The mixed xylem sap proteome of Fusarium oxysporum‐infected tomato plants

Abstract

SUMMARY Secreted proteins are known to play decisive roles in plant-fungus interactions. To study the molecular details of the interaction between the xylem-colonizing, plant-pathogenic fungus Fusarium oxysporum and tomato, the composition of the xylem sap proteome of infected tomato plants was investigated and compared with that of healthy plants. Two-dimensional gel separation and mass spectrometry yielded peptide masses and peptide sequences of 33 different proteins. Despite the absence of complete genome sequences of either tomato or F. oxysporum, 21 proteins were identified as tomato proteins and seven as fungal proteins. Thirteen of the tomato proteins were specific for infected plants. Sixteen tomato proteins were found in xylem sap for the first time, four of which were identified based on matches to expressed sequences only. Coding sequences for new proteins from F. oxysporum were identified through either direct matching to a database sequence, matching of peptide sequences to genome or expressed sequence tag databases of other Fusarium species, or PCR with degenerate primers on cDNA derived from infected plants followed by screening of a F. oxysporum BAC library. Together, these findings provide an excellent basis for further exploration of the interaction between xylem-colonizing pathogens and their hosts.

Expression of effector gene SIX1 of Fusarium oxysporum requires living plant cells

“…We did notice that SIX1 and the other known SIX genes (SIX2, SIX3 and SIX4, all encoding small proteins secreted in xylem during infection) share some common characteristics in the promoter (Houterman et al, 2007). In or close to each of the promoters a transposon (miniature impala) is present and each contains a variant of the motif 'TCGGCAGTTW'.…”

Tomato susceptibility to Fusarium crown and root rot: Effect of grafting combination and proteomic analysis of tolerance expression in the rootstock

“…Ralstonia solanacearum (Smith) Yabuuchi et al (Dahal et al, 2009), Tobacco mosaic virus (Casado-Vela et al, 2006), Clavibacter michiganensis subsp. michiganensis (Smith) Davis et al (Savidor et al, 2012) or Fusarium oxysporum (Houtermann et al, 2007), thereby pointing to an involvement of PR-2 proteins in the expression of the resistance. On the other hand, data from a recent comparative proteomic investigation on FORL infection of roots in resistant and susceptible tomato lines, showed that b-1,3-glucanases and endochitinases were accumulated only in susceptible plants (Mazzeo et al, 2014), thus suggesting that PR-2 or PR-4 proteins in resistant lines are not essential to the defense response.…”

“…Recently, functional approaches, including proteomics, have greatly contributed to the molecular dissection of plantepathogen interactions, allowing to identify a number of defence-related candidate proteins and helping to clarify specific gene expression patterns (Metha et al, 2008). In tomato, proteomic studies have been performed to investigate response to bacteria (Afroz et al, 2009;Dahal et al, 2010;Savidor et al, 2012), virus (Casado-Vela et al, 2006) and fungi (Houtermann et al, 2007;Mazzeo et al, 2014).…”

Toxin Induction and Protein Extraction from <em>Fusarium</em> <em>spp.</em> Cultures for Proteomic Studies

“…Fusarium mycotoxins such as deoxynivalenol, nivalenol, T2, zearelenone, fusaric acid, moniliformin, etc... have adverse effects on both human and animal health and some are considered as pathogenicity factors. Proteomic studies showed to be effective for deciphering toxin production mechanisms (Taylor et al, 2008) as well as for identifying potential pathogenic factors (Paper et al, 2007, Houterman et al, 2007 in Fusaria. It becomes therefore fundamental to establish reliable methods for comparing between proteomic studies in order to rely on true differences found in protein expression among experiments, strains and laboratories.…”