The MLO (Mildew Locus O) gene family encodes plant-specific proteins containing seven transmembrane domains and likely acting in signal transduction in a calcium and calmodulin dependent manner. Some members of the MLO family are susceptibility factors toward fungi causing the powdery mildew disease. In tomato, for example, the loss-of-function of the MLO gene SlMLO1 leads to a particular form of powdery mildew resistance, called ol-2, which arrests almost completely fungal penetration. This type of penetration resistance is characterized by the apposition of papillae at the sites of plant-pathogen interaction. Other MLO homologs in Arabidopsis regulate root response to mechanical stimuli (AtMLO4 and AtMLO11) and pollen tube reception by the female gametophyte (AtMLO7). However, the role of most MLO genes remains unknown. In this work, we provide a genome-wide study of the tomato SlMLO gene family. Besides SlMLO1, other 15 SlMLO homologs were identified and characterized with respect to their structure, genomic organization, phylogenetic relationship, and expression profile. In addition, by analysis of transgenic plants, we demonstrated that simultaneous silencing of SlMLO1 and two of its closely related homologs, SlMLO5 and SlMLO8, confer higher level of resistance than the one associated with the ol-2 mutation. The outcome of this study provides evidence for functional redundancy among tomato homolog genes involved in powdery mildew susceptibility. Moreover, we developed a series of transgenic lines silenced for individual SlMLO homologs, which lay the foundation for further investigations aimed at assigning new biological functions to the MLO gene family.
The MLO (Mildew Locus O) gene family encodes plant-specific proteins containing seven transmembrane domains and likely acting in signal transduction in a calcium and calmodulin dependent manner. Some members of the MLO family are susceptibility factors toward fungi causing the powdery mildew disease. In tomato, for example, the loss-of-function of the MLO gene SlMLO1 leads to a particular form of powdery mildew resistance, called ol-2, which arrests almost completely fungal penetration. This type of penetration resistance is characterized by the apposition of papillae at the sites of plant-pathogen interaction. Other MLO homologs in Arabidopsis regulate root response to mechanical stimuli (AtMLO4 and AtMLO11) and pollen tube reception by the female gametophyte (AtMLO7). However, the role of most MLO genes remains unknown. In this work, we provide a genome-wide study of the tomato SlMLO gene family. Besides SlMLO1, other 15 SlMLO homologs were identified and characterized with respect to their structure, genomic organization, phylogenetic relationship, and expression profile. In addition, by analysis of transgenic plants, we demonstrated that simultaneous silencing of SlMLO1 and two of its closely related homologs, SlMLO5 and SlMLO8, confer higher level of resistance than the one associated with the ol-2 mutation. The outcome of this study provides evidence for functional redundancy among tomato homolog genes involved in powdery mildew susceptibility. Moreover, we developed a series of transgenic lines silenced for individual SlMLO homologs, which lay the foundation for further investigations aimed at assigning new biological functions to the MLO gene family.
Many important crop species can be affected by the powdery mildew (PM) disease,
resulting in great yield losses in agricultural settings. In barley, recessive
loss-of-function mutations occurring in the HvMLO (Hordeum
vulgare Mildew Resistance Locus O) gene confer resistance to all known
isolates of the PM fungus Blumeria graminis f.sp
hordei. Therefore, natural or induced mlo-mutant
alleles are in use for about seven decades to introduce resistance in spring barley
breeding programs (Jørgensen, 1992;
Büschges et al., 1997; Reinstädler
et al., 2010).Biochemical analysis showed that the barley HvMLO protein contains seven transmembrane
domains integral to the plasma membrane, with an extracellular amino-terminus and an
intracellular carboxy-terminus. The latter harbors a calmodulin-binding domain likely
involved in sensing calcium influxes into cells (Devoto et al., 1999). Although the domain structure of MLO proteins is related to
that of metazoan G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs), several studies could not confirm
the role of MLO proteins as canonical GPCRs (Kim et al., 2002; Lorek et al., 2013). Despite
further intensive efforts to explain the biochemical function of the HvMLO protein, its
core activity remains elusive (Panstruga, 2005).
However, HvMLO might be exploited by the fungus to impair vesicle-associated defense
mechanism at plant-pathogen interaction sites, thus facilitating its penetration
(Panstruga and Schulze-Lefert, 2003; Opalski et
al., 2005; Miklis et al., 2007). This feature makes HvMLO a typical
representative of susceptibility genes (S-genes) (Miklis et al., 2007; van Schie and Takken, 2014).The robustness of barley mlo-resistance, due to its non-race-specific
spectrum and durability, led in the last years to an extensive quest for identification
and functional characterization of the MLO genes in other species
affected by the PM disease. The search resulted in the identification of multiple
MLO gene families, ranging from 12 to 39 members in Arabidopsis,
rice, grapevine, cucumber, apple, peach, woodland strawberry, tobacco, and soybean
(Devoto et al., 2003; Feechan et al., 2008; Liu and Zhu, 2008; Shen et al., 2012; Zhou et al.,
2013; Pessina et al., 2014; Appiano et al., 2015).
Moreover, specific homologs were shown to play a major role in plant-pathogen
interactions (Consonni et al., 2006).A detailed phylogenetic analysis distinguished up to eight clades in which Angiosperm
MLO proteins can be found (Feechan et al., 2008;
Acevedo-Garcia et al., 2014; Pessina et al., 2014). The MLO homologs involved in the interaction
with PM pathogens (ArabidopsisAtMLO2, AtMLO6, AtMLO12, tomatoSlMLO1, pea Er1/PsMLO1,
grapevine VvMLO3 and VvMLO4, tobaccoNtMLO1, pepper CaMLO2, cucumber CsaMLO8,
Lotus japonicus LjMLO1, and barrel clover MtMLO1) are grouped into
clade V. On the other hand, all the known monocot MLO homologs acting as susceptibility
factors (barley HvMLO, rice OsMLO3, and wheat TaMLO_A1 and TaMLO_B1) do not cluster in
clade V, but in clade IV, which is primarily but not exclusively represented by monocot
MLO proteins. For example, grapevine VvMLO14, strawberry FvMLO17, and peach PpMLO12
belong also to clade IV (Elliott et al., 2002;
Feechan et al., 2008; Acevedo-Garcia et al.,
2014; Pessina et al., 2014).In Arabidopsis, the PM resistance conferred by the loss-of-function of
AtMLO2 is incomplete and only mutations in all the three
AtMLO homologs in clade V can completely prevent fungal entry
(Consonni et al., 2006). In addition, more recent
studies in Arabidopsis indicated that other members of the MLO gene
family play a role in different biological processes. The homologs
AtMLO4 and AtMLO11 are together involved in root
thigmomorphogenesis, i.e., root responses to mechanical stimuli (Chen et al., 2009), while AtMLO7 regulates pollen
tube reception from the synergid cells during fertilization (Kessler et al., 2010). The biological roles of other
MLO homologs still remain elusive.Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) is one of the most economically important
vegetables in the world. It can be host of three PM species, namely Oidium
neolycopersici, Oidium lycopersici, and Leveillula taurica
(Seifi et al., 2014). Since 1996, when it was
found that all the tomato cultivars were susceptible to O.
neolycopersici, extensive researches were conducted by our group for sources
of resistance (Seifi et al., 2014). An allele
containing a 19 bp deletion in the coding region of the PM susceptibility gene
SlMLO1 was found in a wild accession of S.
lycopersicum var. cerasiforme. This mutant allele, named
ol-2, was shown to confer recessively inherited broad-spectrum
resistance to a series of isolates of O. neolycopersici (Bai et al.,
2005, 2008). Through histological analysis, it was shown that its mechanism of
resistance is based on the early abortion of fungal pathogenesis at the sites of
attempted penetration (Bai et al., 2005). This
type of penetration resistance is characterized by papillae apposition, the same as
described also for the PM resistance in the Atmlo2 mutant of
Arabidopsis (Consonni et al., 2006). Although
papilla formation can significantly reduce fungal development at the host cell entry
level, fungal penetration was not fully prevented in the ol-2 mutant
(Bai et al., 2005).In this study, we exploited tomato sequence information, derived from the tomato genome
sequencing Heinz 1706 and the 150 tomato genome resequencing projects (Tomato Genome
Consortium, 2012; The 100 Tomato Genome
Sequencing Consortium et al., 2014), in order to
identify tomato MLO homologs (SlMLO). These were
characterized with respect to (1) their genomic organization, (2) relation with
MLO homologs from other species, (3) occurrence of tissue-specific
differentially spliced variants, (4) expression in different tissues in axenic condition
and (5) upon inoculation with the powdery mildew pathogen O.
