| Literature DB >> 31406170 |
Jorge Poveda1, Rosa Hermosa2, Enrique Monte2, Carlos Nicolás3.
Abstract
The family Brassicaceae includes plants that are non-host for arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) such as the model plant Arabidopsis thaliana (arabidopsis) and the economically important crop plant Brassica napus (rapeseed). It is well known that Trichoderma species have the ability to colonize the rhizosphere of Brassicaceae plants, promoting growth and development as well as stimulating systemic defenses. The aim of the present work is to ascertain that Brassicaceae plants increase productivity when AMF and Trichoderma are combinedly applied, and how such an effect can be ruled. This simultaneous application of a Trichoderma harzianum biocontrol strain and an AMF formulation produces a significant increase in the colonization by Trichoderma and the presence of AMF in arabidopsis and rapeseed roots, such colonization accompanied by improved productivity in both Brassicaceae species. Expression profiling of defense-related marker genes suggests that the phytohormone salicylic acid plays a key role in the modulation of the root colonization process when both fungi are jointly applied.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31406170 PMCID: PMC6690897 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-48269-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Number of siliques produced by arabidopsis (a) and rapeseed (b) plants. Arabidopsis (ARA) and rapeseed (BN) inoculated with T. harzianum T34 (-T34) and AMF (-AMF). Each value represents the average of 45 plants from 3 independent experiments (15 plants each), with their standard deviation. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed, followed by Sidak’s multiple comparison test, indicating significant differences as follows: *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001.
Arabidopsis (ARA), rapeseed (BN) and tomato (TOM) root fungal colonization by T. harzianum T34 (+T34) and AMF (+AMF).
| Treatments | Quantified fungi | Plant | Fungi | Ratioc | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ct | SD | Qtya | Ct | SD | Qtyb | |||
| ARA + T34 | T34 | 19.65 | 0.08 | 2.46 | 25.68 | 0.15 | 1.11 | 0.45 ± 0.02 |
| ARA + AMF | AMF | 19.89 | 0.06 | 2.17 | — | — | — | — |
| ARA + T34 + AMF | T34 | 19.78 | 0.10 | 2.28 | 24.55 | 0.29 | 2.03 | 0.89 ± 0.06* |
| AMF | 28.82 | 0.23 | 2.74 | 0.12 ± 0.01 | ||||
| BN + T34 | T34 | 21.32 | 0.12 | 0.79 | 27.95 | 0.25 | 0.30 | 0.38 ± 0.01 |
| BN + AMF | AMF | 21.28 | 0.05 | 0.84 | — | — | — | — |
| BN + T34 + AMF | T34 | 20.98 | 0.03 | 0.90 | 26.47 | 0.21 | 0.62 | 0.69 ± 0.05* |
| AMF | 30.14 | 0.19 | 0.08 | 0.09 ± 0.01 | ||||
| TOM + T34 | T34 | 20.56 | 0.06 | 1.25 | 26.38 | 0.22 | 0.67 | 0.54 ± 0.04 |
| TOM + AMF | AMF | 20.69 | 0.11 | 1.20 | 27.53 | 0.12 | 0.78 | 0.65 ± 0.04 |
| TOM + T34 + AMF | T34 | 20.75 | 0.02 | 1.19 | 28.79 | 0.20 | 0.16 | 0.14 ± 0.02* |
| AMF | 26.83 | 0.17 | 0.99 | 0.83 ± 0.07* | ||||
aQuantity of plant DNA (ng) referred to actin gene.
bQuantity of fungi DNA (ng) referred to Trichoderma actin gene and AMF 18 s rRNA.
cProportion of fungal DNA vs. plant DNA. Values are the means of three root pools (five plants each one) from three independent experiments with the corresponding standard deviations, and values followed by * are significantly different (P < 0.05) regarding the single application of T34 or AMF.
— Absence of amplification.
Quantification of fungal DNA in arabidopsis (3-week-old plants) roots was performed by qPCR, using the actin genes of Trichoderma and arabidopsis, and the 18S rRNA for AMF.
Figure 2Real time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) analysis of some defense genes in roots of 3 week-old A. thaliana plants inoculated with T. harzianum T34 and/or AMF. Genes of the isochorismate synthase 1 (ICS1), pathogenesis-related protein 1 (PR-1), callose synthase 5 (CALS5), lipoxygenase 1 (LOX1), vegetative storage protein (VSP2) and plant defensin 1.5 (PDF1.5). Values correspond to relative measurements against arabidopsis grown in the absence of the fungus (2−ΔΔCt = 1). The arabidopsis actin gene was used as an internal reference. Bars represent standard deviations of the means of three root pools of five plants each one collected from three independent experiments. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed, followed by Sidak’s multiple comparison test, indicating significant differences as follows: *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001; ****P < 0.0001.
