect through activation of salicylic acid-, jasmonic acid- and ethylene pathways that result in an altered transcriptome, with the expression of genes involved in perception of pathogens and associated cellular re-programming in support of defense. Furthermore, infection assays with the pathogen Pseudomonas syringae pv. tabaci confirmed the establishment of a functional anti-microbial environment in planta.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25658943 PMCID: PMC4319752 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0117377
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Summary of selected genes differentially expressed in tobacco cell suspensions in response to INAP treatment.
| SIMILAR SEQUENCE FROM BLAST DATABASE | E-value | Max identity % |
|---|---|---|
| SIGNAL PERCEPTION AND TRANSDUCTION | ||
|
| 7.00E-16 | 78 |
|
| 5.00E-04 | 92 |
|
| 0.006 | 80 |
|
| 9.00E-19 | 75 |
|
| 7.00E-05 | 85 |
|
| 2.00E-12 | 80 |
|
| 2.00E-08 | 85 |
|
| 0.084 | 93 |
|
| 0.33 | 100 |
|
| 9.00E-38 | 91 |
|
| 4.00E-123 | 100 |
|
| 2.00E-101 | 98 |
|
| 6.00E-145 | 91 |
| RESPONSE REGULATION | ||
|
| 2.00E-09 | 98 |
|
| 8.00E-42 | 100 |
|
| 8.00E-87 | 99 |
|
| 1.00E-22 | 87 |
|
| 0.18 | 84 |
|
| 5.00E-13 | 91 |
| TRANSCRIPTION | ||
|
| 5.00E-110 | 96 |
|
| 1.00E-90 | 98 |
|
| 5.00E-06 | 92 |
|
| 0.002 | 52 |
|
| 6.00E-96 | 87 |
|
| 0.002 | 71 |
|
| 2.00E-07 | 97 |
|
| 2.00E-08 | 76 |
|
| 9.00E-05 | 85 |
| PROTEIN UBIQUITINATION AND DEGRADATION | ||
|
| 4.00E-18 | 87 |
|
| 3.00E-09 | 100 |
|
| 2.00E-12 | 77 |
|
| 1.00E-16 | 96 |
|
| 5.00E-12 | 96 |
|
| 4.00E-20 | 82 |
| PROTEIN SYNTHESIS AND FOLDING | ||
|
| 3.00E-105 | 93 |
|
| 3.00E-151 | 98 |
|
| 4.00E-144 | 96 |
|
| 0 | 97 |
| VESICLES AND TRANSPORTATION | ||
|
| 2.00E-15 | 85 |
|
| 1.00E-149 | 98 |
|
| 2.00E-81 | 93 |
|
| 7.00E-04 | 100 |
|
| 4.00E-04 | 34 |
|
| 9.00E-04 | 83 |
|
| 5.00E-10 | 86 |
|
| 9.00E-19 | 95 |
| STRESS-RELATED RESPONSES | ||
|
| 4.00E-91 | 90 |
|
| 1.00E-57 | 87 |
|
| 2.00E-53 | 98 |
|
| 5.00E-31 | 79 |
|
| 9.00E-98 | 99 |
|
| 1.00E-104 | 100 |
|
| 7.00E-15 | 87 |
|
| 3.00E-05 | 97 |
| DEFENSE RESPONSES | ||
|
| 3.00E-40 | 83 |
|
| 8.00E-37 | 75 |
|
| 1.00E-15 | 96 |
|
| 3.00E-06 | 92 |
|
| 1.00E-117 | 98 |
|
| 8.00E-159 | 98 |
|
| 2.00E-04 | 44 |
|
| 4.00E-109 | 99 |
|
| 4.00E-07 | 100 |
|
| 2.00E-41 | 93 |
| METABOLISM AND ENERGY | ||
|
| 4.00E-94 | 99 |
|
| 0.003 | 89 |
|
| 1.00E-05 | 92 |
|
| 8.00E-08 | 87 |
|
| 0.081 | 81 |
|
| 3.00E-47 | 81 |
|
| 7.00E-04 | 100 |
|
| 2.00E-51 | 94 |
|
| 1.00E-16 | 98 |
|
| 1.00E-23 | 78 |
| CELL WALL-RELATED AND CYTOSKELETON | ||
|
| 5.00E-161 | 98 |
|
| 1.00E-178 | 100 |
|
| 1.00E-05 | 76 |
|
| 3.00E-34 | 81 |
|
| 3.00E-47 | 82 |
|
| 2.00E-04 | 94 |
|
| 2.00E-73 | 100 |
|
| 4.00E-36 | 100 |
Accession numbers of similar sequences are given in S3 Table.
Fig 1Classification of INAP-induced transcripts according to functional categories.
Pie-chart showing genes induced by INAP treatment in cultured tobacco cells, identified through ACP-DDRT-PCR, pyro-sequencing and BLAST analyses, as expressed in percentage values.
Fig 2qPCR analysis of differential gene expression kinetics in Nicotiana tabacum cells following induction with INAP.
The data was normalized using Elf α and 18S to give the relative gene expression wherein error bars represent the standard error of mean. Expression analysis was performed on three biological repeats with two technical repeats of each. (a) SAR1-GTPase, (b) Avr9/Cf-9 rapidly elicited (ACRE-261), (c) NPR1, (d) Heat shock protein 90 (HSP90), (e) SGT1, (f) RAR1, (g) Cyclophilin, (h) Thioredoxin, (i) Ethylene response element binding protein (EREBP), (j) Cytochrome P450, (k) β-1,3-Glucanase, (l) Chitinase, (m) Pre-pro-cysteine proteinase, (n) Pheophorbide oxygenase A, (o) Biotic cell death-associated protein, (p) Pathogenesis-related protein-1b and (q) Pathogenesis-related protein-1a. Error bars: (a) indicates no significant differences, with P > 0.05, (ab) indicates a significant difference with P < 0.05, (b) indicates a highly significant difference with P< 0.01 and (bb) indicates a highly significant difference with P< 0.001.
Fig 3Schematic diagram illustrating the priming action of INAP on N. tabacum cells.
Results show a broad activation of cellular responses involved in innate immunity from pathogen or PAMP perception to the eventual enhanced innate immune response. Details of the gene transcripts found to be up-regulated in response to treatment of cultured cells by INAP are given in the main text.
Fig 4In planta growth of Pseudomonas syringae pv.
tabaci in tobacco leaf tissues following pre-conditioning with 1 mM INAP. Graphical representation of bacterial cell counts expressed as colony forming units (CFUs) per square cm obtained from serially diluted extracts after 2 days of growth on King’s B medium. C = Controls, infiltrated with 10 mM MgSO4 and T = INAP conditioned tissue, infiltrated with 1 mM INAP dissolved in 10 mM MgSO4. Error barrs indicate standard deviation of three biological repeats.