neolycopersici. Finally, an RNAi-based reverse genetic approach was followed
to investigate the possibility that SlMLO homologs other than
SlMLO1 could play additional roles in the interaction with
O. neolycopersici.
Results
In silico identification and sequencing of the tomato
SlMLO gene family
A total of 17 tomato MLO-like loci were identified through BLAST
interrogation of the tomato genomic sequence database (SGN), using AtMLO protein
sequences as query. Two of them (referred to as Solyc09g18830 and Solyc09g18840 in
the SGN database) were noticeably shorter than other predicted MLO
homologs and physically close to each other, suggesting they are different parts of
the same gene (Table 1). Search in the tomato
EST database and gene prediction analysis in the S. pimpinellifolium
genome with the FGENESH software allowed identifying a hypothetical full-length
MLO transcript encompassing Solyc09g18830 and Solyc09g18840. PCR
from leaf of the tomato cultivar Moneymaker (MM) confirmed the presence of this
transcript, which was named SlMLO7 (Supplementary Figure 1). The other 15 predicted
SlMLO genes were named from SlMLO1 to
SlMLO6, and from SlMLO8 to
SlMLO16, as reported in Table 1. For all of them, information is available with respect to putative
amino acid length and number of introns.
Table 1
Features of the .
SGN locus name
MLO gene
Chromosome
Position
ORF lenght (aa)
Introns
Solyc04g049090
SlMLO1
4
SL2.40ch04:38700445.38705951
507
14
Solyc08g015870
SlMLO2
8
SL2.40ch08:6074040.6078983
504
13
Solyc06g010030
SlMLO3
6
SL2.40ch06:4786764.4792828
591
14
Solyc00g007200
SlMLO4
2?
SL2.40ch00:6816892.6823417
554
14
Solyc03g095650
SlMLO5
3
SL2.40ch03:50279919.50288063
517
14
Solyc02g082430
SlMLO6
2
SL2.40ch02:40694608.40700995
553
14
Solyc09g018830 Solyc09g018840
SlMLO7
9
SL2.40ch09:17564555.17568214
270
10
Solyc11g069220
SlMLO8
11
SL2.40ch11:50939533.50946726
506
13
Solyc06g082820
SlMLO9
6
SL2.40ch06:44779673.44784035
511
13
Solyc02g083720
SlMLO10
2
SL2.40ch02:41596474.41602413
533
14
Solyc01g102520
SlMLO11
1
SL2.40ch01:83071860.83075439
475
13
Solyc08g067760
SlMLO12
8
SL2.40ch08:53957062.53962884
532
14
Solyc10g044510
SlMLO13
10
SL2.40ch10:22128868.22135940
558
14
Solyc07g063260
SlMLO14
7
SL2.40ch07:62995345.63002900
563
14
Solyc02g077570
SlMLO15
2
SL2.40ch02:37045094.37050486
375
10
Solyc06g010010
SlMLO16
6
SL2.40ch06:4699552.4706571
477
14
Features of the .With the exception of SlMLO4, information on chromosomal
localization could also be inferred (Table 1).
Most SlMLO homologs are scattered throughout the tomato genome, thus
suggesting that segmental duplication events have been a major source for the
evolution of the SlMLO gene family. Exceptions are represented by
two physical gene clusters, one containing SlMLO6, SlMLO10, and
SlMLO15 on chromosome 2, and the other containing
SlMLO3 and SlMLO16 on chromosome 6.Sequence and expression of all the predicted SlMLO homologs were
verified by PCR amplification of cDNAs derived from four different tissues (leaf,
root, flower, and ripened fruit) of MM. All the SlMLO homologs could
be amplified at least from one plant tissue. In total, 15 SlMLO
homologs could be cloned from leaf (with the exception of SlMLO12),
10 from flower, nine from fruit and eight from root (Supplementary Table 1).Sequence alignment of cloned SlMLO transcripts with corresponding
SGN predicted coding sequence (CDS), derived from the cultivar Heinz 1706, revealed
polymorphisms for SlMLO7, SlMLO8, SlMLO10, and
SlMLO15 (Supplementary Figure 1). The 1339 bp
SlMLO7 cloned transcript corresponds to a short open reading
frame (ORF) due to a stop codon at 137–139 bp (Supplementary Figure 1). The SGN predicted CDS of
SlMLO8 misses part of the third, seventh, eighth, and ninth exon
present in the corresponding transcript cloned from MM leaf; compared to the SGN
predicted CDS of SlMLO10, the transcript cloned from MM fruit
contains a base change at the beginning of the fifth exon, which results in a stop
codon (Supplementary Figure 1). Also the predicted ORF of SlMLO15 is shorter (375 aa)
than the average ORF length of other SlMLOs (Table 1). The sequence cloned from MM leaf has a longer ORF (459 aa) compared to
the predicted SGN sequence (Table 3A).In other cases, sequence alignments of cloned SlMLO from the
different tissues with their corresponding genomic regions showed various types of
splice variants, consisting of intron retention, exon skipping and alternative
5′ and 3′ splice sites, according to the types of alternative
splicing described by Keren et al. (2010)
(Table 2 and Supplementary Figure 1).
Table 2
Types of differentially spliced events observed in cloned
.
SlMLO
Plant tissue
Type of alternative
splicing
Intron retention
Exon skipping
Alternative 5′ splice
site
Alternative 3′ splice
site
SlMLO1
Flower
√
SlMLO5*
Fruit
√
SlMLO6
Leaf
√
√
SlMLO9
Leaf
√
SlMLO11*
Root
√
SlMLO13
Leaf
√
√
SlMLO15
Fruit
√
√
SlMLO15*
Root
√
√
√
SlMLO15*
Flower
√
√
√
The asterisk (.
Types of differentially spliced events observed in cloned
.The asterisk (.
Characterization of conserved amino acids and motifs of the SlMLO
proteins
To examine sequence features of the tomato SlMLO proteins, a multiple sequence
alignment was performed using sequences obtained by the conceptual translation of
transcripts cloned in different tissues. When no deviating transcripts were observed
for a SlMLO gene, the sequence obtained from leaf was used for
translation, with the exception of SlMLO12 which is the only homolog
that was not cloned from leaf but from flower.The aligned amino acid sequences of the tomato SlMLO protein family showed a high
degree of conservation (92%) of the 30 amino acid residues previously described to be
invariable throughout the whole MLO protein family (Supplementary Figure 2; Elliott et al., 2005).Due to aberrant transcripts, the protein sequences of SlMLO7 and SlMLO13 in leaf,
SlMLO11 in root, and SlMLO15 in root, flower and fruit, were severely truncated
(Table 3A). The predicted ORF of SlMLO8 in
leaf was longer than the one deriving from the SGN prediction, which is missing
important domains of the translated MLO protein. The protein sequence of
SlMLO9 in leaf was shorter (448 aa length) than the ones obtained
from the other two tissues (512 aa length) and it is predicted to have five
transmembrane (TM) domains, instead of seven as in fruit and flower (Table 3A).
Table 3A
Features and motifs distribution occurring in SlMLO proteins obtained
from .
