4.5 Article

Identification of Beet necrotic yellow vein virus P25 Pathogenicity Factor-Interacting Sugar Beet Proteins That Represent Putative Virus Targets or Components of Plant Resistance

期刊

MOLECULAR PLANT-MICROBE INTERACTIONS
卷 22, 期 8, 页码 999-1010

出版社

AMER PHYTOPATHOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1094/MPMI-22-8-0999

关键词

-

资金

  1. Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology (BMWi)
  2. Arbeitsgemeinschaft industrieller Forschungsvereinigungen
  3. Gemeinschaft zur Forderung der privaten deutschen Pflanzenzuchtung

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Beet necrotic yellow vein virus (BNYVV) induces the most important disease threatening sugar beet. The growth of partially resistant hybrids carrying monogenic dominant resistance genes stabilize yield but are unable to entirely prevent virus infection and replication. P25 is responsible for symptom development and previous studies have shown that recently occurring resistance-breaking isolates possess increased P25 variability. To better understand the viral pathogenicity factor's interplay with plant proteins and to possibly unravel the molecular basis of sugar beet antivirus resistance, P25 was applied in a yeast two-hybrid screen of a resistant sugar beet cDNA library. This screen identified candidate proteins recognized as orthologues from other plant species which are known to be expressed following pathogen infection and involved in plant defense response. Most of the candidates potentially related to host-pathogen interactions were involved in the ubiquitylation process and plants response to stress, and were part of cell and metabolism components. The interaction of several candidate genes with P25 was confirmed in Nicotiana benthamiana leaf cells by transient agrobacterium-mediated expression applying bimolecular fluorescence complementation assay. The putative functions of several of the candidates identified support previous findings and present first targets for understanding the BNYVV pathogenicity and antivirus resistance mechanism.

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