Figure 3Real time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) analysis of some defense genes in roots of 5 week-old A. thaliana plants inoculated with T. harzianum T34 and/or AMF. Genes of the isochorismate synthase 1 (ICS1), pathogenesis-related protein 1 (PR-1), callose synthase 5 (CALS5), lipoxygenase 1 (LOX1), vegetative storage protein (VSP2) and plant defensin 1.5 (PDF1.5). Values correspond to relative measurements against arabidopsis grown in the absence of the fungus (2−ΔΔCt = 1). The arabidopsis actin gene was used as an internal reference. Bars represent standard deviations of the means of three root pools of five plants each one collected from three independent experiments. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed, followed by Sidak’s multiple comparison test, indicating significant differences as follows: *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001; ****P < 0.0001.
Figure 4Real time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) analysis of expression of some defense genes in roots of 4 weeks-old tomato plants inoculated with T. harzianum T34 and/or AMF. Genes of the isochorismate synthase 1 (ICS1), pathogenesis-related protein 1 (PR-1), lipoxygenase 1 (LOX1) and ethylene signaling protein (EIN2). Values correspond to relative measurements against tomato grown in the absence of the fungus (2−ΔΔCt = 1). The tomato actin gene was used as endogenous reference control. Bars represent standard deviations of the means of three root pools of five plants each one collected from three independent experiments. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed, followed by Sidak’s multiple comparison test, indicating significant differences as follows: *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001; ****P < 0.0001.
Figure 5Real time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) analysis of expression of some defense genes in roots of 7 weeks-old tomato plants inoculated with T. harzianum T34 and/or AMF. Genes of the isochorismate synthase 1 (ICS1), pathogenesis-related protein 1 (PR-1), lipoxygenase 1 (LOX1) and ethylene signaling protein (EIN2). Values correspond to relative measurements against tomato grown in the absence of the fungus (2−ΔΔCt = 1). The tomato actin gene was used as endogenous reference control. Bars represent standard deviations of the means of three root pools of five plants each one collected from three independent experiments. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed, followed by Sidak’s multiple comparison test, indicating significant differences as follows: *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001; ****P < 0.0001.
Analysis of fungal root colonization by T. harzianum T34 (+T34) and AMF (+AMF) in Arabidopsis wild-type Col-0 (COL) and defensive mutants sid2 (SID) and coi1-30 (COI).
| Treatments | Quantified fungi | Plant | Fungi | Ratioc | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ct | SD | Qtya | Ct | SD | Qtyb | |||
| COL + T34 | T34 | 20.32 | 0.05 | 1.98 | 26.37 | 0.12 | 0.71 | 0.36 ± 0.03 |
| COL + AMF | AMF | 19.99 | 0.07 | 2.04 | — | — | — | — |
| COI + T34 | T34 | 19.96 | 0.09 | 2.08 | 26.45 | 0.17 | 0.69 | 0.33 ± 0.01 |
| COI + AMF | AMF | 19.87 | 0.10 | 2.19 | — | — | — | — |
| COI + T34 + AMF | T34 | 20.12 | 0.08 | 2.00 | 25.59 | 0.14 | 1.37 | 0.68 ± 0.04* |
| AMF | 29.97 | 0.09 | 0.20 | 0.10 ± 0.02 | ||||
| SID + T34 | T34 | 20.08 | 0.05 | 2.01 | 25.03 | 0.12 | 1.75 | 0.87 ± 0.05* |
| SID + AMF | AMF | 19.89 | 0.07 | 2.18 | 27.61 | 0.18 | 0.76 | 0.35 ± 0.06 |
| SID + T34 + AMF | T34 | 20.02 | 0.03 | 2.03 | 24.68 | 0.11 | 1.97 | 0.96 ± 0.03* |
| AMF | 26.59 | 0.12 | 1.13 | 0.56 ± 0.07* | ||||
aQuantity of plant DNA (ng) referred to arabidopsis actin gene.
bQuantity of fungi DNA (ng) referred to Trichoderma actin gene and AMF 18s rRNA.
cProportion of fungal DNA vs. plant DNA. Values are the means of three root pools (five plants each one) from three different experiments with the corresponding standard deviations, and values followed by * are significantly different (P < 0.05) regarding the single application of T34 or AMF.