ORF Length (aa)
MOTIF 1
MOTIF 2
MOTIF 3
MOTIF4
MOTIF 5
MOTIF 6
MOTIF 7
MOTIF 8
MOTIF 9
MOTIF10
SlMLO1
Leaf
507
√
√
√
√
√
√
Root
507
√
√
√
√
√
√
Flower
491
√
√
√
√
√
SlMLO2
Leaf
504
√
√
√
√
√
SlMLO3
Leaf
591
√
√
√
SlMLO4
Leaf
554
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
SlMLO5
Leaf
517
√
√
√
√
√
Flower
517
√
√
√
√
√
Fruit
540
√
√
√
√
√
SlMLO6
Leaf
549
√
√
√
√
√
√
Root
553
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
Flower
553
√
√
√
√
√
√
Fruit
553
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
SlMLO7
Leaf
61
SlMLO8
Leaf
561
√
√
√
√
√
SlMLO9
Leaf
448
√
√
√
√
√
√
Flower
511
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
Fruit
511
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
SlMLO10
Leaf
533
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
Root
533
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
Flower
533
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
Fruit
178
√
√
SlMLO11
Leaf
475
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
Root
70
Flower
475
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
Fruit
475
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
SlMLO12
Flower
532
√
√
√
√
√
SlMLO13
Leaf
63
√
Root
558
√
√
√
√
√
√
Flower
558
√
√
√
√
√
√
Fruit
558
√
√
√
√
√
√
SlMLO14
Leaf
563
√
√
√
√
√
SlMLO15
Leaf
459
√
√
√
√
Root
56
Flower
70
Fruit
84
√
SlMLO16
Leaf
477
√
√
√
√
When no deviating transcripts are present for one SlMLO, the one from
leaf has been used for motif analysis. Cells highlighted in gray indicate
the absence of the corresponding motif.
Features and motifs distribution occurring in SlMLO proteins obtained
from .When no deviating transcripts are present for one SlMLO, the one from
leaf has been used for motif analysis. Cells highlighted in gray indicate
the absence of the corresponding motif.Finally, the SlMLO protein family was also used as input to search for conserved
motifs. Ten patterns of consecutive amino acids, having a length ranging from 40 to
70 and shared by at least three MLO sequences (Table 3B), were found. Interestingly, four of these motifs included
transmembrane domains, while the others were located in the second intracellular and
extracellular domains, in the C-terminus and in the calmodulin-binding domain. The
motifs seven and nine were shared only by SlMLO4/SlMLO6 and SlMLO10/SlMLO13
respectively while the motif ten was only present in the amino acid sequences of
SlMLO13 of root, flower, and fruit. Those motifs might indicate regions of peculiar
importance for the specific function of these homologs.
Table 3B
Features details of the consensus motifs reported in Table 3A as
predicted by the MEME software package (.
For each motif, the MEME e-value for significance and the position of
each motif in one of the MLO protein domains (transmembrane –TM-,
extracellular –EC-, intracellular –IC-, C-terminus
–C-term-, calmodulin-binding –CaMBD- domain) is
indicated.
Features details of the consensus motifs reported in Table 3A as
predicted by the MEME software package (.For each motif, the MEME e-value for significance and the position of
each motif in one of the MLO protein domains (transmembrane –TM-,
extracellular –EC-, intracellular –IC-, C-terminus
–C-term-, calmodulin-binding –CaMBD- domain) is
indicated.
Phylogenetic analysis of the tomato SlMLO protein family
A phylogenetic analysis was carried out in order to establish the relationships
between SlMLO proteins and MLO proteins of other plant species (Arabidopsis
AtMLO1-15, pea PsMLO1, Lotus japonicus LjMLO1, barrel clover MtMLO1,
pepper CaMLO2, tobaccoNtMLO1, cucumber CsaMLO8, apple MdMLO18 and MdMLO20,
strawberry FvMLO13 and FvMLO15, peach PpMLO9 and PpMLO13, barley HvMLO, rice OsMLO3,
and wheat TaMLOA1b and TaMLOB1a). The resulting tree contains eight different clades
(Figure 1). These were named by Roman numerals
from I to VIII, in accordance with previous studies performing phylogenetic analysis
on the Arabidopsis and apple MLO protein families (Devoto et al., 2003; Pessina et al., 2014).
Figure 1
Rooted circular cladogram showing the phylogenetic relationships of the
tomato SlMLO proteins. A UPGMA-based tree comprises all the sequences
of the MLO protein family of Arabidopsis (At) and tomato (Sl). Individual
sequences of apple (Md), tobacco (Nt), cucumber (Csa), pea (Ps), Lotus
japonicus (Lj), barrel clover (Mt), pepper (Ca), barley (Hv), rice
(Os), and wheat (Ta) are included. Numbers on each node represent bootstrap
values based on 100 replicates. Phylogenetic clades are designated with colors
and Roman numbers according to the position of AtMLO homologs and apple MdMLO,
as indicated by Pessina et al. (2014).
The tomato SlMLO protein sequences used for this tree derived all from the
translation of the transcripts cloned from leaf of the cv. Moneymaker, except
for SlMLO12, which corresponds to the translated sequence of flower. Accession
numbers of the sequences used, other than tomato SlMLO, are listed in
Supplementary Table 2.
Rooted circular cladogram showing the phylogenetic relationships of the
tomato SlMLO proteins. A UPGMA-based tree comprises all the sequences
of the MLO protein family of Arabidopsis (At) and tomato (Sl). Individual
sequences of apple (Md), tobacco (Nt), cucumber (Csa), pea (Ps), Lotus
japonicus (Lj), barrel clover (Mt), pepper (Ca), barley (Hv), rice
(Os), and wheat (Ta) are included. Numbers on each node represent bootstrap
values based on 100 replicates. Phylogenetic clades are designated with colors
and Roman numbers according to the position of AtMLO homologs and apple MdMLO,
as indicated by Pessina et al. (2014).
The tomato SlMLO protein sequences used for this tree derived all from the
translation of the transcripts cloned from leaf of the cv. Moneymaker, except
for SlMLO12, which corresponds to the translated sequence of flower. Accession
numbers of the sequences used, other than tomato SlMLO, are listed in
Supplementary Table 2.Five clades, namely clade I, II, III, V, and VI, contain both tomato and Arabidopsis
homologs; clade IV contains only the monocot MLO homologs that were selected for this
study; clade VII contains only SlMLO15 together with apple, peach and strawberry MLO
proteins (MdMLO18, PpMLO9, and FvMLO15, respectively). No SlMLO homologs could be
assigned to clade VIII, which only contains Rosaceae MLO homologs (Figure 1).Three tomato MLO homologs, SlMLO3, SlMLO5, and SlMLO8, cluster together with SlMLO1
in clade V, containing all the known eudicot MLO homologs functionally related to
powdery mildew susceptibility (AtMLO2, AtMLO6, AtMLO12, PsMLO1, LjMLO1, MtMLO1,
CsaMLO8, NtMLO1, and CaMLO2; Figure 1; Elliott
et al., 2005; Consonni et al., 2006; Bai et al., 2008; Pavan et al., 2009; Humphry
et al., 2011; Várallyay et al., 2012; Zheng et al., 2013; Appiano et al., 2015;
Berg et al., 2015).The tomato homologs SlMLO4, SlMLO6, and SlMLO12 group in clade III together with
AtMLO7, which regulates Arabidopsis pollen tube reception by the synergid cells,
whereas SlMLO10, SlMLO13, and SlMLO14 are the closest tomato homologs to the root
thigmomorphogenesis regulating proteins, AtMLO4 and AtMLO11, in clade I (Figure 1).Finally, clade II includes four tomato SlMLO homologs (SlMLO2, SlMLO7, SlMLO9, and
SlMLO11) together with three Arabidopsis proteins (AtMLO1, AtMLO13, and AtMLO15) and
clade VI harbors only AtMLO3 and tomato SlMLO16 (Figure 1).
Expression profiles of SlMLO homologs in axenic conditions and
upon powdery mildew challenge
The expression level of SlMLO genes was determined in four different
tissues (leaf, root, flower, and ripened fruit). These were found to vary
considerably among SlMLO genes, and it was not possible to assign
clade-specific expression patterns (Figure 2).
Concerning clade V, SlMLO5 and SlMLO8 were found to
be characterized by very low expression levels in all the tissues. Interestingly,
SlMLO1 was found to be less expressed in leaves compared to
flowers. Our results are supported by the collection of RNA-seq data, as shown by the
FPKM (fragments per kilobase of exon per million fragments mapped) values for the
four tissues under investigation of each homolog represented into graphs of
Supplementary Figure 3.
