4.6 Article

Sequence and Gene Expression Analysis of Recently Identified NLP from Plasmopara viticola

期刊

MICROORGANISMS
卷 9, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms9071453

关键词

Plasmopara viticola; NLP; necrosis and ethylene inducing peptide 1; grapevine; downy mildew

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Grapevine downy mildew, caused by the obligate biotrophic oomycete Plasmopara viticola, is a challenging disease in viticulture. The pathogen evades plant immunity by secreting effector molecules, with one important family being the necrosis- and ethylene-inducing peptide 1 (Nep1)-like proteins. These proteins exist in cytotoxic and non-cyctotoxic forms and play crucial roles in the growth and pathogenicity of plant pathogenic microorganisms.
Grapevine downy mildew, evoked by the obligate biotrophic oomycete Plasmopara viticola, is one of the most challenging diseases in viticulture. P. viticola establishes an infection by circumvention of plant immunity, which is achieved by the secretion of effector molecules. One family of potential effectors are the necrosis- and ethylene-inducing peptide 1 (Nep1)-like proteins (NLP). NLP are most abundant in plant pathogenic microorganisms and exist in cytotoxic and non-cyctotoxic forms. Cytotoxic NLP often act as virulence factors and are synthesized in necrotrophic or hemibiotrophic pathogens during the transition from biotrophic to necrotrophic growth. In addition to these cytotoxic NLP, many non-cytotoxic NLP have been identified; their function in biotrophic pathogens is still unknown. In 2020, eight different NLP coding genes were identified in P. viticola and named PvNLP1 to PvNLP8 (Plasmopara viticola NLP 1-8). In the present study, PvNLP4 to PvNLP8 were characterized by using qPCR analysis and transient expression in the model plant Nicotiana benthamiana. Gene expression analysis showed high PvNLP expression during the early stages of infection. Necrosis-inducing activity of PvNLP was not observed in the nonhost N. benthamiana.

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

4.6
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