4.7 Article

Combined Metabonomic and Quantitative RT-PCR Analyses Revealed Metabolic Reprogramming Associated with Fusarium graminearum Resistance in Transgenic Arabidopsis thaliana

期刊

FRONTIERS IN PLANT SCIENCE
卷 8, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2017.02177

关键词

Arabidopsis thaliana; Fusarium graminearum; metabolic responses; mycotoxins; Chi-CWP2; NMR

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31600240, 31200208, 21175149, 31272004]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fusarium head blight disease resulting from Fusarium graminearum (FG) infection causes huge losses in global production of cereals and development of FG-resistant plants is urgently needed. To understand biochemistry mechanisms for FG resistance, here, we have systematically investigated the plant metabolomic phenotypes associated with FG resistance for transgenic Arabidopsis thaliana expressing a class-I chitinase (Chi), a Fusarium-specific recombinant antibody gene (CWP2) and fused Chi-CWP2. Plant disease indices, mycotoxin levels, metabonomic characteristics, and expression levels of several key genes were measured together with their correlations. We found that A. thaliana expressing Chi-CWP2 showed higher FG resistance with much lower disease indices and mycotoxin levels than the wild-type and the plants expressing Chi or CWP2 alone. The combined metabonomic and quantitative RT-PCR analyses revealed that such FG-resistance was closely associated with the promoted biosynthesis of secondary metabolites (phenylpropanoids, alkanoids) and organic osmolytes (proline, betaine, glucose, myo-inositol) together with enhanced TCA cycle and GABA shunt. These suggest that the concurrently enhanced biosyntheses of the shikimate-mediated secondary metabolites and organic osmolytes be an important strategy for A. thaliana to develop and improve FG resistance. These findings provide essential biochemical information related to FG resistance which is important for developing FG-resistant cereals.

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