Two Brassica napus polygalacturonase inhibitory protein genes are expressed at different levels in response to biotic and abiotic stresses

被引:83
作者
Li, RG [1 ]
Rimmer, R [1 ]
Yu, M [1 ]
Sharpe, AG [1 ]
Séguin-Swartz, G [1 ]
Lydiate, D [1 ]
Hegedus, DD [1 ]
机构
[1] Agr & Agri Food Canada, Mol Genet Sect, Saskatoon, SK S7N 0X2, Canada
关键词
Brassica; defense response; polygalacturonase inhibitory protein; wounding; Sclerotinia; stress;
D O I
10.1007/s00425-003-0988-5
中图分类号
Q94 [植物学];
学科分类号
071001 ;
摘要
Plants encode a distinct set of polygalacturonase inhibitory proteins (PGIPs) that function to inhibit polygalacturonase enzymes produced by soft-rot fungal pathogens. We characterized two PGIP-encoding genes (Bnpgip1 and Bnpgip2) from Brassica napus DH12075 (a double-haploid line derived from a cross between 'Cresor' and 'Westar'). The two proteins exhibit 67.4% identity at the amino acid level and contain 10 imperfect leucine-rich repeats. The pgip genes are present as a small multigene family in B. napus with at least four members. Bnpgip1 and Bnpgip2 are constitutively expressed in roots, stems, flower buds and open flowers. In mature leaf tissue, different levels of induction were observed in response to biotic and abiotic stresses. Bnpgip1 expression was highly responsive to flea beetle feeding and mechanical wounding, weakly responsive to Sclerotinia sclerotiorum infection and exposure to cold but not to dehydration. Conversely, Bnpgip2 expression was strongly induced by S. sclerotiorum infection and to a lesser degree by wounding but not by flea beetle feeding. Application of jasmonic acid to leaves induced both Bnpgip1 and Bnpgip2 gene expression; however, salicylic acid did not activate either gene. Taken together, these results suggest that separate pathways regulate Bnpgip1 and Bnpgip2, and that their roles in plant development or resistance to biotic and abiotic stress differ.
引用
收藏
页码:299 / 308
页数:10
相关论文
共 65 条
  • [1] Receptor kinases in plant development
    Becraft, PW
    [J]. TRENDS IN PLANT SCIENCE, 1998, 3 (10) : 384 - 388
  • [2] RPS2 OF ARABIDOPSIS-THALIANA - A LEUCINE-RICH REPEAT CLASS OF PLANT-DISEASE RESISTANCE GENES
    BENT, AF
    KUNKEL, BN
    DAHLBECK, D
    BROWN, KL
    SCHMIDT, R
    GIRAUDAT, J
    LEUNG, J
    STASKAWICZ, BJ
    [J]. SCIENCE, 1994, 265 (5180) : 1856 - 1860
  • [3] POLYGALACTURONASE-INHIBITING PROTEIN ACCUMULATES IN PHASEOLUS-VULGARIS L IN RESPONSE TO WOUNDING, ELICITORS AND FUNGAL INFECTION
    BERGMANN, CW
    ITO, Y
    SINGER, D
    ALBERSHEIM, P
    DARVILL, AG
    BENHAMOU, N
    NUSS, L
    SALVI, G
    CERVONE, F
    DELORENZO, G
    [J]. PLANT JOURNAL, 1994, 5 (05) : 625 - 634
  • [4] HOST PATHOGEN INTERACTIONS .35. CAN PHASEOLUS PGIP INHIBIT PECTIC ENZYMES FROM MICROBES AND PLANTS
    CERVONE, F
    DELORENZO, G
    PRESSEY, R
    DARVILL, AG
    ALBERSHEIM, P
    [J]. PHYTOCHEMISTRY, 1990, 29 (02) : 447 - 449
  • [5] Transcriptional profiling reveals novel interactions between wounding, pathogen, abiotic stress, and hormonal responses in Arabidopsis
    Cheong, YH
    Chang, HS
    Gupta, R
    Wang, X
    Zhu, T
    Luan, S
    [J]. PLANT PHYSIOLOGY, 2002, 129 (02) : 661 - 677
  • [6] The CLAVATA1 gene encodes a putative receptor kinase that controls shoot and floral meristem size in Arabidopsis
    Clark, SE
    Williams, RW
    Meyerowitz, EM
    [J]. CELL, 1997, 89 (04) : 575 - 585
  • [7] Fungal polygalacturonases exhibit different substrate degradation patterns and differ in their susceptibilities to polygalacturonase-inhibiting proteins
    Cook, BJ
    Clay, RP
    Bergmann, CW
    Albersheim, P
    Darvill, AG
    [J]. MOLECULAR PLANT-MICROBE INTERACTIONS, 1999, 12 (08) : 703 - 711
  • [8] DARVILL A, 1994, BIOCHEM SOC SYMP, P89
  • [9] Signals regulating multiple responses to wounding and herbivores
    de Bruxelles, GL
    Roberts, MR
    [J]. CRITICAL REVIEWS IN PLANT SCIENCES, 2001, 20 (05) : 487 - 521
  • [10] The role of polygalacturonase-inhibiting proteins (PGIPS) in defense against pathogenic fungi
    De Lorenzo, G
    D'Ovidio, R
    Cervone, F
    [J]. ANNUAL REVIEW OF PHYTOPATHOLOGY, 2001, 39 : 313 - 335