Localization of Fungal Components in the Pea-<i>Fusarium</i> Interaction Detected Immunochemically with Anti-chitosan and Anti-fungal Cell Wall Antisera

Hadwiger, Lee A.; Beckman, Jean M.; Adams, Michael J.

doi:10.1104/pp.67.1.170

Cited by 105 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The demonstration that polycations interact with polygalacturonate provides a likely explanation for reports that labeled polycations bind to the plant cell wall (6,11). The interaction of chitosan with polygalacturonate also indicates a possible mechanism for adhesion of the fungal wall to that of the host plant during infection.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 73%

Effect of Chitosan on Membrane Permeability of Suspension-Cultured Glycine max and Phaseolus vulgaris Cells

Young¹,

Köhle²,

Kauss³

1982

Plant Physiol.

234

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Treatment of suspension-cultured Glycine max cv Harosoy 63 cells with soluble chitosan (20-500 micrograms per milliliter) increased membrane permeability as shown by leakage of electrolytes, protein, and UV absorbing material. Severe damage to the cell membrane by chitosan (100 and 500 ug/ml) was also indicated by reduced staining with fluorescein diacetate and the leakage of fluorescein from preloaded cells. Other basic polymers (poly-L-lysine, histone, DEAE-dextran, protamine sulfate, and glycol chitosan) also increased permeability, whereas the basic monomers L-lysine and D-glucosamine, and acidic or neutral polymers were not active. Chitosan-induced leakage was inhibited by divalent cations, the order of effectiveness being Ba2 > Ca2+ > Sr2 > Mg2+. Na polygalacturonate and Na poly-L-aspartate also reduced polycation-induced leakage, probably by formation of polycation-polyanion complexes. A chitosan-polygalacturonate complex precipitated on mixing solutions of the two polymers containing approximately equal numbers of galacturonate and glucosamine residues, but not with either polymer in excess. A similar concentrationdependent precipitation of chitosan by Na poly-L-aspartate was found. Leakage from Phaseolus vulgaris cv Grandessa cells was also induced by chitosan, and was inhibited by Ca2+ and Na polygalacturonate.Chitosan (,8-1,4- MATERIALS AND METHODSCell Cultures. The cell suspension culture of Glycine max cv Harosoy 63 was a gift from J. Ebel, Freiburg University, Germany and that of Phaseolus vulgaris cv Grandessa (seeds from Bruno Nebelung, Munster, Germany) was initiated by inoculation of callus derived from sterile hypocotyl explants of 6-d-old seedlings. Suspension cultures were grown at 26°C in the dark on a 1.5-cm radius rotary shaker at 120 rpm in Erlenmeyer flasks containing B5 medium (9) which was modified by using 50 jLM FeSO4-EDTA as the source of iron (8), and subcultured at 6-and 12-d intervals, respectively.Chemicals. Chitosan from crab shells (Sigma) was dissolved in 90 ml 0.1 N acetic acid/g chitosan by stirring overnight, centrifuged at 27,000g for 20 min to remove insoluble material, then precipitated by neutralization to pH 8.0 with 5 N NaOH. The precipitate was washed extensively with distilled H20 by centrifugation and freeze-dried. The glucosamine content of this purified preparation was estimated to be 100%o by the method of Ride and Drysdale (23). Aqueous solutions of purified chitosan and glycol chitosan (Sigma) were prepared for use by dissolving 100 mg in 18 ml 0.1 N acetic acid and dialyzing four times against 2 liters of distilled H20. Poly-L-lysine hydrobromide (mol wt, >70,000), DEAE-dextran (approximate mol wt, 500,000), histone (calf thymus, type II), Na polygalacturonate (grade II), Na poly-L-aspartate (mol wt, 20,000-50,000), glucosamine hydrochloride, L-lysine monohydrochloride, L-aspartic acid, FDA, and BSA (fraction V) were from Sigma. Protamine sulfate and galacturonic acid were from Merck (Darmstadt, Germany). Solutions of aspartic acid and galacturonic...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 73%

Effect of Chitosan on Membrane Permeability of Suspension-Cultured Glycine max and Phaseolus vulgaris Cells

Young¹,

Köhle²,

Kauss³

1982

Plant Physiol.

