|
|
||||||||
|
First published online June 24, 2005; 10.1104/pp.105.061200 Plant Physiology 138:1774-1784 (2005) © 2005 American Society of Plant Biologists
Dissecting Defense-Related and Developmental Transcriptional Responses of Maize during Ustilago maydis Infection and Subsequent Tumor Formation1Max-Planck-Institute for Terrestrial Microbiology, Department of Organismic Interactions, D35043 Marburg, Germany
Infection of maize (Zea mays) plants with the smut fungus Ustilago maydis triggers the formation of tumors on aerial parts in which the fungal life cycle is completed. A differential display screen was performed to gain insight into transcriptional changes of the host response. Some of the genes strongly up-regulated in tumors showed a pronounced developmental expression pattern with decreasing transcript levels from basal to apical shoot segments, suggesting that U. maydis has the capacity to extend the undifferentiated state of maize plants. Differentially expressed genes implicated in secondary metabolism were Bx1, involved in biosynthesis of the cyclic hydroxamic acid 2,4-dihydroxy-7-methoxy-2H-1,4-benzoxazin-3-one, and a novel putative sesquiterpene cyclase gene U. maydis induced (Umi)2. Together with the up-regulation of Umi11 encoding a cyclotide-like protein this suggests a nonconventional induction of plant defenses. Explicitly, U. maydis was resistant to 2,4-dihydroxy-7-methoxy-2H-1,4-benzoxazin-3-one but susceptible to its benzoxazolinone derivative 6-methoxy-2-benzoxazolinone. Infection studies of isolated leaves with U. maydis and Colletotrichum graminicola provided evidence for coregulation of Umi2 and PR-1 gene expression, with mRNA levels strongly determined by the extent of fungal colonization within tissue. However, in contrast to Umi2, transcript levels of PR-1 remained low in plants infected with wild-type U. maydis but were 8-fold elevated upon infection with an U. maydis mutant strongly attenuated in pathogenic development. This suggests that U. maydis colonization in planta suppresses a classical defense response. Furthermore, comparative expression analysis uncovered distinct transcriptional programs operating in the host in response to fungal infection and subsequent tumor formation.
1 This work was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (grant no. SFB369). Article, publication date, and citation information can be found at www.plantphysiol.org/cgi/doi/10.1104/pp.105.061200. * E-mail basse{at}staff.uni-marburg.de; fax 496421178 609. Received February 12, 2005; returned for revision April 21, 2005; accepted April 22, 2005. This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ASPB Publications | PLANT PHYSIOLOGY | THE PLANT CELL | |
|---|---|---|---|