| Literature DB >> 35887492 |
Maria Aragona1, Anita Haegi1, Maria Teresa Valente1, Luca Riccioni1, Laura Orzali1, Salvatore Vitale1, Laura Luongo1, Alessandro Infantino1.
Abstract
The fast and continued progress of high-throughput sequencing (HTS) and the drastic reduction of its costs have boosted new and unpredictable developments in the field of plant pathology. The cost of whole-genome sequencing, which, until few years ago, was prohibitive for many projects, is now so affordable that a new branch, phylogenomics, is being developed. Fungal taxonomy is being deeply influenced by genome comparison, too. It is now easier to discover new genes as potential targets for an accurate diagnosis of new or emerging pathogens, notably those of quarantine concern. Similarly, with the development of metabarcoding and metagenomics techniques, it is now possible to unravel complex diseases or answer crucial questions, such as "What's in my soil?", to a good approximation, including fungi, bacteria, nematodes, etc. The new technologies allow to redraw the approach for disease control strategies considering the pathogens within their environment and deciphering the complex interactions between microorganisms and the cultivated crops. This kind of analysis usually generates big data that need sophisticated bioinformatic tools (machine learning, artificial intelligence) for their management. Herein, examples of the use of new technologies for research in fungal diversity and diagnosis of some fungal pathogens are reported.Entities:
Keywords: filamentous fungal pathogens; fungal taxonomy; high-throughput sequencing; metabarcoding; metagenomics; plant disease diagnosis
Year: 2022 PMID: 35887492 PMCID: PMC9320658 DOI: 10.3390/jof8070737
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Fungi (Basel) ISSN: 2309-608X
Step procedures in metabarcoding approach (discussed in the text).
|
|
| Optimization of sample collection and extraction of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Choice of suitable primers for barcode genes |
|
|
|
|
| Different sequencing platforms |
|
|
|
|
| Sequence Clustering (OTU/ASV) |
Comparison between NGMLST, HiMLST, and conventional MLST based on 96 isolates with 8 target loci (adapted from [109]).
| NGMLST | HiMLST | Conventional MLST | |
|---|---|---|---|
| PCR amplifications | 192 | 864 | 768 |
| PCR product purifications | 4 | >96 | 768 |
| Estimated time for experimental work | 7 h | >30 h | >1 week |
| Estimated time for data analysis | ≈1 h | >10 h | >10 h |
| Data analysis | automatic | manual | manual |
| Estimated cost per isolate | EUR 9.6 | EUR 46 | EUR 77 |