234

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Specifically, the pea cell chromatin in the inoculated tissue was dispersed relative to the water controls. The polycationic compound Chit released from Fsph has a high affinity for DNA and has been shown to enter the plant nucleus (Hadwiger et al, 1981) and induce pisatin synthesis (Hadwiger and Beckman, 1980). Moreover, Chit is also capable of causing DNA strand breakage in vitro (Kashige et al, 1994).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of the Effects of DNA-Damaging Agents and Biotic Elicitors on the Induction of Plant Defense Genes, Nuclear Distortion, and Cell Death

2001

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pea (Pisum sativum L. cv Alcan) endocarp tissue challenged with an incompatible fungal pathogen, Fusarium solani f. sp. phaseoli or fungal elicitors results in the induction of pathogenesis-related (PR) genes and the accumulation of pisatin, a phytoalexin. Essentially the same response occurs in pea tissue exposed to DNA-specific agents that crosslink or intercalate DNA. In this study, the effects of DNA-damaging agents were assessed relative to the inducible expression of several pea PR genes: phenylalanine ammonia lyase, chalcone synthase, and DRR206. Mitomycin C and actinomycin D mimicked the biotic elicitors in enhancing the expression of all three PR genes. The activities of these PR gene promoters, isolated from different plants, were evaluated heterologously in transgenic tobacco. It is remarkable that ␤-glucuronidase expression was induced when plants containing the heterologous phenylalanine ammonia lyase, chalcone synthase, and DRR206 promoter-␤-glucuronidase chimeric reporter genes were treated by DNA-damaging agents. Finally, cytological analyses indicated that many of these agents caused nuclear distortion and collapse of the treated pea cells. Yet we observed that cell death is not necessary for the induction of the PR gene promoters assessed in this study. Based on these observations and previously published results, we propose that DNA damage or the associated alteration of chromatin can signal the transcriptional activation of plant defense genes.

show abstract

“…Both chitosan and PIIF are possible elicitors of induced responses in plants naturally attacked by insects and fungi (Hadwiger et al, 1981;Walkers-Simons et al, 1984;Green and Ryan, 1972).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Preliminary study of the monoterpene response of three pines to Ophiostoma clavigerum (Ascomycetes : Ophiostomatales) and two chemical elicitors

Lieutier¹,

Berryman

Millstein

1991

Ann. For. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary — The monoterpene response of phloem and sapwood of individual pines belonging to 3 species (Pinus contorta, Pinus ponderosa and Pinus monticola) to inoculation with Ophiostoma clavigerum and injection with chitosan, a proteinase inhibitor-inducing factor and a control buffer, was investigated quantitatively and qualitatively. The total quantity of monoterpene in the reactive tissues increased with each treatment but to different levels. In each tree, the monoterpene composition of the reactive tissues differed from that of the unwounded tissues, but was the same whatever the treatment, even in the case of an injection with buffer control. In addition, phloem and sapwood responses were qualitatively identical although constitutive compositions differed greatly. The composition of reactive tissues was not very different from that of unwounded sapwood. The direction of variation of each monoterpene from unwounded to reactive tissues differed according to the particular tree. Only phellandrene + limonene reacted consistently. From these results we cannot conclude that chitosan is a natural elicitor, and the non-specificity of the response for the aggression favors the hypothesis that an elicitor originates from the tree itself. Because of this non-specificity, and the fact that the three trees responded in a qualitatively different manner, we suggest that the qualitative monoterpene response of the tree is not adapted to any specific aggressor even though these trees are usually hosts of the same bark beetle-fungus complex. Thus, the role of monoterpenes in the induced defensive response is very likely a quantitative and dose-dependent relationship.

show abstract

Localization of Fungal Components in the Pea-Fusarium Interaction Detected Immunochemically with Anti-chitosan and Anti-fungal Cell Wall Antisera

Cited by 105 publications

References 14 publications

Effect of Chitosan on Membrane Permeability of Suspension-Cultured Glycine max and Phaseolus vulgaris Cells

Effect of Chitosan on Membrane Permeability of Suspension-Cultured Glycine max and Phaseolus vulgaris Cells

A Comparison of the Effects of DNA-Damaging Agents and Biotic Elicitors on the Induction of Plant Defense Genes, Nuclear Distortion, and Cell Death

Preliminary study of the monoterpene response of three pines to Ophiostoma clavigerum (Ascomycetes : Ophiostomatales) and two chemical elicitors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About