4.5 Article

Tomato flower abnormalities induced by stolbur phytoplasma infection are associated with changes of expression of floral development genes

期刊

MOLECULAR PLANT-MICROBE INTERACTIONS
卷 19, 期 1, 页码 62-68

出版社

AMER PHYTOPATHOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1094/MPMI-19-0062

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum cv. Micro-Tom) plants infected by the stolbur phytoplasma (isolate PO) display floral abnormalities, including sepal hypertrophy, virescence, phyllody, and aborted reproductive organs, which are reminiscent of those observed in Arabidopsis thaliana mutants affected in flower development genes. Semiquantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction and in situ RNA hybridization were used to compare expressions of meristem and flower development genes in healthy and stolbur phytoplasma-infected tomatoes. In infected plants, FALSIFLORA (FA), controlling the identity of the inflorescence meristem, was up-regulated, whereas LeWUSCHEL (LeWUS) and LeCLAVATAI (LeCLVI), regulating the meristem development, and LeDEFICIENS (LeDEF), responsible for the organ (petals and stamens) identity within the flower, were down-regulated regardless of the development stage of the flower bud. In contrast, expression of TAG], which regulates stamen and carpel identities and negatively controls LeWUS, was up-regulated at the early stages and down-regulated at the late stages. In situ RNA hybridization analyses revealed that TAG] transcripts were restricted to the same floral meristern territories in healthy and infected tomatoes, indicating that tissue-specific expression of TAG] was not affected by the stolbur phytoplasma infection. Taken together, these data indicate that flower malformations of stolbur phytoplasma-infected tomatoes are associated with early changes in the expression of key flower development genes. The possible mechanisms by which the multiplication of stolbur phytoplasma in tomato sieve tubes deregulates floral development are discussed.

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

4.5
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