4.7 Article

Constitutive phenolic biomarkers identify naive Quercus agrifolia resistant to Phytophthora ramorum, the causal agent of sudden oak death

期刊

TREE PHYSIOLOGY
卷 37, 期 12, 页码 1686-1696

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/treephys/tpx116

关键词

coast live oak; metabolites; predicting disease susceptibility; pre-infection; sudden oak death; survival

类别

资金

  1. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service [10-DG-11052021-227]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sudden oak death, caused by the invasive pathogen Phytophthora ramorum Werres, de Cock & Man in't Veld, can be deadly for Quercus agrifolia Nee (coast live oak, CLO). However, resistant trees have been observed in natural populations. The objective of this study was to examine if pre-attack (constitutive) levels of phenolic compounds can be used as biomarkers to identify trees likely to be resistant. Naive trees were selected from a natural population and phloem was sampled for analysis of constitutive phenolics. Following P. ramorum inoculation, trees were phenotyped to determine disease susceptibility and constitutive phenolic biomarkers of resistance were identified. Seasonal variation in phloem phenolics was also assessed in a subset of non-inoculated trees. Four biomarkers, including myricitrin and three incompletely characterized flavonoids, together correctly classified 80% of trees. Biomarker levels were then used to predict survival of inoculated CLO and the proportion of resistant trees within a subset of non-inoculated trees from the same population. Levels of five phenolics were significantly affected by season, but with no pronounced variation in average levels among seasons. These results suggest that pre-infection levels of specific phenolic compounds (i.e., biomarkers) can identify trees naturally resistant to this invasive forest pathogen. Knowledge of resistant trees within natural populations may be useful for conserving and breeding resistant trees and for disease management.

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