4.5 Article

Understanding rice plant resistance to the Brown Planthopper (Nilaparvata lugens): A proteomic approach

Journal

PROTEOMICS
Volume 9, Issue 10, Pages 2798-2808

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pmic.200800840

Keywords

Brown planthopper; Pest resistance; Quantitative proteomics; Rice plant

Funding

  1. National Program of High Technology Development [2007AA10Z135]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30730062]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Engineering and breeding resistant plant varieties are the most effective and environmentally friendly ways to control agricultural pests and improve crop performance. However, the mechanism of plant resistance to pests is poorly understood. Here we used a quantitative mass-spectrometry-based proteomic approach for comparative analysis of expression profiles of proteins in rice leaf sheaths in responses to infestation by the brown planthopper (Nilaparvata lugens Stal, BPH), which is a serious rice crop pest. Proteins involved in multiple pathways showed significant changes in expression in response to BPH feeding, including jasmonic acid synthesis proteins, oxidative stress response proteins, beta-glucanases, protein;kinases, clathrin protein, glycine cleavage system protein, photosynthesis proteins and aquaporins. The corresponding genes of eight important proteins were further analyzed by quantitative RT-PCR. Proteomic and transcript responses that were related to wounding, oxidative and pathogen stress overlapped considerably between BPH-resistant (carrying the resistance gene BPH15) and susceptible rice lines. In contrast, proteins and genes related to callose metabolism remained unchanged and glycine cleavage system protein was up-regulated in the BPH-resistant lines, indicating that they have an efficient and specific defense mechanism. Our results provide new information about the interaction between rice and the BPH.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available