3.8 Article

Filling out the gaps - identification of fugralins as products of the PKS2 cluster in Fusarium graminearum

期刊

FRONTIERS IN FUNGAL BIOLOGY
卷 4, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/ffunb.2023.1264366

关键词

polyketides; secondary metabolites; natural products; PKSs; biosynthesis; pathogenicity

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the life cycle and metabolome of the pathogenic fungus Fusarium graminearum, which has significant impacts on agriculture and human health. A previously unknown polyketide from the PKS2 gene cluster was identified and named fugralin A and B. Functional characterization showed that these compounds are not produced during infection and do not affect pathogenicity or visual growth. The compounds are volatile, suggesting potential functions for further investigation.
As one of the grain crop pathogenic fungi with the greatest impacts on agricultural economical as well as human health, an elaborate understanding of the life cycle and subsequent metabolome of Fusarium graminearum is of great interest. Throughout the lifetime of the fungus, it is known to produce a wide array of secondary metabolites, including polyketides. One of the F. graminearum polyketides which has remained a mystery until now has been elucidated in this work. Previously, it was suggested that the biosynthetic product of the PKS2 gene cluster was involved in active mycelial growth, the exact mechanism, however, remained unclear. In our work, disruption and overexpression of the PKS2 gene in F. graminearum enabled structural elucidation of a linear and a cyclic tetraketide with a double methyl group, named fugralin A and B, respectively. Further functional characterization showed that the compounds are not produced during infection, and that deletion and overexpression did not affect pathogenicity or visual growth. The compounds were shown to be volatile, which could point to possible functions that can be investigated further in future studies.

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

3.8
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