3.8 Article

The defense-responsive genes showing enhanced and repressed expression after pathogen infection in rice (Oryza sativa L.)

Journal

SCIENCE IN CHINA SERIES C-LIFE SCIENCES
Volume 45, Issue 5, Pages 449-467

Publisher

SCIENCE PRESS
DOI: 10.1360/02yc9050

Keywords

bacterial blight; blast; defense-related genes; cDNA arrays

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Despite large numbers of studies about defense response, processes involved in the resistance of plants to incompatible pathogens are still largely uncharacterized. The objective of this study was to identify genes involved in defense response by cDNA array analysis and to gain knowledge about the functions of the genes involved in defense response. Approximately 20000 rice cDNA clones were arrayed on nylon filters. RNA samples isolated from different rice lines after infection with incompatible strains or isolates of Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae or Pyricularia grisea, respectively, were used to synthesize cDNA as probes for screening the cDNA arrays. A total of 100 differentially expressed unique sequences were identified from 5 pathogen-host combinations. Fifty-three sequences were detected as showing enhanced expression and 47 sequences were detected as showing repressed expression after pathogen infection. Sequence analysis revealed that most of the 100 sequences had various degrees of homology with genes in databases which encode or putatively encode transcription regulating proteins, translation regulating proteins, transport proteins, kinases, metabolic enzymes, and proteins involved in other functions. Most of the genes have not been previously reported as being involved in the disease resistance response in rice. The results from cDNA arrays, reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction, and RNA gel blot analysis suggest that activation or repression of most of these genes might occur commonly in the defense response.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available