Transcriptional Profiling of Resistant and Susceptible Buffalograsses in Response to Blissus occiduus (Hemiptera: Blissidae) Feeding

Ramm, C. M.; Wachholtz, Michael; Amundsen, Keenan; Donze, Teresa; Heng-Moss, Tiffany; Twigg, Paul; Palmer, Nathan A.; Sarath, Gautam; Baxendale, Fred

doi:10.1093/jee/tov067

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Reactive oxygen species (ROS) are a well-recognized component of plant response to insect herbivory (Kerchev et al, 2012; Foyer and Noctor, 2013), and several studies suggest tolerant plants have a greater ability to quench excess ROS (Heng-Moss et al, 2004; Franzen et al, 2007; Ramm et al, 2015). Enzymes such as peroxidases and glutathione-S-transferases (GSTs) reduce ROS accumulation and detoxify oxidized metabolites and xenobiotic when plants encounter reactive oxygen generating stressors (Gulsen et al, 2010;Perez and Brown, 2014).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global Responses of Resistant and Susceptible Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) to Sugarcane Aphid (Melanaphis sacchari)

Tetreault¹,

Grover²,

Scully³

et al. 2019

Front. Plant Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sugarcane aphid ( Melanaphis sacchari ) has emerged as a significant pest for sorghum. The use of sugarcane aphid-resistant sorghum germplasm with integrated pest management strategies appears to be an excellent solution to this problem. In this study, a resistant line (RTx2783) and a susceptible line (A/BCK60) were used to characterize the differences in plant responses to the sugarcane aphid through a series of experiments, which examined global sorghum gene expression, aphid feeding behavior and inheritance of aphid resistance. The global transcriptomic responses to sugarcane aphids in resistant and susceptible plants were identified using RNA-seq and compared to the expression profiles of uninfested plants at 5, 10, and 15 days post-infestation. The expression of genes from several functional categories were altered in aphid-infested susceptible plants, which included genes related to cell wall modification, photosynthesis and phytohormone biosynthesis. In the resistant line, only 31 genes were differentially expressed in the infested plants relative to uninfested plants over the same timecourse. However, network analysis of these transcriptomes identified a co-expression module where the expression of multiple sugar and starch associated genes were repressed in infested resistant plants at 5 and 10 days. Several nucleotide-binding-site, leucine-rich repeat (NBS-LRR) and disease resistance genes similar to aphid resistance genes identified in other plants are identified in the current study which may be involved in sugarcane aphid resistance. The electrical penetration graph (EPG) results indicated that sugarcane aphid spent approximately twice as long in non-probing phase, and approximately a quarter of time in phloem ingestion phase on the resistant and F 1 plants compared to susceptible plant. Additionally, network analysis identified a phloem protein 2 gene expressed in both susceptible and resistant plants early (day 5) of infestation, which may contribute to defense against aphid feeding within sieve elements. The resistant line RTx2783 displayed both antixenosis and antibiosis modes of resistance based on EPG and choice bioassays between susceptible, resistant and F 1 plants. Aphid resistance from RTx2783 segregated as a single dominant locus in the F 2 generation, which will enable breeders to rapidly develop sugarcane aphid-resistant hybrids using RTx2783 as the male parent.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global Responses of Resistant and Susceptible Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) to Sugarcane Aphid (Melanaphis sacchari)

Tetreault¹,

Grover²,

Scully³

et al. 2019

Front. Plant Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…ROS are a well-established component of plant response to insect herbivory [ 16 , 80 , 81 ]. Indeed, the ability of a plant to effectively scavenge excess ROS has been hypothesized to differentiate susceptible genotypes from tolerant genotypes [ 26 , 82 – 84 ]. Although cellular ROS can be generated from multiple compartments, the plasma membrane-bound reactive-burst oxidases (RBOHs) are among the first to respond to external stimuli and are a central cog in ROS-mediated signaling [ 85 , 86 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transcriptional analysis of defense mechanisms in upland tetraploid switchgrass to greenbugs

