4.5 Article

Pan-Parastagonospora Comparative Genome Analysis-Effector Prediction and Genome Evolution

期刊

GENOME BIOLOGY AND EVOLUTION
卷 10, 期 9, 页码 2443-2457

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/gbe/evy192

关键词

Parastagonospora nodorum; Pan-genome; plant pathogen; crop disease; host-microbe interactions

资金

  1. Australian Government National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy
  2. Education Investment Fund Super Science Initiative
  3. Grains Research and Development Corporation research [CUR00012, CUR00023, GRS10061]
  4. Australian Government

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We report a fungal pan-genome study involving Parastagonospora spp., including 21 isolates of the wheat (Triticum aestivum) pathogen Parastagonospora nodorum, 10 of the grass-infecting Parastagonospora avenae, and 2 of a closely related undefined sister species. We observed substantial variation in the distribution of polymorphisms across the pan-genome, including repeat-induced point mutations, diversifying selection and gene gains and losses. We also discovered chromosome-scale inter and intraspecific presence/absence variation of some sequences, suggesting the occurrence of one or more accessory chromosomes or regions that may play a role in host-pathogen interactions. The presence of known pathogenicity effector loci SnToxA, SnTox1, and SnTox3 varied substantially among isolates. Three P. nodorum isolates lacked functional versions for all three loci, whereas three P. avenae isolates carried one or both of the SnTox1 and SnTox3 genes, indicating previously unrecognized potential for discovering additional effectors in the P. nodorum-wheat pathosystem. We utilized the pan-genomic comparative analysis to improve the prediction of pathogenicity effector candidates, recovering the three confirmed effectors among our top-ranked candidates. We propose applying this pan-genomic approach to identify the effector repertoire involved in other host-microbe interactions involving necrotrophic pathogens in the Pezizomycotina.

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