4.7 Review

Transcriptomic signatures of transfer cells in early developing nematode feeding cells of Arabidopsis focused on auxin and ethylene signaling

期刊

FRONTIERS IN PLANT SCIENCE
卷 5, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2014.00107

关键词

plant-nematode interaction; giant cells; early transcriptomic signatures; syncytia; auxin; ethylene; transfer cells; cell wall ingrowths

资金

  1. Spanish Government [AGL2010-17388, CSD2007-057]
  2. Castilla-La Mancha Government [PCI08-0074-0294]
  3. Ministry of Education, Spain

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Phyto-endoparasitic nematodes induce specialized feeding cells (NFCs) in their hosts, termed syncytia and giant cells (GCs) for cyst and root-knot nematodes (RKNs), respectively. They differ in their ontogeny and global transcriptional signatures, but both develop cell wall ingrowths (CIs) to facilitate high rates of apoplastic/symplastic solute exchange showing transfer cell (TC) characteristics. Regulatory signals for TC differentiation are not still well-known. The two-component signaling system (2CS) and reactive oxygen species are proposed as inductors of TC identity, while, 2CSs-related genes are not major contributors to differential gene expression in early developing NFCs. Transcriptomic and functional studies have assigned a major role to auxin and ethylene as regulatory signals on early developing TCs. Genes encoding proteins with similar functions expressed in both early developing NFCs and typical TCs are putatively involved in upstream or downstream responses mediated by auxin and ethylene. Yet, no function directly associated to the TCs identity of NFCs, such as the formation of CIs is described for most of them. Thus, we reviewed similarities between transcriptional changes observed during the early stages of NFCs formation and those described during differentiation of TCs to hypothesize about putative signals leading to TC-like differentiation of NFCs with particular emphasis on auxin an ethylene.

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