Localization and Induced Resistance in Virus-Infected Plants

Loerenstein, G

doi:10.1146/annurev.py.10.090172.001141

Cited by 131 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Other, earlier reviews (32,80,105,121) have covered not only virus infections, but also the extensive literature on alterations in growth regulator metabolism caused by fungal and bacterial infections, which are beyond our scope here . Unlike viruses, fungi and bacteria may also produce or metabolize growth regulators themselves during infection .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Plant growth regulators and virus infection: A critical review

Fraser¹,

Whenham²

1982

Plant Growth Regul

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Virus infection can severely inhibit plant growth and distort development . This article reviews changes in plant growth regulator metabolism caused by infection . In general, virus infection decreases auxin and gibberellin concentrations and increases abscisic acid concentration . Ethylene production is stimulated in necrotic or chlorotic reactions to infection, but not where the virus spreads systemically without necrosis . While these broad trends are true for most host-virus combinations studied, several situations are recorded where the virus had other effects on growth substance concentration . Cytokinin changes do not show any common pattern : both increases and decreases after infection have been reported .The extent to which virus-induced changes in growth substance concentration could be responsible for observed alterations in host growth and development is discussed . While changes in abscisic acid, gibberellin and ethylene production seem potentially important, the experimental evidence does not provide conclusive proof for control of growth by these changes .The numerous investigations of effects of exogenous regulators on virus multiplication and pathogenesis are reviewed . Different regulators, or the same regulator applied at different times or concentrations, had very diverse effects, and in some cases did significantly alter virus multiplication and pathogenesis . However, such studies seem to have yielded disappointingly little understanding of the biochemistry of the host-virus interaction, and the possible involvement of growth substances in this .Possible uses of plant growth regulators in chemotherapy of virus disease, and their possible involvement in natural or induced resistance mechanisms are discussed .

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Plant growth regulators and virus infection: A critical review

Fraser¹,

Whenham²

1982

Plant Growth Regul

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…PAL and OMT were increased in many cells to a level that was 1.5-fold over the water-injected control. In leaves reacting hypersensitively and carrying local lesions, PAL and OMT increased 10-to 20-fold over the control (18), but the increase was restricted to the rings of cells surrounding the lesions. Although the effect of the glucan preparation on PAL and OMT activities was apparently too small to explain the induced resistance to virus, we decided to determine what would happen to the ability of the glucan preparation to protect against viral infection if the formation of lignin was selectively inhibited with AOPP (20).…”

Section: Mechanism By Which the Glucan Preparation Protectsmentioning

confidence: 75%

Host-Pathogen Interactions

Kopp¹,

Rouster²,

Fritig³

et al. 1989

Plant Physiol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A glucan preparation obtained from the mycelial walls of the fungus Phytophthora megasperma f.sp. glycinea and known as an elicitor of phytoalexins in soybean was shown to be a very efficient inducer of resistance against viruses in tobacco. The glucan preparation protected against mechanically transmitted viral infections on the upper and lower leaf surfaces. Whether the glucan preparation was applied by injection, inoculation, or spraying, it protected the plants if applied before, at the same time as, or not later than 8 hours after virus inoculation. At concentrations ranging from 0.1 to 10 micrograms per milliliter, the glucan preparation induced protection ranging from 50 to 100% against both symptom production (necrotic local lesions, necrotic rings, or systemic mosaic) and virus accumulation in all Nicotiana-virus combinations examined. However, no significant protection against some of the same viruses was observed in bean or turnip. The host plants successfully protected included N. tabacum (9 different cultivars), N. sylvestris, N. glutlnosa, and N. clevelandii.The viruses belonged to several taxonomic groups including tobacco mosaic virus, alfalfa mosaic virus, and tomato black ring virus. The glucan preparation did not act directly on the virus and did not interfere with virus disassembly; rather, it appeared to induce changes in the host plant that prevented infections from being initiated or recently established infections from enlarging. The induced resistance does not depend on induction of pathogenesis-related proteins, the phenylpropanoid pathway, ligninlike substances, or callose-like materials. We believe the induced resistance results from a mechanism that has yet to be described. the observed resistance (for recent reviews, see 8, 26). The metabolic alterations that occur during a viral-induced hypersensitive reaction appear to be similar to those that occur in the same host during incompatible interactions with pathogenic bacteria and fungi (7). The most commonly observed metabolic changes are the production of phytoalexins and phenylpropanoid metabolites. In previous reports, it was shown that the phenylpropanoid pathway is strongly activated ( 15) in tobacco leaves reacting hypersensitively to TMV2 and that the virus localizing mechanism was weakened (larger lesions) if infected leaves were treated with competitive inhibitors of phenylalanine ammonia-lyase, a key enzyme in the pathway (19,20). This suggested an involvement of the activated phenylpropanoid pathway in the localizing mechanism.Treatment of various plant materials with elicitors of microbial origin have been shown to mimic defense responses and to stimulate the pathways leading to phenylpropanoids and flavonoids (for reviews, see 1, 4). Among these elicitors were cell wall fragments and substances present in the culture filtrates ofthe fungus Phytophthora megasperma f.sp. glycinea (Pmg) (1, 2). In particular, poly-and oligosaccharides extracted and purified from cell walls of this fungus were shown to exhibit very h...

show abstract

“…These proteins have been studied in Phytolacca americana [4,11,12], Mirabilis Jalapa [13,14] and Trichosanthes kirilowii [15]. These proteins show antiviral activity when mixed with virus inoculum and are found to be localized extracellularly in plants [16,17]. On the other hand, some virus inhibitors of plant origin have been reported to induce systemic resistance in non-treated parts of plants also and thereby preventing infection of viruses [6,7,9,[18][19][20][21][22].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Molecular Characterization of Antiviral Proteins, Isolated from Host Plants, Pretreated with Antiviral Glycoprotein, Isolated from Roots of Boerhaavia Diffusa Plants

Amity¹

2017

JHVRV

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Antiviral proteins were isolated, from host plants, following treatment with an antiviral glycoprotein, extracted from the roots of Boerhaavia diffusa plants. It was found to be active against isometric as well as an isometric viruses in their respective hypersensitive and systemic hosts. The biologically active principal was isolated and purified. Estimation of proteins, from the leaf samples of N.glutinosa plants, indicated higher concentration of new proteins in plants whose two basal leaves were treated 24 hours earlier with an aqueous solution of the glycoprotein. SDS-PAGE analysis studies on partially purified antiviral principal of protein nature revealed that the size of band in L 3 (after 24 hours) was 30 Kda along with very dark and prominent bands. The size of band recorded in rest treatments was of 36 Kda and 50 Kda.

show abstract

Localization and Induced Resistance in Virus-Infected Plants

Cited by 131 publications

References 13 publications

Plant growth regulators and virus infection: A critical review

Plant growth regulators and virus infection: A critical review

Host-Pathogen Interactions

Molecular Characterization of Antiviral Proteins, Isolated from Host Plants, Pretreated with Antiviral Glycoprotein, Isolated from Roots of Boerhaavia Diffusa Plants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About