| Literature DB >> 35448634 |
Po-Wen Tu1,2, Jie-Siang Chiu3, Chih Lin1, Chih-Cheng Chien1, Feng-Chia Hsieh4, Ming-Che Shih1,3, Yu-Liang Yang1,2.
Abstract
Colletotrichum gloeosporioides is a phytopathogenic fungus that causes devastating losses in strawberries without effective countermeasures. Members of the genus Photorhabdus exhibit antimicrobial capability and have been found to have the potential for use as biocontrol agents against C. gloeosporioides. Photorhabdus species exhibit two phase variations with a differentiated composition of secondary metabolites designated to each phase. In this study, Photorhabdus akhurstii sp. nov. 0813-124 exhibited phase I (PL1) and phase II (PL2); however, only PL1 displayed distinct inhibition of C. gloeosporioides in the confrontation assay. We identified the bioactive ingredients of P. akhurstii sp. nov. 0813-124 to be glidobactin A and cepafungin I, with MIC values lower than 1.5 and 2.0 µg/mL, respectively. Furthermore, we revealed the biosynthetic gene cluster (BGC) of corresponding bioactive molecules through genomics analysis and determined its expression level in PL1 and PL2. The expression of glidobactin BGC in PL1 increased rapidly within 24 h, while PL2 was eventually stimulated after 60 h. In summary, we demonstrated that P. akhurstii sp. nov. 0813-124 could potentially be used as a biocontrol agent or part of a natural product repertoire for combating C. gloeosporioides.Entities:
Keywords: Colletotrichum gloeosporioides; Photorhabdus akhurstii; antifungal ability; biocontrol agent; glidobactin; natural product; phytopathogen
Year: 2022 PMID: 35448634 PMCID: PMC9027565 DOI: 10.3390/jof8040403
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Fungi (Basel) ISSN: 2309-608X
Figure 1Fungal inhibition against C. gloeosporioides and pigmentation of PL1 and PL2. Pigmentation of PL1 (a) and PL2 (b) after 72 h incubation at 30 °C on LP agar. The antagonist assays of PL1 (c) and PL2 (d) against C. gloeosporioides plugin (center). The inhibition of fungal spore germination by EA solvent (left bottom) and crude extracts of PL1 (e) and PL2 (f) using methanol (right bottom), butanol (right top), and EA (left top).
Figure 2Growth inhibition of C. gloeosporioides spores by eluents from PL1 EA crude extract on PDA. (a) Four fractions of MPLC eluents. (b) Forty-five subfractions of HPLC eluents. (c) HPLC profile of the MPLC eluent F4.
Figure 3Structures and MS2 fragment annotation of HPLC Peak 1 (a), Peak 2 (b), and Peak 3 (c).
Inhibition bioassay and minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) of PL1 extract and isolated compounds against C. gloeosporioides spore.
| Subject | MIC (µg/mL) |
|---|---|
| PL1 BuOH crude extract | NS * |
| PL1 EA crude extract | <300 |
| Glidobactin A | ≤1.50 |
| Cepafungin I | ≤2.00 |
| Carbendazim (positive control) | ≤0.32 |
* NS: non-sensitive.
Figure 4The 8th BGC of P. akhurstii sp. nov. 0813-124 phase I and reference glidobactin BGC from S. brevitalea sp. nov. (MIBiG accession: BGC0000997). The structures of glidobactins are shown at the bottom. The functional carbonyl group is labeled in red.
Figure 5Time-dependent expressions of five related genes (a–e) in the 8th BGC compared between PL1 (blue) and PL2 (red) during 90 h of PDB incubation. Values are the means of biological replicates ± standard deviations (N = 3).