Transcriptome and hormone profiling reveals Eucalyptus grandis defence responses against Chrysoporthe austroafricana

BMC Genomics

Sanushka Naidoo¹  Alexander A Myburg¹  Ronishree Mangwanda¹ 

[1] Department of Genetics, Forestry and Agricultural Biotechnology Institute (FABI), Genomics Research Institute (GRI), University of Pretoria, Private bag x20, Pretoria 0028, South Africa

关键词: Salicylic acid;    RNA-sequencing;    Plant defence;    Hormone signalling;    Gibberellic acid;    Eucalyptus stem canker;   

Others  :  1177272
DOI  :  10.1186/s12864-015-1529-x

 received in 2014-11-08, accepted in 2015-04-13,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

Eucalyptus species and interspecific hybrids exhibit valuable growth and wood properties that make them a highly desirable commodity. However, these trees are challenged by a wide array of biotic stresses during their lifetimes. The Eucalyptus grandis reference genome sequence provides a resource to study pest and pathogen defence mechanisms in long-lived woody plants. E. grandis trees are generally susceptible to Chrysoporthe austroafricana, a causal agent of stem cankers on eucalypts. The aim of this study was to characterize the defence response of E. grandis against C. austroafricana.

Results

Hormone profiling of susceptible and moderately resistant clonal E. grandis genotypes indicated a reduction in salicylic acid and gibberellic acid levels at 3 days post inoculation. We hypothesized that these signaling pathways may facilitate resistance. To further investigate other defence mechanisms at this time point, transcriptome profiling was performed. This revealed that cell wall modifications and response to oxidative stress form part of the defence responses common to both genotypes, whilst changes in the hormone signaling pathways may contribute to resistance. Additionally the expression of selected candidate defence response genes was induced earlier in moderately resistant trees than in susceptible trees, supporting the hypothesis that a delayed defence response may occur in the susceptible interaction.