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAphid infestation of switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) has the potential to reduce yields and biomass quality. Although switchgrass-greenbug (Schizaphis graminum; GB) interactions have been studied at the whole plant level, little information is available on plant defense responses at the molecular level.ResultsThe global transcriptomic response of switchgrass cv Summer to GB was monitored by RNA-Seq in infested and control (uninfested) plants harvested at 5, 10, and 15 days after infestation (DAI). Differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in infested plants were analyzed relative to control uninfested plants at each time point. DEGs in GB-infested plants induced by 5-DAI included an upregulation of reactive burst oxidases and several cell wall receptors. Expression changes in genes linked to redox metabolism, cell wall structure, and hormone biosynthesis were also observed by 5-DAI. At 10-DAI, network analysis indicated a massive upregulation of defense-associated genes, including NAC, WRKY, and MYB classes of transcription factors and potential ancillary signaling molecules such as leucine aminopeptidases. Molecular evidence for loss of chloroplastic functions was also detected at this time point. Supporting these molecular changes, chlorophyll content was significantly decreased, and ROS levels were elevated in infested plants 10-DAI. Total peroxidase and laccase activities were elevated in infested plants at 10-DAI relative to control uninfested plants. The net result appeared to be a broad scale defensive response that led to an apparent reduction in C and N assimilation and a potential redirection of nutrients away from GB and towards the production of defensive compounds, such as pipecolic acid, chlorogenic acid, and trehalose by 10-DAI. By 15-DAI, evidence of recovery in primary metabolism was noted based on transcript abundances for genes associated with carbon, nitrogen, and nutrient assimilation.ConclusionsExtensive remodeling of the plant transcriptome and the production of ROS and several defensive metabolites in an upland switchgrass cultivar were observed in response to GB feeding. The early loss and apparent recovery in primary metabolism by 15-DAI would suggest that these transcriptional changes in later stages of GB infestation could underlie the recovery response categorized for this switchgrass cultivar. These results can be exploited to develop switchgrass lines with more durable resistance to GB and potentially other aphids.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12870-017-0998-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

“…Transcriptional profiling in tolerant and susceptible buffalograsses suggests that a chinch bug tolerant genotype may be physiologically better prepared for chinch bug attack than susceptible plants as a result of relatively high basal levels of POX and POX-1 (peroxidases), CAT (catalase), and GRAS [a gibberellic acid insensitive (GAI), repressor of GAI and scarecrow] transcripts ( Ramm et al, 2013 ). Ramm et al (2015) further noted that prior to chinch bug feeding the tolerant buffalograss had significantly higher expression of seven POXs, including five GPXs , relative to the susceptible buffalograss. Collectively, this suggest that constitutively elevated levels of ROS scavenging enzymes in tolerant plants may confer the ability to more readily detoxify ROS induced by chinch bug injury without suffering the negative consequences of high cellular levels of ROS.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…Over the past decade, researchers have evaluated the interrelationships between ROS damage and mitigation arising from quenching failures associated with end-product inhibition of photosynthesis. Several studies have suggested that tolerant plants appear to counteract deleterious effects of ROS accumulation and, consequently, PCD in response to phloem-feeding insects through up-regulation of detoxification mechanisms ( Heng-Moss et al, 2004 ; Franzen et al, 2007 ; Gutsche et al, 2009 ; Smith et al, 2010 ; Ramm et al, 2013 , 2015 ; Sytykiewicz et al, 2014 ). Sytykiewicz et al (2014) described a significant increase of superoxide anion radicals (O 2 ) in maize seedlings infested with Rhopalosiphum padi (Bird cherry-oat aphid).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Plant Tolerance: A Unique Approach to Control Hemipteran Pests

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Plant tolerance to insect pests has been indicated to be a unique category of resistance, however, very little information is available on the mechanism of tolerance against insect pests. Tolerance is distinctive in terms of the plant’s ability to withstand or recover from herbivore injury through growth and compensatory physiological processes. Because plant tolerance involves plant compensatory characteristics, the plant is able to harbor large numbers of herbivores without interfering with the insect pest’s physiology or behavior. Some studies have observed that tolerant plants can compensate photosynthetically by avoiding feedback inhibition and impaired electron flow through photosystem II that occurs as a result of insect feeding. Similarly, the up-regulation of peroxidases and other oxidative enzymes during insect feeding, in conjunction with elevated levels of phytohormones can play an important role in providing plant tolerance to insect pests. Hemipteran insects comprise some of the most economically important plant pests (e.g., aphids, whiteflies), due to their ability to achieve high population growth and their potential to transmit plant viruses. In this review, results from studies on plant tolerance to hemipterans are summarized, and potential models to understand tolerance are presented.

show abstract

Transcriptional Profiling of Resistant and Susceptible Buffalograsses in Response to Blissus occiduus (Hemiptera: Blissidae) Feeding

Cited by 8 publications

References 49 publications

Global Responses of Resistant and Susceptible Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) to Sugarcane Aphid (Melanaphis sacchari)

Global Responses of Resistant and Susceptible Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) to Sugarcane Aphid (Melanaphis sacchari)

Transcriptional analysis of defense mechanisms in upland tetraploid switchgrass to greenbugs

Plant Tolerance: A Unique Approach to Control Hemipteran Pests

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About