Figure 2
Relative expression level of . The
expression level of each gene is compared to the abundance of Ef1α
which was used as reference gene. Bars show standard errors based on three
technical replicates. Similar trends are reported in Supplementary Figure 3.
Relative expression level of . The
expression level of each gene is compared to the abundance of Ef1α
which was used as reference gene. Bars show standard errors based on three
technical replicates. Similar trends are reported in Supplementary Figure 3.Next, we investigated the expression profile of the SlMLO gene
family in response to O. neolycopersici, using L33 as a reference
gene (Figure 3). SlMLO1
expression significantly increased at 6 and 10 h after pathogen challenge. No other
SlMLO homolog in clade V (SlMLO3, SlMLO5,
SlMLO8) showed pathogen-dependent up-regulation.
Figure 3
Relative expression level of the . Samples were collected at 0, 6, and 10 h after
inoculation (hpi). Transcript abundance of each SlMLO homolog
was normalized against the transcription level of the 60S ribosomal protein L33
used as reference gene. Bars show standard errors based on four biological
replicates. Asterisks refer to significant differences with respect to
non-inoculated plants (0 hpi), inferred by mean comparisons with a
Student's t-test
(*p < 0.05,
**p < 0.01,
***p < 0.001).
The SlMLO genes harbored in clade V, based on the phylogenetic
tree of Figure 1, are indicated by an
arrow spanning their corresponding bars. Similar results were obtained by using
the elongation factor Ef1α as housekeeping gene (Supplementary Figure
4).
Relative expression level of the . Samples were collected at 0, 6, and 10 h after
inoculation (hpi). Transcript abundance of each SlMLO homolog
was normalized against the transcription level of the 60S ribosomal protein L33
used as reference gene. Bars show standard errors based on four biological
replicates. Asterisks refer to significant differences with respect to
non-inoculated plants (0 hpi), inferred by mean comparisons with a
Student's t-test
(*p < 0.05,
**p < 0.01,
***p < 0.001).
The SlMLO genes harbored in clade V, based on the phylogenetic
tree of Figure 1, are indicated by an
arrow spanning their corresponding bars. Similar results were obtained by using
the elongation factor Ef1α as housekeeping gene (Supplementary Figure
4).On the other hand, a significant upregulation in response to O.
neolycopersici was observed for SlMLO homologs outside
clade V, namely SlMLO2, SlMLO4, SlMLO7, SlMLO10, SlMLO13, SlMLO14,
and SlMLO16. In particular, the expression of
SlMLO4 and SlMLO14 at 10 h after inoculation was
comparable to the one of SlMLO1, and ~four-fold and
~three-fold higher than the one of control plants, respectively.Similar results were obtained repeating the expression analysis using Ef 1α
as reference gene (Supplementary Figure 4).In order to confirm the strong up-regulation of the above mentioned genes, a second
inoculation experiment was carried out, sampling leaf tissues at the same time points
(0, 6, and 10 hpi). The results presented in Supplementary Figure 5 indicate that indeed
SlMLO1, SlMLO4, and SlMLO14 show a statistically
significant up-regulated expression due to the O. neolycopersici
challenge. The slight down-regulated expression of SlMLO3 observed
after the first pathogen inoculation was not confirmed in the second experiment.
Functional characterization of clade V SlMLO homologs
Based on their relatedness with eudicot MLO homologs predisposing to
PM susceptibility, including SlMLO1, the newly identified
SlMLO homologs in clade V (SlMLO3, SlMLO5, and
SlMLO8, Figure 1) were
further investigated with respect to their role in the interaction with O.
neolycopersici. Therefore, specific RNAi silencing constructs for these
three homologs were developed, which were used to transform the susceptible cultivar
Moneymaker (MM) (Supplementary Figure 6 and Supplementary Table 3). A silencing construct targeting SlMLO1 was
included as control, which was expected to lead to a resistant phenotype.Ten to 20 T1 plants were obtained for each silencing construct. The
expression of the target genes was assessed by means of real-time qPCR (Supplementary
Figure 7) and T1
plants with a reduced level of expression of the target gene were allowed to
self-pollinate to develop T2 families. In total, two independent
T2 families (each segregating for the presence of the silencing
construct) were developed for SlMLO1 and SlMLO8,
and three were obtained for SlMLO3 and SlMLO5.
Transgenic individuals of each family were further assessed for the silencing levels
of target genes and other clade V homologs. This revealed successful silencing of
each target genes and no unwanted co-silencing in transgenic RNAi::SlMLO3,
SlMLO5, and SlMLO8 individuals (Figures 4B–D). Conversely, T2 transgenic
plants of two T2 families carrying the RNAi::SlMLO1
silencing construct were characterized by the simultaneous silencing of
SlMLO1, SlMLO5, and SlMLO8 (Figure 4A and Supplementary Figure 8).
Figure 4
Evaluation of the silencing effect of the RNAi constructs designed to
target .
Panels (A–D) show the expressions of clade V
SlMLO homologs in plants of T2 families, derived
from different transformation events and segregating for the presence
[T2_NPT(+)] or absence [T2_NPT(-)] of the
RNAi::SlMLO1, RNAi::SlMLO3,
RNAi::SLMLO5, and RNAi::SlMLO8 constructs,
respectively. In (A) bars and standard errors refer to eight
plants T2_NPT(+) and four plants T2_NPT(-) of two
T2 families and four Moneymaker (MM) plants. In (B)
bars and standard errors refer to ten plants T2_NPT(+) and
five plants T2_NPT(-) of three T2 families and four MM
individuals. In (C) bars and standard errors refer to ten plants
T2_NPT(+) and five plants T2_NPT(-) of three
T2 families and four MM individuals. In (D) bars and
standard errors refer to 10 T2_NPT(+) of two T2
families and four MM individuals.
Evaluation of the silencing effect of the RNAi constructs designed to
target .
Panels (A–D) show the expressions of clade V
SlMLO homologs in plants of T2 families, derived
from different transformation events and segregating for the presence
[T2_NPT(+)] or absence [T2_NPT(-)] of the
RNAi::SlMLO1, RNAi::SlMLO3,
RNAi::SLMLO5, and RNAi::SlMLO8 constructs,
respectively. In (A) bars and standard errors refer to eight
plants T2_NPT(+) and four plants T2_NPT(-) of two
T2 families and four Moneymaker (MM) plants. In (B)
bars and standard errors refer to ten plants T2_NPT(+) and
five plants T2_NPT(-) of three T2 families and four MM
individuals. In (C) bars and standard errors refer to ten plants
T2_NPT(+) and five plants T2_NPT(-) of three
T2 families and four MM individuals. In (D) bars and
standard errors refer to 10 T2_NPT(+) of two T2
families and four MM individuals.As expected, T2 progenies carrying the RNAi::SlMLO1
construct segregated for PM resistance: T2 plants carrying the silencing
construct [T2_SlMLO1_NPT(+)] were resistant,
whereas non-transgenic plants [T2_SlMLO1_NPT(-)] were
susceptible as MM (Figure 5A). In contrast, all
T2 progenies segregating for SlMLO3, SlMLO5, and
SlMLO8 silencing constructs visually appeared to be fully
susceptible to O. neolycopersici (Figure 5A). The quantification of disease severity on these lines using
real-time qPCR supported phenotypic observations, as no significant difference was
found between T2_SlMLO3_NPT(+),
T2_SlMLO5_NPT(+),
T2_SlMLO8_NPT(+) plants, and MM (Figure 5B and Supplementary Figure 9). For each T2
family, transgenic and non-transgenic plants were phenotypically
indistinguishable.
