| Literature DB >> 26801007 |
Yashwant Kumar1, Limin Zhang2, Priyabrata Panigrahi1, Bhushan B Dholakia1, Veena Dewangan1, Sachin G Chavan1, Shrikant M Kunjir3, Xiangyu Wu2, Ning Li2, Pattuparambil R Rajmohanan3, Narendra Y Kadoo1, Ashok P Giri1, Huiru Tang2,4, Vidya S Gupta1.
Abstract
Molecular changes elicited by plants in response to fungal attack and how this affects plant-pathogen interaction, including susceptibility or resistance, remain elusive. We studied the dynamics in root metabolism during compatible and incompatible interactions between chickpea and Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. ciceri (Foc), using quantitative label-free proteomics and NMR-based metabolomics. Results demonstrated differential expression of proteins and metabolites upon Foc inoculations in the resistant plants compared with the susceptible ones. Additionally, expression analysis of candidate genes supported the proteomic and metabolic variations in the chickpea roots upon Foc inoculation. In particular, we found that the resistant plants revealed significant increase in the carbon and nitrogen metabolism; generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), lignification and phytoalexins. The levels of some of the pathogenesis-related proteins were significantly higher upon Foc inoculation in the resistant plant. Interestingly, results also exhibited the crucial role of altered Yang cycle, which contributed in different methylation reactions and unfolded protein response in the chickpea roots against Foc. Overall, the observed modulations in the metabolic flux as outcome of several orchestrated molecular events are determinant of plant's role in chickpea-Foc interactions.Entities:
Keywords: Chickpea; Fusarium oxysporum; NMR; metabolomics; plant-pathogen interaction; proteomics
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26801007 PMCID: PMC5066658 DOI: 10.1111/pbi.12522
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plant Biotechnol J ISSN: 1467-7644 Impact factor: 9.803
Figure 1Clusters (C1 to C8) of 481 differential expressed proteins in chickpea root. For each protein, the ratio of Log2‐normalized expression of Foc inoculated with its respective control at various stages (2 to 12 DAI) and represented by a colour, according to the colour scale at the top. The number of proteins in a given cluster with similar expression trend is indicated in parentheses.
Figure 2Interconnection between various metabolic processes in chickpea–Foc interaction. Each graph represents differential expression (fold change) pattern according to the colour scale; columns represent the four stages (2 to 12 DAI) after Foc inoculation. The first row represents the resistant cultivar, while the second row represents the susceptible cultivar.
Figure 3Typical NMR spectrum of chickpea root extract. Annotation with number and details of metabolites is provided in Table S2.
Figure 4PCA trajectory plots. (a) resistant‐DV and (b) susceptible‐JG62 plants with their respective controls obtained from mean of PC1 and PC2 values at 2 to 12 DAI with error bars representing two standard deviations. Foc‐inoculated samples are in green while respective controls in red. Top right corner box indicates overall pattern.
Figure 5Pairwise comparison via OPLS‐DA. OPLS‐DA scores plots (left) and corresponding coefficient‐coded loadings plots (right) obtained from metabolic profiles of Foc‐inoculated (a–d) resistant‐DV and (e–h) susceptible‐JG62 cultivars and their respective controls at 2 to 12 DAI. The coloured scale in correlation coefficient (|r|: absolute values) plots shows the significance of metabolite variations discriminating between the Foc‐inoculated and control plants.
Figure 6Quantitative real‐time PCR of various candidate genes. (a–n) expression variation in each gene observed from chickpea root of Foc‐inoculated resistant‐DV and susceptible‐JG62 cultivars as compared to their respective controls at 2 to 12 DAI.