4.5 Article

A Partial Chromosomal Deletion Caused by Random Plasmid Integration Resulted in a Reduced Virulence Phenotype in Fusarium graminearum

期刊

MOLECULAR PLANT-MICROBE INTERACTIONS
卷 23, 期 8, 页码 1083-1096

出版社

AMER PHYTOPATHOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1094/MPMI-23-8-1083

关键词

-

资金

  1. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) of the United Kingdom
  2. United States Department of Agriculture [59-0790-6-068]
  3. Monsanto Company, St. Louis
  4. Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station
  5. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BBS/E/C/00004972, BBS/E/C/00004973] Funding Source: researchfish
  6. BBSRC [BBS/E/C/00004972, BBS/E/C/00004973] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fusarium graminearum (teleomorph: Gibberella zeae) is an Ascomycete fungal plant pathogen which infects a range of agriculturally important crops, including wheat, barley, and maize. A random plasmid insertion mutagenesis approach was used to analyze the pathogenicity of the PH-1 strain, for which full genomic information is available. Fungal transformants were initially screened for their ability to infect wheat ears. From a total of 1,170 transformants screened, eight were confirmed to be highly reduced in pathogenicity toward wheat ears and roots. These were designated disease-attenuated E graminearum (daf) mutants. The in vitro growth rate and appearance of each daf mutant was equivalent to the parental strain. Deoxynivalenol (DON) was not detected in threshed grain recovered from ears inoculated with the daf10 mutant. Plasmid rescue and sequencing of the mutant daf10 revealed a deletion of approximately 350 kb from one end of chromosome 1. This chromosome segment is predicted to contain 146 genes. Microarray analysis of daf10 gene expression during growth in DON-inducing conditions confirmed the large deletion. The identities of the genes deleted and their potential role in DON production, pathogenesis, and other life processes are discussed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据