Figure 5
Powdery mildew evaluation on plants of segregating
T. Panel (A) shows the phenotypic
evaluation of the powdery mildew growth on leaves of different T2
individuals that have been evaluated for the (from left to right) absence of
the RNAi::SlMLO1, presence of the
RNAi::SlMLO1, presence of the
RNAi::SlMLO3, presence of the RNAi::SlMLO5,
and presence of the RNAi::SlMLO8 silencing constructs,
followed by one individual of the cv Moneymaker (MM) and one of the Slmlo1 line
carrying a loss-of-function mutation in the SlMLO1 gene. Panel
(B) shows the relative quantification of the ratio between
Oidium neolycopersici and plant gDNAs in transgenic
individuals [NPT(+)] and not transgenic individuals [NPT(-)]
segregating in T2 families obtained with the silencing constructs
above described. Bars and standard errors refer to (from left to right) four
individuals of two independent T2 families not carrying the
RNAi::SlMLO1, eight individuals of the same two
T2 families carrying the RNAi::SlMLO1, 18
individuals of three independent T2 segregating families carrying
the RNAi::SlMLO3 construct, 18 individuals of three
independent T2 segregating families carrying the
RNAi::SlMLO5 construct and 20 individuals of two
T2 segregating families carrying the
RNAi::SlMLO8 construct, next to 10 MM plants and 10 plants
of the Slmlo1 line. The asterisk refers to the significant difference in
susceptibility between individuals of the T2_SlMLO1_NPT(+)
and Slmlo1, inferred by mean comparisons with a Student's
t-test (*p <
0.05).
Powdery mildew evaluation on plants of segregating
T. Panel (A) shows the phenotypic
evaluation of the powdery mildew growth on leaves of different T2
individuals that have been evaluated for the (from left to right) absence of
the RNAi::SlMLO1, presence of the
RNAi::SlMLO1, presence of the
RNAi::SlMLO3, presence of the RNAi::SlMLO5,
and presence of the RNAi::SlMLO8 silencing constructs,
followed by one individual of the cv Moneymaker (MM) and one of the Slmlo1 line
carrying a loss-of-function mutation in the SlMLO1 gene. Panel
(B) shows the relative quantification of the ratio between
Oidium neolycopersici and plant gDNAs in transgenic
individuals [NPT(+)] and not transgenic individuals [NPT(-)]
segregating in T2 families obtained with the silencing constructs
above described. Bars and standard errors refer to (from left to right) four
individuals of two independent T2 families not carrying the
RNAi::SlMLO1, eight individuals of the same two
T2 families carrying the RNAi::SlMLO1, 18
individuals of three independent T2 segregating families carrying
the RNAi::SlMLO3 construct, 18 individuals of three
independent T2 segregating families carrying the
RNAi::SlMLO5 construct and 20 individuals of two
T2 segregating families carrying the
RNAi::SlMLO8 construct, next to 10 MM plants and 10 plants
of the Slmlo1 line. The asterisk refers to the significant difference in
susceptibility between individuals of the T2_SlMLO1_NPT(+)
and Slmlo1, inferred by mean comparisons with a Student's
t-test (*p <
0.05).The Slmlo1 line, harboring a loss-of-function mutation in the SlMLO1
gene (Bai et al., 2008), is resistant to PM,
however lower leaves displayed PM symptoms (Figure 5A). Compared to the plants of the Slmlo1 line, RNAi plants carrying the
RNAi::SlMLO1 construct
[T2_SlMLO1_NPT(+) plants] showed no PM symptom
and also a significantly lower amount of fungal biomass (Figure 5B and Supplementary Figure 9A). Therefore, further
microscopic observations were carried out to study the fungal growth on the Slmlo1
line and T2_SlMLO1_NPT(+) plants.Since the two T2 families carrying the RNAi::SlMLO1
construct showed no difference with respect to the level of reduced expression of the
SlMLO homologs and fungal biomass quantification (Supplementary
Figures 8, 9), we used one T2
family for microscopic study. Compared to MM, fungal growth was significantly reduced
in both Slmlo1 and T2_RNAi::SlMLO1_NPT(+)
individuals due to the formation of a papilla beneath the appressorium (Figure 6). Interestingly, the rate of papilla formation in
T2_RNAi::SlMLO1_NPT(+) (93.3% of the infection
units) was significantly higher than in Slmlo1 (64.4% of the infection units; Table
4). In some cases, O.
neolycopersici was still able to penetrate epidermal cells and form
haustoria with a rate of 48.9% in Slmlo1 and 30% in
T2_RNAi::SlMLO1_NPT(+) (Table 4 and Figure 6). The general development of the spores on the two genotypes was
strikingly different: while on the Slmlo1 line the fungus could produce mostly up to
two secondary hyphae (in 36.7% of the total infection units), on
T2_RNAi::SlMLO1_NPT(+) individuals fungal
growth was significantly reduced after producing a germination tube (Table 4 and Figure 6).
Figure 6
Effect of the silencing of . Panel
(A) refers to a transgenic plant carrying the
RNAi::SlMLO1 construct, Panel (B) a plant of
the Slmlo1 line and (C) a plant of the tomato cv. Moneymaker.
Panels (A–C) show fungal structures (spores, germination
tube, appressorium, haustorium –HS-, and hyphae) and the plant cellular
reaction of papilla apposition at the sites of fungal penetration.
Table 4
Development of .
Genotype
Percentage of infection
units (IU)
Hyphae per
IU
Primary AP
Primary papilla
Primary HS
Secondary Papilla
Secondary HS
1
2
3
4
5
MM
100
0
90.2
0
68.3
76.8
67.1
35.4
6.1
0
Slmlo1
100
64.4
48.9
23.3
14.4
43.3
36.7
18.9
3.3
0
T2_RNAi::SlMLO1_NPT(+)
100
93.3*
30.0
2.2
0.0
11.1
7.8
3.3
0.0
0
AP, appressorium; HS, haustorium;
p < 0.05 compared to Slmlo1.
Effect of the silencing of . Panel
(A) refers to a transgenic plant carrying the
RNAi::SlMLO1 construct, Panel (B) a plant of
the Slmlo1 line and (C) a plant of the tomato cv. Moneymaker.
Panels (A–C) show fungal structures (spores, germination
tube, appressorium, haustorium –HS-, and hyphae) and the plant cellular
reaction of papilla apposition at the sites of fungal penetration.Development of .AP, appressorium; HS, haustorium;p < 0.05 compared to Slmlo1.
Discussion
Structure and evolution of the SlMLO gene family
In this study, we followed an in silico approach to assign 16
homologs to the tomato MLO gene family. This is consistent with the
results of previous studies reporting the MLO gene families of
several diploid species made of a number of homologs variable from 13 to 21 (Devoto
et al., 2003; Feechan et al., 2008; Liu and Zhu, 2008; Shen et al., 2012;
Pessina et al., 2014; Schouten et al., 2014; Appiano et al., 2015). This suggests that a similar number of MLO
homologs is likely to be retrieved in future genome-wide investigations involving
diploid eudicot species.Information on chromosomal localization was available for all the
SlMLO homologs with the exception of SlMLO4.
However, potato and tomato genomes are highly syntenic (Tomato Genome Consortium,
2012) and the closest
SlMLO4 homolog in potato (Sotub02g007200) is positioned on
chromosome 2, thus suggesting that SlMLO4 is also located ontomato
chromosome 2.Cloning of the SlMLO gene family from different tissues of the
cultivar MM revealed the occurrence of transcripts deviating from predictions
available at the SGN database, indicating that, despite the efforts of the tomato
resequencing project, the assembly of genomic regions and the prediction of certain
loci are not correct yet. Moreover, several cases of differentially spliced variants
among plant tissues were observed, mostly due to intron retention and exon skipping,
as it is in the case of SlMLO5, SlMLO9, SlMLO11, SlMLO13, and
SlMLO15. Due to the method used in this study to amplify the
SlMLO homologs, we cannot exclude that the intron retention is
the result of the amplification of non-mature mRNA. However, intron retention was
previously reported to be a very common type of alternative splicing in Arabidopsis
and rice (Ner-Gaon et al., 2007). There is
also a well-documented evidence indicating organ-specific regulation of alternative
splicing in plants (Palusa et al., 2007). More
studies need to be performed to unravel its complexity and functional significance.
