4.6 Article

Requirement of the galU Gene for Polysaccharide Production by and Pathogenicity and Growth In Planta of Xanthomonas citri subsp citri

期刊

APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 76, 期 7, 页码 2234-2242

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/AEM.02897-09

关键词

-

资金

  1. USDA-CSREES [73402]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Xanthomonas citri subsp. citri is the causal agent of citrus canker, which has a significant impact on citrus production. In this study, we characterized the galU gene of X. citri subsp. citri. Two galU mutants (F6 and D12) were identified in an X. citri subsp. citri EZ-Tn5 < R6K gamma ori/KAN-2 > Tnp transposon library. Rescue cloning, sequence analysis, and Southern blot analysis indicated that both of these mutants had a single copy of the EZ-Tn5 transposon inserted in galU in the chromosome. Further study showed that galU was required for biosynthesis of extracellular polysaccharides (EPS; xanthan gum) and capsular polysaccharide (CPS) and biofilm formation. Mutation of galU resulted in a loss of pathogenicity for grapefruit. The loss of pathogenicity of a galU mutant resulted from its inability to grow in planta rather than from the effect on virulence genes. Quantitative reverse transcription-PCR assays indicated that mutation of galU did not impair the expression of key virulence genes, such as pthA of X. citri subsp. citri. Although D12 had a growth rate similar to that of the wild-type strain in nutrient broth, no D12 population became established in the intercellular spaces of citrus leaves. Coinoculation of a galU mutant with the wild-type strain did not promote growth of the galU mutant in planta. Defects in EPS and CPS production, pathogenicity, and growth in planta of the galU mutant were complemented to the wild-type level using plasmid pCGU2.1 containing an intact galU gene. These data indicate that the galU gene contributes to X. citri subsp. citri growth in intercellular spaces and is involved in EPS and CPS synthesis and biofilm formation.

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