4.5 Article

Comparative proteome analysis of mycelial proteins from G. boninense vs G. tornatum: Identification of proteins potentially involved in the pathogenicity of G. boninense

Journal

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pmpp.2021.101736

Keywords

Ganoderma; Proteomics; Oil palm; Basal stem rot; Pathogenicity

Categories

Funding

  1. Malaysian Palm Oil Board (Board Approved Program) [R005606000]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Comparative proteomic analysis of Ganoderma boninense and G. tornatum under carbon and nitrogen starvation with oil palm sawdust revealed significant alterations in protein expression, suggesting potential links to pathogenicity differences between these two fungi in oil palm.
Ganoderma boninense is the most pathogenic fungal species for the oil palm. The molecular interactions involved in its pathogenicity remains undefined. By comparing the proteome profiles of a pathogenic and non-pathogenic species of Ganoderma, the identities of proteins essential for pathogenicity may be identified. As such we performed a shotgun proteomic analysis comparing G. boninense and G. tornatum. We were able to identify 1645 proteins, out of which 128 proteins and 187 proteins were significantly increased in abundance in G. boninense and G. tornatum, respectively, under carbon and nitrogen starvation with and without the presence of the oil palm sawdust (conditions that mimicked field conditions). A bioinformatics analysis of these proteins suggested that during carbon and nitrogen starvation, groups of proteins related to catalytic activity, binding, cellular anatomical entity, metabolic process and cellular process underwent extensive alterations in both Ganoderma species. In addition, exposure to carbon and nitrogen starvation with the presence of the oil palm sawdust, induced different groups of proteins in G. boninense and G. tornatum that may be linked to the different level of pathogenicity between both Ganoderma species in oil palm.

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