| Literature DB >> 28208805 |
Alessandro Spagnolo1, Vincenzo Mondello2, Philippe Larignon3, Sandra Villaume4, Fanja Rabenoelina5, Christophe Clément6, Florence Fontaine7.
Abstract
As a result of the increasing economic impact of grapevine trunk diseases on viticulture worldwide, efficient and viable control strategies are urgently needed. However, understanding both plant-pathogen interactions and plant physiological changes related to these diseases is fundamental to such an achievement. In this study, we analyzed the effect of inoculation with the Botryosphaeria dieback fungal agents, Neofusicoccum parvum and Diplodia seriata, with and without inflorescence removal at the onset of G stage (separated clusters), I stage (flowering) and M stage (veraison). A measure of lesion size and real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction-based analysis were carried out. The results clearly show the importance of inflorescences in the development of lesions associated with Botryosphaeria dieback pathogens inoculated on green stems of adult vines, especially at the onset of flowering. At flowering, the biggest necroses were observed with the inflorescences present, as well as an activation of the studied defense responses. Thus, an ineffective response to the pathogen could be consistent with a possible metabolic reprogramming linked to the host phenophase.Entities:
Keywords: Botryosphaeria dieback; Diplodia seriata; Neofusicoccum parvum; defense responses; flowering
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28208805 PMCID: PMC5343928 DOI: 10.3390/ijms18020393
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Figure 1Mean lesion lengths ± SE on green stems after artificial inoculation at the onset of the G stage, flowering and veraison with: (A) N. parvum (Np) and (B) N. parvum (Np) or D. seriata (Ds) the in presence (+inf) or absence (−inf) of inflorescences; control stems (C + inf, C − inf) were wounded and inoculated with sterile malt agar. Differences among the means were evaluated by Dunn’s multiple comparison test; after that the null hypothesis (equal means) was rejected in the Kruskal–Wallis test, assuming a significance of p ≤ 0.05. The same letter above columns indicates no statistically significant differences for p ≤ 0.05.
Figure 2Expression levels of the selected 16 genes recorded by RT-qPCR in N. parvum artificially-inoculated stems at different phenological stages. Values (the mean of three technical replicates) represent the expression levels (ΔΔCt) of reported conditions relatively to the control (C + inf). Expression of a given gene was considered up- or down-regulated when the value of relative expression was >2-fold or <0.5-fold compared to the control, respectively. Due to the similarity to control values, the last eight genes were not considered in the following trials.
Figure 3Expression levels of the considered eight genes recorded by RT-qPCR in N. parvum and D. seriata artificially-inoculated stems at different phenological stages. Values (the mean of three technical replicates) represent the expression levels (ΔΔCt) of reported conditions relative to the control (C + inf). The expression of a given gene was considered up- or down-regulated when the value of relative expression was >2-fold or <0.5-fold compared to the control, respectively.
Conditions and sample codes.
| Experiment | Condition | Sample Codes | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| G Stage ( | I Stage ( | M Stage ( | ||
| Control | C − inf/C + inf | C − inf/C + inf | C − inf/C + inf | |
| Np − inf/Np + inf | Np − inf/Np + inf | Np − inf/Np + inf | ||
| Ds − inf/Ds + inf | Ds − inf/Ds + inf | Ds − inf/Ds + inf | ||
Legend: C = Control; Np = N. parvum; Ds = D. seriata; + inf/− inf = with/without inflorescences.
Primers of genes analyzed by real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction.
| Function | Gene | Primer Sequences | GenBank or TC TIGR * Accession Number |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5′-GAACTGGGTGCTTGATAGGC-3′ | GU585871 | ||
| 5′-AACCAAAATATCCGGAGTAAAAGA-3′ | |||
| 5′-ATCTACCTCAAGCTCCTAGTC-3′ | XM_002270599 | ||
| 5′-CAATCTTGTCCTCCTTTCCT-3′ | |||
| 5′-GCAGAAGCCAAAGCCATTGA-3′ | NM_001281104 | ||
| 5′-GCCGATGATGGACTCCAGTAC-3′ | |||
| 5′-TCCTCCCGGAAAACAGCTG-3′ | X75967 | ||
| 5′-TCCTCCAAATGCCTCAAATCA-3′ | |||
| 5′-AACATCCCCCCTCCCACTT-3′ | XM_002269882 | ||
| 5′-TGCATCTCGCTTGGCCTATT-3′ | |||
| 5′-AGGAAGCAGCATTGAAGGCTC-3′ | FJ851185 | ||
| 5′-TGCACCAGGCATTTCTACACC-3′ | |||
| 5′-CTACAACTATGGCGCTGCTG-3′ | AF532966 | ||
| 5′-CCAAAACCATAATGCGGTCT-3′ | |||
| 5′-TCAATGGCTGCAATGGTGC-3′ | DQ267748 | ||
| 5′-CGGTCGATGTTGCGAGATTTA-3′ | |||
| 5′-TGGTCTTGCTGATAAGCCTAGTGA-3′ | XM_002727606 | ||
| 5′-TCCACATCCGATCGACATTG-3′ | |||
| 5′-AGGGAACAATCGTTACCCAAG-3′ | AY156047 | ||
| 5′-CCGATGGTAGGGACACTGAT-3′ | |||
| 5′-CCTGAAATCAAAGTTCTCCTTCACA-3′ | XM_002266322 | ||
| 5′-CCGGGCCTGAAATCAAAGTT-3′ | |||
| 5′-CCTAACACCTTAGCCGAATTCGC-3′ | AF532965 | ||
| 5′-GGCCATAGGCACATTAAATCCATC-3′ | |||
| 5′-TCTGGATTCCGAACTGCATTG-3′ | XM_002270484 | ||
| 5′-ACCCATGATTAGCAGCATTGG-3′ | |||
| 5′-GCAGAAGCTGCCAGTGAAATT-3′ | XM_002277883 | ||
| 5′-GGCAAGCCATGAAAGTGACA-3′ | |||
| 5′-TCGGTGGAGGATGACTTGCT-3′ | XM_002272382 | ||
| 5′-CGTGTGCTGTACGAGCTGAAG-3′ | |||
| 5′-GTGGACCTAATGCAGTGATTGGA-3′ | AF056622 | ||
| 5′-TGCCAGTGGTAAGGCTAAGTTCA-3′ | |||
| 5′-CGTCGAAGATGCTCAATGATGA-3′ | XM_002285322 | ||
| 5′-CCCCCACGAGCAACATTAATT-3′ | |||
| 5′-ATCACCAACCTCATTCATATGC-3′ | AF271661 | ||
| 5′-GTTGTTGTCTCAACCCATTTCC-3′ |
* see http://www.jcvi.org/cms/research/projects/tdb/overview/.