Certainly, alternative forms of splicing, such as the ones found in this study, can
lead to aberrant mRNA isoforms that cause the loss-of-function of a
MLO gene. An example is reported by a recent study conducted by
Berg et al. (2015) in cucumber. They show that
the integration of a transposable element in the genomic region of the
CsaMLO8 leads to an aberrant splicing that causes the
loss-of-function of this susceptibility gene in a resistant cucumber genotype.The identification of protein motifs conserved in transmembrane domains of specific
SlMLO homologs (Tables 3A,B) corroborates previous findings in Solanaceae
plant species (Appiano et al., 2015). This
indicates that transmembrane domains, which are thought to provide a common scaffold
invariable for the whole MLO family (Devoto et al., 1999), might also be involved in conferring specific functions to MLO
homologs. Future functional studies of targeted mutagenesis of transmembrane MLO
protein regions can help to unravel their actual role.All the SlMLO proteins were found to group in six phylogenetic clades together with
other eudicot MLO homologs, including the complete Arabidopsis AtMLO family and
certain members of the apple, peach and strawberry MLO family. No SlMLO homolog could
be assigned to clade IV, previously shown to contain monocot MLO homologs and a few
eudicot homologs (grapevine VvMLO14, strawberry FvMLO17, and peach PpMLO12) (Feechan
et al., 2008; Pessina et al., 2014).Based on their sequence relatedness with Arabidopsis AtMLO proteins of known
function, it is logical to argue that one or more of the tomato SlMLO homologs in
clade III and clade I could regulate the processes of root response to mechanical
stimuli and pollen tube reception, respectively. The RNAi silenced lines of several
SlMLO homologs generated in this study could be useful to assign
new functions to MLO proteins which have gone unnoticed by the evaluation of the
available panel of Arabidopsis Atmlo mutants.
Possible pleiotropic effects and co-functioning of SlMLO homologs
RNA-seq data, RT-PCR and real-time qPCR of the SlMLO gene family
confirmed the expression of all the 16 SlMLO homologs. Often, it was
possible to detect high level of transcript of the same SlMLO
homolog in more than one of the four tissues under study (leaf, root, flower, and
mature fruit). This is in line with the findings of the previous study of Chen et al.
(2006), investigating the expression pattern
of the Arabidopsis AtMLO gene family in several tissues. Overall,
this body of evidence suggest that: (a) different MLO homologs may
have synergistic or antagonistic roles in regulating the same biological process; (b)
MLO homologs may have pleiotropic effects on different biological
processes. Co-functioning between MLO homologs has been demonstrated
to occur in Arabidopsis, where different AtMLO genes co-participate
in the same tissue to determine powdery mildew susceptibility and root response to
mechanical stimuli (Consonni et al., 2006;
Chen et al., 2009). A yet unidentified
additional biological function could be hypothesized for the SlMLO1,
previously shown to act as a susceptibility gene toward O.
neolycopersici (Pavan et al., 2009). This gene was found to exhibit its strongest expression level in
tomato flower and moderate expression in root, two tissues which are less or not
attacked by the fungus, respectively. Moreover, additional biological roles for
SlMLO1 would explain why this gene has not been excluded from
evolution, despite promoting susceptibility to PM pathogen. Interestingly, evidence
shows that the SlMLO1 orthologs in barley and Arabidopsis are
involved in the interaction with pathogens other than powdery mildews, such as
necrotrophs and hemibiotroph (Jarosch et al., 1999; Kumar et al., 2001; Consonni
et al., 2006). Thus, it is worthwhile to test
the RNAi::SlMLO1 plants with more pathogens to broaden its role in
plant-pathogen interactions.
SlMLO homologs involved in powdery mildew susceptibility
In this study, we mainly focused on the SlMLO genes grouped in the
clade V containing all the MLO homologs associated with PM
susceptibility in eudicots. The presence of multiple tomato homologs in clade V is in
accordance with the existence of three Arabidopsis proteins (AtMLO2, AtMLO6, and
AtMLO12) associated with increased fungal penetration (Consonni et al., 2006).We showed that tomato SlMLO3, SlMLO5, and SlMLO8,
differently from SlMLO1, do not increase their expression upon
O. neolycopersici challenge. Furthermore, strong silencing of the
same homologs in a susceptible tomato background (Moneymaker) did not result in a
significant reduction of disease symptoms (Figures 3–5).Plants transformed with a construct meant to silence SlMLO1 showed
co-silencing of SlMLO5 and SlMLO8, due to sequence
relatedness between these genes (Figure 4).
Interestingly, these plants were also significantly more resistant than plants of the
Slmlo1 line (Figure 5). Since the Slmlo1 line is
only a BC3S2 line carrying the Slmlo1mutation
(the ol-2 gene) in MM background, we cannot fully exclude background
effects from the ol-2 donor, the resistant line LC-95 of S.
lycopersicum var. cerasiforme, which might add to
partial susceptibility phenotype of the Slmlo1 line. On the other hand, our scenario
is reminiscent of the one reported in Arabidopsis, where Atmlo2
single mutant displays partial PM resistance, whereas
Atmlo2/Atmlo6/Atmlo12 triple mutant is fully resistant (Consonni
et al., 2006). Also in grape, more than one
VvMLO genes are involved in susceptibility to powdery mildew
(Feechan et al., 2008, 2013). Taken together with the knowledge of functional redundancy
in Arabidopsis and grape, our data suggest that in tomatoSlMLO1,
SlMLO5, and SlMLO8 are functionally redundant as PM
susceptibility factors with SlMLO1 playing a major role. Our results
showed that the contribution of SlMLO5 and SlMLO8
is too small to be observed with an RNAi approach silencing individual genes, but a
complementation experiment using the Slmlo1 line could be more suitable to observe
their minor role.It cannot be excluded yet that the other clade V tomato homolog,
SlMLO3, is also involved in plant-pathogen interactions. However,
it is worthwhile to notice that the SlMLO3 protein is missing three of the six motifs
contained in SlMLO1, two of which are also present in SlMLO5 and SlMLO8 (Table 3B). The motif three in Table 3B is located in the second intracellular
domain, which is known to be involved together with the third intracellular domain in
the protein functionality (Elliott et al., 2005). This would suggest that SlMLO3 might miss
important features to be fully functional as susceptibility factor. Overexpressing
SlMLO3 in the Slmlo mutant may provide a better evidence on its
eventual role as a functional susceptibility gene.Interestingly, we noticed that SlMLO4 and SlMLO14,
which do not belong to clade V, are up-regulated upon O.
neolycopersici infection (Figure 3
and Supplementary Figures 4,
5).
SlMLO14 is closely related to AtMLO4 and
AtMLO11, which are involved in root thigmomorphogenesis (Chen et
al., 2009), while SlMLO4 is
related to AtMLO7, involved in pollen tube reception (Kessler et
al., 2010). In Arabidopsis, mutation of
AtMLO4, AtMLO7, and AtMLO11 does not result in
PM resistance. Thus, we expected that silencing of SlMLO4 and
SlMLO14 in tomato will not lead to PM resistance too. The
up-regulated expression of SlMLO4 and SlMLO14 after
challenge with O. neolycopersici might be the result of shared
regulatory cis-acting elements. We used a 2 kb region located upstream the starting
codon of SlMLO1, SlMLO4, and SlMLO14 coding
sequences to search for shared regulatory elements through the online database Plant
Care (http://bioinformatics.psb.ugent.be/webtools/plantcare/html/) (Lescot
et al., 2002). We found at least five common
motifs which are associated with upregulation by multiple biotic and/or abiotic
stresses: ABRE (CACGTG), involved in abscisic acid responsiveness, CGTCA- and
TGACG-motifs, involved in the MeJA responsiveness, HSE (AAAAAATTC), involved in heat
stress responsiveness, and TCA (CCATCTTTTT/GAGAAGAATA) element, involved in salicylic
acid response. It is intriguing whether SlMLO4 and
SlMLO14 can act as a susceptibility gene to PM. Till now, only
clade IV and clade V MLO genes have been studied for their role as a
susceptibility gene. To further study these PM-induced non-clade V
SlMLO genes, a complementation test using the Slmlo mutant could
be performed.In conclusion, this study provides a comprehensive characterization of the
MLO gene family in tomato by analyzing their genomic structure,
expression profile and predicted protein motifs. In tomato, there are 17
MLO genes which can be grouped into six clades. The expression of
these MLO genes can be tissue specific and some MLO
genes show alternative splicing variants in different tissues. The
SlMLO1 in clade V is confirmed to be the major PM susceptibility
factor. In addition, two clade V genes, SlMLO5 and
SlMLO8, are suggested to have a partial redundant function, as
described in Arabidopsis for AtMLO2, 6, and 12
genes (Consonni et al., 2006). To label an
MLO gene as a PM susceptibility gene, it is recommended to
combine phylogenetic analysis and expression profile to select candidates of clade IV
(for monocot) and V (for dicot) that are induced by PM infection. However, the
upregulation of MLO genes outside clade V in response to PM, as
shown in this study and in Pessina et al. (2014), raises the possibility that they may act as susceptibility genes.
