4.7 Review

Understanding the plant-pathogen interactions in the context of proteomics-generated apoplastic proteins inventory

期刊

FRONTIERS IN PLANT SCIENCE
卷 6, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2015.00352

关键词

apoplast; apoplastic proteins; pattern-triggered immunity; effector-triggered immunity; secretome; protein secretion; plant-pathogen interaction

资金

  1. Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology [2013R1A1A1A05005407]
  2. Next-Generation BioGreen 21 Program (Plant Molecular Breeding Center), Rural Development Administration, Republic of Korea [PJ011038]
  3. Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research
  4. Alexander-Bayer Fellowship from Alexander von Humboldt Foundation
  5. Bayer Science and Education Foundation
  6. National Research Foundation of Korea [2013R1A1A1A05005407] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The extracellular space between cell wall and plasma membrane acts as the first battle field between plants and pathogens. Bacteria, fungi, and oomycetes that colonize the living plant tissues are encased in this narrow region in the initial step of infection. Therefore, the apoplastic region is believed to be an interface which mediates the first crosstalk between host and pathogen. The secreted proteins and other metabolites, derived from both host and pathogen, interact in this apoplastic region and govern the final relationship between them. Hence, investigation of protein secretion and apoplastic interaction could provide a better understanding of plant-microbe interaction. Here, we are briefly discussing the methods available for the isolation and normalization of the apoplastic proteins, as well as the current state of secretome studies focused on the in-planta interaction between the host and the pathogen.

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

4.7
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