4.4 Article

Using metabolic profiling to assess plant-pathogen interactions: an example using rice (Oryza sativa) and the blast pathogen Magnaporthe grisea

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PLANT PATHOLOGY
Volume 129, Issue 4, Pages 539-554

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10658-010-9718-6

Keywords

Metabolomics; Metabonomics; NMR spectroscopy; Chromatography; Mass spectrometry

Funding

  1. European Union (European Commission) [003956]
  2. Plant Signalling Network Research Centre from the Korean Science and Engineering Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A metabolomics based approach has been used to study the infection of the Hwacheong rice cultivar (Oryza sativa L. cv. Hwacheong) with compatible (KJ201) and incompatible (KJ401) strains of the rice blast fungal pathogen Magnaporthe grisea. The metabolic response of the rice plants to each strain was assessed 0, 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 h post inoculation. Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) spectroscopy and Gas and Liquid Chromatography Tandem Mass spectrometry (GC/LC-MS/MS) were used to study both aqueous and organic phase metabolites, collectively resulting in the identification of 93 compounds. Clear metabolic profiles were observed at each time point but there were no significant differences in the metabolic response elicited by each pathogen strain until 24 h post inoculation. The largest change was found to be in alanine, which was similar to 30% (+/- 9%) higher in the leaves from the compatible, compared to the resistant, plants. Together with several other metabolites (malate, glutamine, proline, cinnamate and an unknown sugar) alanine exhibited a good correlation between time of fungal penetration into the leaf and the divergence of metabolite profiles in each interaction. The results indicate both that a wide range of metabolites can be identified in rice leaves and that metabolomics has potential for the study of biochemical changes in plant-pathogen interactions.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available