4.7 Article

Cathepsin L-like Cysteine Proteinase Genes Are Associated with the Development and Pathogenicity of Pine Wood Nematode, Bursaphelenchus xylophilus

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms20010215

关键词

Bursaphelenchus xylophilus; cathepsin L; gene expression; development; pathogenicity

资金

  1. Jiangsu Provincial Agricultural Science and Technology Innovation Fund [CX (16) 1005]
  2. Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions (PAPD)
  3. Innovation Plan for Graduate Students of Jiangsu, China [KYZZ16_0315]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The pine wood nematode (PWN), Bursaphelenchus xylophilus, is the pathogen of pine wilt disease (PWD), resulting in huge losses in pine forests. However, its pathogenic mechanism remains unclear. The cathepsin L-like cysteine proteinase (CPL) genes are multifunctional genes related to the parasitic abilities of plant-parasitic nematodes, but their functions in PWN remain unclear. We cloned three cpl genes of PWN (Bx-cpls) by rapid amplification of cDNA ends (RACE) and analyzed their characteristics using bioinformatic methods. The tissue specificity of cpl gene of PWN (Bx-cpl) was studied using in situ mRNA hybridization (ISH). The functions of Bx-cpls in development and pathogenicity were investigated using real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) and RNA interference (RNAi). The results showed that the full-length cDNAs of Bx-cpl-1, Bx-cpl-2, and Bx-cpl-3 were 1163 bp, 1305 bp, and 1302 bp, respectively. Bx-cpls could accumulate specifically in the egg, intestine, and genital system of PWN. During different developmental stages of PWN, the expression of Bx-cpls in the egg stage was highest. After infection, the expression levels of Bx-cpls increased and reached their highest at the initial stage of PWD, then declined gradually. The silencing of Bx-cpl could reduce the feeding, reproduction, and pathogenicity of PWN. These results revealed that Bx-cpls play multiple roles in the development and pathogenic processes of PWN.

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