Conclusion

The ability of a host to fine-tune its defence responses is crucial and the responses identified in this study extends our understanding of plant defence, gained from model systems, to woody perennials.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Mangwanda et al.; licensee BioMed Central.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Shepherd M, Bartle J, Lee DJ, Brawner J, Bush D, Turnbull P, et al.: Eucalypts as a biofuel feedstock. Biogeosciences 2011, 2:639-57.
• [2]Hinchee M, Rottmann W, Davis M, Chang SJ: Eucalyptus with improved pulping and bioenergy characteristics. Vitro Cell Dev Biol-Anim 2011, 47:S29-30.
• [3]Wingfield MJ, Roux J, Slippers B, Hurley BP, Garnas J, Myburg AA, et al.: Established and new technologies reduce increasing pest and pathogen threats to Eucalypt plantations. Forest Ecol Manag 2013, 301:35-42.
• [4]Myburg AA, Grattapaglia D, Tuskan GA, Hellsten U, Hayes RD, Grimwood J, et al.: The genome of Eucalyptus grandis. Nature 2014, 510:356-62.
• [5]Naidoo S, Kulheim C, Zwart L, Mangwanda R, Oates CN, Visser EA, et al.: Uncovering the defence responses of Eucalyptus to pests and pathogens in the genomics age. Tree Physiol 2014, 34:931-43.
• [6]Tobias PA, Guest DI: Tree immunity: growing old without antibodies. Trends Plant Sci 2014, 19:367-70.
• [7]Meng X, Zhang S: MAPK cascades in plant disease resistance signaling. Annu Rev Phytopathol 2013, 51:245-66.
• [8]Pieterse CMJ, Does DV, Zamioudis C, Leon-Reyes A, Wees SCMV: Hormonal Modulation of Plant Immunity. Annu Rev Cell Dev 2012, 28:489-521.
• [9]Mengiste T: Plant immunity to necrotrophs. Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol 2012, 50:13.11-13.28.
• [10]O’Brien JA, Daudi A, Butt VS, Bolwell GP: Reactive oxygen species and their role in plant defence and cell wall metabolism. Planta 2012, 236:765-79.
• [11]Robert-Seilaniantz A, Grant M, Jones JDG: Hormone crosstalk in plant disease and defense: more than just JASMONATE-SALICYLATE antagonism. Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol 2011, 49:317-43.
• [12]Gryzenhout M, Myburg H, Merwe NA, Wingfield BD, Wingfield MJ: Chrysoporthe, a new genus to accommodate Cryphonectria cubensis. Stud Mycol 2004, 50:119-42.
• [13]Roux J, Myburg H, Wingfield BD, Wingfield MJ: Biological and phylogenetic analyses suggest that two Cryphonectria spp. cause cankers of Eucalyptus in Africa. Plant Dis 2003, 87:1329-32.
• [14]Van Heerden SW, Amerson HV, Preisig O, Wingfield BD, Wingfield MJ: Relative pathogenicity of cryphonectria cubensis on Eucalyptus clones differing in their resistance to C. Cubensis. Plant Dis 2005, 89:659-62.
• [15]Delessert C, Wilson IW, Straeten DVD, Dennis ES, Dolferus R: Spatial and temporal analysis of the local response to wounding in Arabidopsis leaves. Plant Mol Biol 2004, 55:165-81.
• [16]Raiola A, Lionetti V, Elmaghraby I, Immerzeel P, Mellerowicz EJ, Salvi G, et al.: Pectin Methylesterase is induced in Arabidopsis upon infection and is necessary for a successful colonization by necrotrophic pathogens. Mol Plant-Microbe Interact 2011, 24:432-40.
• [17]Schulz P, Herde M, Romeis T: Calcium-Dependent Protein Kinases: Hubs in Plant Stress Signaling and Development. Plant Physiol 2013, 163:523-30.
• [18]Suzuki N, Miller G, Morales J, Shulaev V, Torres MA, Mittler R: Respiratory burst oxidases: the engines of ROS signaling. Curr Opin Plant Biol 2011, 14:691-9.
• [19]Sun T: The molecular mechanism and evolution of the GA–GID1–DELLA signaling module in plants. Curr Biol 2011, 21:338-45.
• [20]Pantelides IS, Tjamos SE, Pappa S, Kargakis M, Paplomatas EJ: The ethylene receptor ETR1 is required for Fusarium oxysporum pathogenicity. Plant Pathol 2013, 62:1302-9.
• [21]Zhao Q, Guo HW: Paradigms and paradox in the ethylene signaling pathway and interaction network. Mol Plant 2011, 4:626-34.
• [22]Naidoo R, Ferreira L, Berger DK, Myburg AA, Naidoo S: The identification and differential expression of Eucalyptus grandis pathogenesis-related genes in response to salicylic acid and methyl jasmonate. Frontiers Plant Sci 2013, 4:43.
• [23]Meier S, Bastian R, Donaldson L, Murray S, Bajic V, Gehring C: Co-expression and promoter content analyses assign a role in biotic and abiotic stress responses to plant natriuretic peptides. BMC Plant Biol 2008, 8:24.
• [24]Park S-W, Kaimoyo E, Kumar D, Mosher S, Klessig DF: Methyl salicylate is a critical mobile signal for plant systemic acquired resistance. Science 2008, 318:113-5.
• [25]Park S-W, Liu P-P, Forouhar F, Vlot AC, Tong L, Tietjen K, et al.: Use of a synthetic salicylic acid analog to investigate the roles of methyl salicylate and its esterases in plant disease resistance. J Biol Chem 2009, 284:7307-17.