— Absence of amplification.
Quantification of fungal DNA in arabidopsis (5-week-old plants), rapeseed (10-week-old plants) and tomato (7-week-old-plants) roots was performed by qPCR, using the actin genes of Trichoderma, arabidopsis, rapeseed and tomato, and the 18S rRNA for AMF.
Primers used in this work.
| Code | Sequence (5′-3′) | Use | References | R2 | Slope | Efficiency (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Act-T-F | ATGGTATGGGTCAGAAGGA | Endogenous |
[ | 0.993 | 3.346 | 99.01 |
| Act-T-R | ATGTCAACACGAGCAATGG | |||||
| AML1 (F) | CTTTCGATGGTAGGATAGAGG | 18S rRNA to AMFs quantification |
[ | 0.988 | 3.279 | 101.80 |
| AML2 (R) | ACAACTTTAATATACGCTATTGGA | |||||
| Act-Bn-F | CCCTGGAATTGCTGACCGTA | Endogenous rapeseed gene |
[ | 0.990 | 3.285 | 101.54 |
| Act-Bn-R | TGGAAAGTGCTGAGGGATGC | |||||
| Act-At-F | CTCCCGCTATGTATGTCGCC | Endogenous arabidopsis gene |
[ | 0.996 | 3.306 | 100.67 |
| Act-At-R | TTGGCACAGTGTGAGACACAC | |||||
| ICS1-At-F | GATCTAGCTAACGAGAACGG | Synthesis gene of SA in arabidopsis |
[ | 0.989 | 3.283 | 101.64 |
| ICS1-At-R | CATTAAACTCAACCTGAGGGAC | |||||
| PR-1-At-F | GGCTAACTACAACTACGCTG | Response gene to SA in arabidopsis |
[ | 0.992 | 3.292 | 101.24 |
| PR-1-At-R | GGCTTCTCGTTCACATAATTC | |||||
| CAL5-At-F | CTTTGCTGGTTTCAACTCAACTC | Response gene to SA in arabidopsis |
[ | 0.991 | 3.291 | 101.30 |
| CAL5-At-R | AATGTTTGCTCTCCGTTTCC | |||||
| LOX1-At-F | GTAAGCTCTGATGTTACTGATTC | Synthesis gene of JA in arabidopsis |
[ | 0.988 | 3.279 | 101.83 |
| LOX1-At-R | CTGCGGTTAACGACGTGATTG | |||||
| VSP2-At-F | GTTAGGGACCGGAGCATCAA | Response gene to JA in arabidopsis |
[ | 0.986 | 3.274 | 102.02 |
| VSP2-At-R | TCAATCCCGAGCTCTATGATGTT | |||||
| PDF1.5-At-F | GTTGCTCTTGTTCTCTTTGCTGA | Response gene to JA in arabidopsis |
[ | 0.997 | 3.309 | 100.53 |
| PDF1.5-At-R | CCATGTCTCACTTTCCCTTTTGC | |||||
| Act-Sl-R | CACCACTGCTGAACGGGAA | Endogenous tomato gene |
[ | 0.987 | 3.278 | 101.87 |
| Act-Sl-R | GGAGCTGCTCCTGGCAGTTT | |||||
| ICS1-Sl-F | GTTCCTCTCCAAGAATGTCC | Synthesis gene of SA in tomato |
[ | 0.984 | 3.291 | 102.41 |
| ICS1-Sl-R | TCCTTCAAGCTCATCAAACT | |||||
| PR-1-Sl-F | CCTCAAGATTATCTTAACGCTC | Response gene to SA in tomato |
[ | 0.983 | 3.263 | 102.54 |
| PR-1-Sl-R | TACCATTGCTTCTCATCAACC | |||||
| LOX1-Sl-F | GCCTCTCTTCTTGATGGAG | Synthesis gene of JA in tomato |
[ | 0.995 | 3.268 | 100.75 |
| LOX1-Sl-R | GTAGTGAGCCACTTCTCCAA | |||||
| EIN2-Sl-F | GTTGCTAAGTGATGCTGTA | Response gene to JA/ET in tomato |
[ | 0.997 | 3.306 | 100.48 |
| EIN2-Sl-R | CGCTCAAGCATGCTGGGCC |