Finally, the RNAi lines generated in this study are useful materials for further
assigning new biological functions to the MLO gene family
members.
Materials and methods
Plant material, fungal material, and inoculation
In this study, we used the susceptible S. lycopersicum cultivar
Moneymaker (MM), the Slmlo1 line and transgenic T2 families in which
individual SlMLO gene was silenced via RNAi in MM background. The
Slmlo1 mutant (the ol-2 gene) was a natural mutation discovered in
the resistant line LC-95 of S. lycopersicum var.
cerasiforme. The LC-95 line was crossed with the susceptible
tomatoS. lycopersicum cv. Super Marmande and the F2 progeny was
used for mapping in 1998 (Ciccarese et al., 1998). Later, we introgressed the ol-2 allele into
S. lycopersicum cv Moneymaker (MM) by backcrossing and one BC3S2
line homozygous for the ol-2 allele (the tomatoSlmlo1 line) was
used in the experiment.The powdery mildew disease assay was performed by artificial inoculation in the
greenhouse. For this, the Wageningen isolate of O. neolycopersici
(On) was used (Bai et al., 2008). A suspension of O. neolycopersici conidia was
prepared, by rinsing freshly sporulating leaves of infected tomato plants with tap
water. This suspension was immediately sprayed on 1 month-old tomato plants. Ten
plants for each of the T2 progenies obtained from the transformation of
each silencing construct, 10 Slmlo1 plants and 10 MM plants were used for disease
assay. The scoring of powdery mildew symptoms was done 10 days after inoculation,
inspecting and collecting the third and fourth true leaves for each plant.For the evaluation of the expression of the SlMLO gene family, two
independent inoculations were set up. In both cases, we used the cultivar MM, four
and three biological replicates for each of the three time points (0, 6, and 10 h
post inoculation –hpi-) during the first and the second
inoculation, respectively.
Identification and cloning of the SlMLO gene family
Putative tomato MLO protein sequences were identified in the Sol Genomics Network
(SGN) (http://solgenomics.net/) database by using the BLASTP and TBLASTN
algorithms with Arabidopsis AtMLO protein sequences as query. Chromosomal
localization, sequences of the corresponding genes and introns/exons boundaries were
inferred by annotations from the International Tomato Annotation Group (ITAG).Aiming at cloning and sequencing the SlMLO gene family from the
cultivar MM, total RNA from leaf, root, flower and ripened fruit was isolated
(RNeasy® mini kit, Qiagen). The different tissues were collected from five MM
plants and pooled together to obtain enough material for the RNA isolation. For each
individual SlMLO homolog, two primer pairs specifically amplifying
overlapping products of around 800 bp of the predicted coding sequences (CDS) were
designed using the Primer3 plus online software (http://www.bioinformatics.nl/cgi-bin/primer3plus/primer3plus.cgi;
Rozen and Skaletsky, 2000). The forward primer
and the reverse primer of product A and product B, respectively, are located in the
respective UTR regions to ensure the cloning of the complete CDS. A one-step PCR was
performed to obtain the desired product (SuperScript® III One-Step RT-PCR
System, Invitrogen; Supplementary Table 1). Its high sensitivity and specificity ensured the
amplification of these very lowly expressed genes. Indeed, a PCR performed on a cDNA
obtained with oligo(dT)20 primers did not yield any product for many of
the homologs under investigation. The use of sequence-specific primers in the
one-step PCR, on the other hand, allowed the binding of only the desired mRNA
sequences.Corresponding amplicons were visualized onagarose gel and cloned into the
pGEM®-T Easy vector (Promega). Recombinant plasmids were sequenced by using
universal T7 and SP6 primers.In order to reveal gene structures and polymorphisms, SlMLO
sequences obtained by cloned amplicons were merged using the package Seqman of the
software DNASTAR® Lasergene8. The obtained consensus was aligned with the
coding region of the SlMLO identified in silico and
the corresponding genomic region using the CLC 7.6.1 sequence viewer software
(www.clcbio.com).Finally, for the motif analysis, the MEME (http://meme.nbcr.net/) package was
used to predict consensus patterns of consecutive conserved amino acids in the SlMLO
proteins deriving from the in silico translation of the cloned
transcripts from leaf, root, flower, and fruit of the cultivar MM (Bailey et al.,
2015).
Comparative analysis
The corresponding SlMLO protein sequences of translated cloned CDS obtained from leaf
and flower (in the case of SlMLO12) were used as dataset in the CLC
7.6.1 sequence viewer software (www.clcbio.com) for ClustalW
alignment and the obtainment of an UPGMA-based comparative tree (bootstrap value was
set equal to 100), together with those of the 15 Arabidopsis AtMLO homologs.
Moreover, MLO proteins experimentally shown to be required for PM susceptibility were
added, namely pea PsMLO1, barley HvMLO, wheat TaMLO_A1b and TaMLO_B1a, rice OsMLO3,
pepper CaMLO2, tobaccoNtMLO1, cucumber CsaMLO8, Lotus japonicus
LjMLO1, and barrel clover MtMLO1. Moreover, MLO homologs of the Rosaceae species that
cluster in clade VII (FvMLO15, MdMLO18, PpMLO9) and VIII (FvMLO13, MdMLO20, and
PpMLO13) were included (Supplementary Table 2). The obtained UPGMA-comparative tree was then displayed as
circular rooted cladogram with CLC software.
Expression analysis of the SlMLO gene family in response to
O. neolycopersici
Tissue samples from the third and fourth true leaf of 1 month-old tomato plants were
collected immediately before fungal inoculation and at two time points after
inoculation (6 and 10 h). The RNA isolation was performed with MagMAX-96 Total RNA
Isolation kit (Applied Biosystem), following the manufacturer's instructions.
Included in the protocol is a DNase treatment using the TURBO™ DNase. An
aliquot of the RNA isolated was run on denaturing agarose gel to assess its
integrity. Purity and concentration were determined by measuring its absorbance at
260 and 280 nm using the NanoDrop® 1000A spectrophotometer. Following this
protocol for RNA isolation, intact and pure RNA was obtained and the concentration
was variable between 200 and 250ng/μl.cDNAs were synthesized by using the SuperScript III first-strand synthesis kit
(Invitrogen) using the oligo(dT)20 primer, starting from the same amount
of RNA (200 ng/μl). Specific primer pairs for each of the 16
SlMLO homologs, amplifying fragments ranging from 70 to 230 bp,
were designed as described above (Supplementary Table 3). The amplification of single
fragments of the expected size for each homolog was verified by agarose gel
electrophoresis and by the observation of the melting pick. Four tomato reference
genes were tested for expression stability in order to determine which ones could be
suitable for normalization of the expression of SlMLO homologs.
These included the 60S ribosomal protein L33 (GeneBank number Q2MI79), the elongation
factor 1α (GeneBank number X14449), actin (Genebank XP_004236747), and
ubiquitin (GeneBank number XP_004248311) (Schijlen et al., 2007; Løvdal and Lillo, 2009). Gene expression stability was assayed with the BestKeeper program
(Pfaffl et al., 2004), determining as best
reference genes the ribosomal protein L33 and the elongation factor 1α. The
cDNAs were diluted 10-fold and used in real-time qPCR with a Bio-Rad CFX96TM thermal
cycler. The thermal cycling conditions used were 95°C for 1 min, followed by
40 cycles at: 95°C for 15 s, 60°C for 1 min, and 72°C for 30
s, followed by a melt cycle of 0.5°C increment per min from 65 to
95°C. Comparable amplification efficiencies between target and reference
genes were determined using the LinRegPCR software (Karlen et al., 2007). Normalization was performed according to
the ΔΔC method (Livak and Schmittgen,
2001). Four biological replicates and two
technical replicates were used in this experiment. Student's
t-tests were applied in order to assess significant differences
between the treatments.