• [26]Shah J, Chaturvedi R, Chowdhury Z, Venables B, Petros RA: Signaling by small metabolites in systemic acquired resistance. Plant J 2014, 79:645-58.
• [27]Shah J, Zeier J: Long-distance communication and signal amplification in systemic acquired resistance. Front Plant Sc 2013, 4:30.
• [28]Navarro L, Bari R, Achard P, Liso P, Nemri A, Harberd NP, et al.: DELLAs control plant immune responses by modulating the balance of jasmonic acid and salicylic acid signaling. Curr Biol 2008, 18:650-5.
• [29]Hauvermale AL, Ariizumi T, Steber CM: Gibberellin signaling: a theme and variations on DELLA repression. Plant Physiol 2012, 160:83-92.
• [30]Pysh LD, Wysocka-Diller JW, Camilleri C, Bouchez D, Benfey PN: The GRAS gene family in Arabidopsis: sequence characterization and basic expression analysis of the SCARECROW-LIKE genes. Plant J 1999, 18:111-9.
• [31]Silverstone AL, Ciampaglio CN, Sun TP: The Arabidopsis RGA gene encodes a transcriptional regulator repressing the gibberellin signal transduction pathway. Plant Cell 1998, 10:155-69.
• [32]Zhang Z-L, Ogawa M, Fleet CM, Zentella R, Hu J, Heo J-O, et al.: SCARECROW-LIKE 3 promotes gibberellin signaling by antagonizing master growth repressor DELLA in Arabidopsis. Proc Natl Acad Sci 2011, 108:2160-5.
• [33]Mobius N, Hertweck C: Fungal phytotoxins as mediators of virulence. Curr Opin Plant Biol 2009, 12:390-8.
• [34]Robert-Seilaniantz A, Navarro L, Bari R, Jones JD: Pathological hormone imbalances. Curr Opin Plant Biol 2007, 10:372-9.
• [35]De Bruyne L, Monica H, Vleesschauwer David D: Connecting growth and defense: the emerging roles of brassinosteroids and gibberellins in plant innate immunity. Mol Plant 2014, 7:943-59.
• [36]Koornneef A, Leon-Reyes A, Ritsema T, Verhage A, Den Otter FC, Van Loon LC, et al.: Kinetics of salicylate-mediated suppression of jasmonate signaling reveal a role for redox modulation. Plant Physiol 2008, 147:1358-68.
• [37]Lapin D, Van den Ackerveken G: Susceptibility to plant disease: more than a failure of host immunity. Trends Plant Sci 2013, 18:546-54.
• [38]O’Donnell PJ, Schmelz EA, Moussatche P, Lund ST, Jones JB, Klee HJ: Susceptible to intolerance – a range of hormonal actions in a susceptible Arabidopsis pathogen response. Plant J 2003, 33:245-57.
• [39]Verhage A, van Wees SC, Pieterse CM: Plant immunity: it's the hormones talking, but what do they say? Plant Physiol 2010, 154:536-40.
• [40]Mina JG, Okada Y, Wansadhipathi-Kannangara NK, Pratt S, Shams-Eldin H, Schwarz RT, et al.: Functional analyses of differentially expressed isoforms of the Arabidopsis inositol phosphorylceramide synthase. Plant Mol Biol 2010, 73:399-407.
• [41]Vicente MRS, Larios Zarate G, Plasencia J: Disruption of sphingolipid biosynthesis in Nicotiana benthamiana activates salicylic acid-dependent responses and compromises resistance to Alternaria alternata f. sp. lycopersici. Planta 2013, 237:121-36.
• [42]Wang W, Yang X, Tangchaiburana S, Ndeh R, Markham JE, Tsegaye Y, et al.: An inositolphosphorylceramide synthase is involved in regulation of plant programmed cell death associated with defense in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 2008, 20:3163-79.
• [43]Izumi Y, Okazawa A, Bamba T, Kobayashi A, Fukusaki E: Development of a method for comprehensive and quantitative analysis of plant hormones by highly sensitive nanoflow liquid chromatography–electrospray ionization-ion trap mass spectrometry. Anal Chim Acta 2009, 648:215-25.
• [44]Zeng Y, Yang T: RNA isolation from highly viscous samples rich in polyphenols and polysaccharides. Plant Molecular Biology Reporter 2002, 20:417a-417e.
• [45]Blankenberg D, Kuster GV, Coraor N, Ananda G, Lazarus R, Mangan M, et al.: Galaxy: A web-based genome analysis tool for experimentalists. Curr Protoc Mol Biol 2010, 89:19.
• [46]Giardine B, Riemer C, Hardison RC, Burhans R, Elnitski L, Shah P, et al.: Galaxy: A platform for interactive large-scale genome analysis. Genome Res 2005, 15:1451-5.
• [47]Goecks J, Nekrutenko A, Taylor J: Galaxy: a comprehensive approach for supporting accessible, reproducible, and transparent computational research in the life sciences. Genome Biol 2010, 11:R86. BioMed Central Full Text
• [48]Thimm O, Blasing O, Gibon Y, Nagel A, Meyer S, Kruger P, et al.: MAPMAN: a user driven tool to display genomics data sets onto diagrams of metabolic pathways and other biological processes. Plant J 2004, 37:914-39.
• [49]Hellemans J, Mortier G, Paepe AD, Speleman F, Vandesompele J: qBase relative quantification framework and software for management and automated analysis of real-time quantitative PCR data. Genome Biol 2007, 8:R19.