4.6 Article

A small secreted protein in Zymoseptoria tritici is responsible for avirulence on wheat cultivars carrying the Stb6 resistance gene

期刊

NEW PHYTOLOGIST
卷 214, 期 2, 页码 619-631

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/nph.14434

关键词

avirulence; AvrStb6; gene-for-gene interaction; genome-wide association study (GWAS); quantitative trait locus (QTL) mapping; Stb6; Zymoseptoria tritici

资金

  1. Swiss National Science Foundation [31003A_155955]
  2. French National Research Agency [ANR-12ADAP-0009-04]
  3. FSOV Septoriose
  4. Short-Term Scientific Mission - COST SUSTAIN action [FA1208]
  5. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) [31003A_155955] Funding Source: Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Zymoseptoria tritici is the causal agent of Septoria tritici blotch, a major pathogen of wheat globally and the most damaging pathogen of wheat in Europe. A gene-for-gene (GFG) interaction between Z. tritici and wheat cultivars carrying the Stb6 resistance gene has been postulated for many years, but the genes have not been identified. We identified AvrStb6 by combining quantitative trait locus mapping in a cross between two Swiss strains with a genome-wide association study using a natural population of c. 100 strains from France. We functionally validated AvrStb6 using ectopic transformations. AvrStb6 encodes a small, cysteine-rich, secreted protein that produces an avirulence phenotype on wheat cultivars carrying the Stb6 resistance gene. We found 16 nonsynonymous single nucleotide polymorphisms among the tested strains, indicating that AvrStb6 is evolving very rapidly. AvrStb6 is located in a highly polymorphic subtelomeric region and is surrounded by transposable elements, which may facilitate its rapid evolution to overcome Stb6 resistance. AvrStb6 is the first avirulence gene to be functionally validated in Z. tritici, contributing to our understanding of avirulence in apoplastic pathogens and the mechanisms underlying GFG interactions between Z. tritici and wheat.

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