SlMLO family expression analysis in different tissues
To analyze MLO gene expression in leaf, root, flower and ripened
fruit approximately equal amount of tissues from five MM plants were pooled and used
for RNA isolation and cDNA synthesis as described in the previous paragraph. Before
using them as templates, cDNAs were diluted 10-fold. Real-time qPCR was performed
using the set of primers reported in Supplementary Table 3 to amplify each homolog in
the four tissues above mentioned. Elongation factor 1α was used as reference
gene. Data analysis was performed according to the
ΔC method (Livak and Schmittgen, 2001). Three technical replicates for each sample
were performed.
Generation of RNAi silencing lines
Four primer pairs were designed to amplify and clone fragments from SlMLO1,
SlMLO3, SlMLO5, and SlMLO8 into the Gateway-compatible
vector pENTR D-TOPO (Invitrogen) (Supplementary Table 3). The cloned sequences of the
SlMLO1, SlMLO3, SlMLO5, and SlMLO8 genes are
highlighted in Supplementary Figure 6. After cloning in E. coli (strain DH5α), the
kanamycin-resistant colonies were assessed for the presence of constructs by colony
PCR. Positive recombinant plasmids were further analyzed by restriction enzyme
digestion and sequencing. Next, amplicons were transferred by LR recombination
reaction into the pHELLSGATE12 vector for hairpin-induced RNAi (Wielopolska et al.,
2005) following the instructions provided
by the manufacturer (Invitrogen), and cloned again in E. coli
DH5α. Bacterial colonies growing on a spectinomycin-containing medium were
selected for the presence of the silencing construct by colony PCR and sequencing.
Recombinant plasmids were transferred into the AGL1+virG strain of
Agrobacterium tumefaciens (Lazo et al., 1991) by electroporation, and transformed bacterial cells were
selected on a medium containing 100 mg/ml−1 spectinomycin, 50
mg/ml−1 carbenicillin, and 50 mg/ml−1
chloramphenicol. Single colonies of A. tumefaciens were picked and
the presence of the insert was confirmed by colony PCR. Ten-fold dilutions of
overnight culture from single positive colonies were re-suspended in MSO medium (4.3
g/l MS basal salt mixture, 30 g/l sucrose, 0.4 mg/l thiamine, 100 mg/l myoinositol,
pH 5.8) to a final OD600 of 0.5 and used for transformation.The transformation procedure for tomato cotyledons was carried out similarly to the
method described by Appiano et al. (2015).Silencing efficiency was assessed, for each of the four constructs, on 10–20
T1 plants and on selected T2 lines by real-time qPCR, as
described for the analysis of the SlMLO gene family expression in
response to O. neolycopersici. In addition, the T2 lines
were assessed for the presence of the NPTII marker gene and the 35S promoter by PCR,
using the primer pair NPTII_Fw (5′ACTGGGCACAACAGACAATC3′)/NPTII_Rev
(5′ TCGTCCTGCAGTTCATTCAG 3′) and 35S-Fw (5′-GCTCCTACAAATG
CCATCA-3′)/35S-Rev (5′- GATAGTGG GATTGTGCGTCA-3′), and
visualizing the products onagarose gel.
Disease quantification on silenced lines
T2 lines originating from selfing of T1 plants showing high
level of silencing were inoculated with O. neolycopersici
(On) by spraying 4 weeks old plants with a suspension of
conidiospores obtained from freshly sporulating leaves of heavily infected plants and
adjusted to a final concentration of 4 × 104 spores/ml. Inoculated
plants were grown in a greenhouse compartment at 20 ± 2°C with 70
± 15% relative humidity and day length of 16 h. Two weeks later, infected
tissues from the third and fourth true leaf were visually scored and sampled. Plant
and fungal DNAs were extracted by using the DNeasy DNA extraction kit (Qiagen). In
total, 15 ng of DNA was used as template for amplification with the primer pair
On-Fw (5′-CGCCAAAGACCTAACCAAAA-3′) and
On-Rev (5′-AGCCAAGAGATCCGTTGTTG-3′), designed onOn-specific internal transcribed spacer sequences (GenBank
accession number EU047564). The tomato Ef1α primers (Supplementary Table 3) were used as reference to
determine fungal biomass relative to host plant DNA by
ΔΔC method.
Disease tests for microscopic evaluation in histological study
Spores of the Wageningen isolate of O. neolycopersici grown in a
climate chamber at 20 ± 1°C, with 70 ± 10% RH and a 16-h
photoperiod were water-sprayed on the third leaf of 1-month old tomato plants of the
susceptible tomato cv. MM, the resistant line Slmlo1 and transgenic plants of one
T2 family selected by PCR for the presence of the NPTII and 35S marker
genes of the RNAi::SlMLO1 silencing construct. The concentration of
the spore suspension was 3 × 105 conidia ml−1.
After 65 h, a 4 cm2 segment was cut from the inoculated leaves. Three
samples were taken from four plants of each genotype and from five plants of the
T2 family, bleached in a 1:3 (v/v) acetic acid/ethanol solution and 48
h later stained in 0.005% trypan blue as described by Pavan et al. (2008). For each genotype, a total of 90 infection
units (IU), defined as a germinated spore that produced, at least, a primary
appressorium, were counted. Observations were performed using a Zeiss Axiophot bright
field microscope and pictures were taken with an Axiocam ERc5s. For each IU, the
number of hyphae, the presence/absence of a primary and secondary haustoria and
presence/absence of papillae were recorded.
Author contributions
Conceived and designed the experiments: ZZ, MA, SP, and VB. Performed the experiments:
MA, ZZ, VB. Analyzed the data: MA, ZZ, VB. Contributed reagents/materials/ analysis
tools: LR, RV. Wrote and edited the paper: SP, MA, ZZ, AW, and VB.
Funding
The work of ZZ is supported by the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences Fundamental
Research Budget Increment Project (Grant No. 2015ZL008), The Agricultural Science and
Technology Innovation Program (Grant No. CAAS-ASTIP-2013-IVFCAAS) and the Merit-based
Scientific Research Foundation of the State Ministry of Human Resources and Social
Security of China for Returned Overseas Chinese Scholars (Grant No. 2015-192). The work
of SP, VB, and LR was supported by the Italian Ministry of University and Research
(GenHORT project).
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial
or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of
interest.
Authors: A Devoto; P Piffanelli; I Nilsson; E Wallin; R Panstruga; G von Heijne; P Schulze-Lefert Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 1999-12-03 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Sharon A Kessler; Hiroko Shimosato-Asano; Nana F Keinath; Samuel E Wuest; Gwyneth Ingram; Ralph Panstruga; Ueli Grossniklaus Journal: Science Date: 2010-11-12 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Chiara Consonni; Matthew E Humphry; H Andreas Hartmann; Maren Livaja; Jörg Durner; Lore Westphal; John Vogel; Volker Lipka; Birgit Kemmerling; Paul Schulze-Lefert; Shauna C Somerville; Ralph Panstruga Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2006-05-28 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Valentina Bracuto; Michela Appiano; Luigi Ricciardi; Deniz Göl; Richard G F Visser; Yuling Bai; Stefano Pavan Journal: Transgenic Res Date: 2017-01-09 Impact factor: 2.788
Authors: A Ramesha; Himanshu Dubey; K Vijayan; Kangayam M Ponnuvel; Rakesh K Mishra; K Suresh Journal: Mol Biol Rep Date: 2020-04-01 Impact factor: 2.316
Authors: Zhe Yan; Michela Appiano; Ageeth van Tuinen; Fien Meijer-Dekens; Danny Schipper; Dongli Gao; Robin Huibers; Richard G F Visser; Yuling Bai; Anne-Marie A Wolters Journal: Genes (Basel) Date: 2021-05-11 Impact factor: 4.096
Authors: Ronald R Tapia; Christopher R Barbey; Saket Chandra; Kevin M Folta; Vance M Whitaker; Seonghee Lee Journal: Hortic Res Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 6.793