4.2 Article

Identification and Analysis of Resistance-like Genes in the Tomato Genome

Journal

JOURNAL OF PHYTOPATHOLOGY
Volume 162, Issue 3, Pages 137-146

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jph.12163

Keywords

disease resistance; phylogenetic analysis; resistance-like genes; sequence variation; tomato

Categories

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30972003]
  2. Specialized Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education [20110008110019]
  3. Beijing Modern Agro-industry Technology Research System

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) is one of the most important vegetable crops in the world. However, the tomato production is severely affected by many diseases. The use of host resistance is believed to be the most effective approach to control the pathogens. In this study, a total of 1003 resistance-like genes were identified from the tomato genome using individual full-length search and conserved domain verification approach. Of the predicted resistance genes, serine/threonine protein kinase was the largest class with 384 genes followed by 212 genes encoding receptor-like kinase, 107 genes encoding receptor-like proteins, 68 genes encoding coiled-coil-nucleotide-binding site (NBS)-leucine-rich repeat (LRR) and 19 genes encoding Toll interleukin-1 receptor domain-NBS-LRR. Physical map positions established for all predicted genes using the tomato WGS chromosomes SL2.40 information indicated that most resistance-like genes clustered on certain chromosomal regions. Comparisons of the sequences from the same resistance-like genes in S.pimpinellifolium and S.lycopersicum showed that 93.5% genes contained single nucleotide polymorphisms and 19.7% genes contained insertion/deletion. The data obtained here will facilitate isolation and characterization of new resistance genes as well as marker-assisted selection for disease resistance breeding in tomato.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available