Display options
Cite
Fofana B, Banks TW, McCallum B, et al. Temporal gene expression profiling of the wheat leaf rust pathosystem using cDNA microarray reveals differences in compatible and incompatible defence pathways. Int J Plant Genomics. 2007;2007:17542doi: 10.1155/2007/17542.
Fofana, B., Banks, T. W., McCallum, B., Strelkov, S. E., & Cloutier, S. (2007). Temporal gene expression profiling of the wheat leaf rust pathosystem using cDNA microarray reveals differences in compatible and incompatible defence pathways. International journal of plant genomics, 200717542. https://doi.org/10.1155/2007/17542
Fofana, Bourlaye, et al. "Temporal gene expression profiling of the wheat leaf rust pathosystem using cDNA microarray reveals differences in compatible and incompatible defence pathways." International journal of plant genomics vol. 2007 (2007): 17542. doi: https://doi.org/10.1155/2007/17542
Fofana B, Banks TW, McCallum B, Strelkov SE, Cloutier S. Temporal gene expression profiling of the wheat leaf rust pathosystem using cDNA microarray reveals differences in compatible and incompatible defence pathways. Int J Plant Genomics. 2007;2007:17542. doi: 10.1155/2007/17542. PMID: 18288238; PMCID: PMC2216066.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Int J Plant Genomics. 2007;2007:17542. doi: 10.1155/2007/17542.

Temporal gene expression profiling of the wheat leaf rust pathosystem using cDNA microarray reveals differences in compatible and incompatible defence pathways.

International journal of plant genomics

Bourlaye Fofana, Travis W Banks, Brent McCallum, Stephen E Strelkov, Sylvie Cloutier

Affiliations

  1. Cereal Research Centre, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.

PMID: 18288238 PMCID: PMC2216066 DOI: 10.1155/2007/17542

Abstract

In this study, we detail the construction of a custom cDNA spotted microarray containing 7728 wheat ESTs and the use of the array to identify host genes that are differentially expressed upon challenges with leaf rust fungal pathogens. Wheat cultivar RL6003 (Thatcher Lr1) was inoculated with Puccinia triticina virulence phenotypes BBB (incompatible) or TJB (7-2) (compatible) and sampled at four different time points (3, 6, 12, and 24 hours) after inoculation. Transcript expression levels relative to a mock treatment were measured. One hundred ninety two genes were found to have significantly altered expression between the compatible and incompatible reactions. Among those were genes involved in photosynthesis, the production of reactive oxygen species, ubiquitination, signal transduction, as well as in the shikimate/phenylpropanoid pathway. These data indicate that various metabolic pathways are affected, some of which might be used by RL6003 to mount a coordinated defense against an incompatible fungal pathogen.

References

  1. Trends Plant Sci. 2003 Jun;8(6):252-8 - PubMed
  2. Science. 2002 Mar 15;295(5562):2073-6 - PubMed
  3. J Biol Chem. 2006 Aug 4;281(31):21660-21669 - PubMed
  4. Mol Plant Microbe Interact. 2004 Mar;17(3):304-12 - PubMed
  5. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998 Feb 17;95(4):1663-8 - PubMed
  6. Plant Cell. 2005 Jan;17(1):268-81 - PubMed
  7. Plant Cell. 2003 Feb;15(2):317-30 - PubMed
  8. Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2000 Apr;3(2):108-16 - PubMed
  9. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999 May 25;96(11):6547-52 - PubMed
  10. Mol Plant Microbe Interact. 2005 Nov;18(11):1161-74 - PubMed
  11. Plant Mol Biol. 2001 Mar;45(4):399-407 - PubMed
  12. Plant Cell. 1998 Mar;10(3):461-73 - PubMed
  13. Curr Opin Plant Biol. 1999 Apr;2(2):96-103 - PubMed
  14. Plant Cell. 1995 Jul;7(7):1085-1097 - PubMed
  15. Plant Cell. 2004 Sep;16(9):2514-28 - PubMed
  16. Science. 2005 Apr 22;308(5721):506-8 - PubMed
  17. Trends Plant Sci. 2005 Feb;10(2):71-8 - PubMed
  18. J Exp Bot. 2002 May;53(372):1305-19 - PubMed
  19. Mol Plant Pathol. 2003 Jan 1;4(1):51-6 - PubMed
  20. Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2003 Aug;6(4):300-6 - PubMed
  21. Phytopathology. 2003 Feb;93(2):153-9 - PubMed
  22. Plant Mol Biol. 2003 Jan;51(1):21-37 - PubMed
  23. Nat Genet. 1999 Jan;21(1 Suppl):10-4 - PubMed
  24. Nat Genet. 2000 Dec;26(4):403-10 - PubMed
  25. Mol Cell. 1999 Jul;4(1):21-33 - PubMed
  26. Mol Plant Pathol. 2003 Nov 1;4(6):469-77 - PubMed
  27. Annu Rev Phytopathol. 2000 Sep;38:491-513 - PubMed
  28. Plant Physiol. 2003 Sep;133(1):47-62 - PubMed
  29. Annu Rev Phytopathol. 1996;34:435-55 - PubMed
  30. Physiol Rev. 2002 Apr;82(2):373-428 - PubMed
  31. Planta. 1998 Mar;204(3):324-34 - PubMed
  32. Mol Plant Microbe Interact. 2004 Aug;17(8):853-64 - PubMed
  33. Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2004;55:373-99 - PubMed
  34. Plant Cell. 2000 Jun;12(6):917-32 - PubMed
  35. Photosynth Res. 2003;75(1):11-27 - PubMed
  36. Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2003 Aug;6(4):307-11 - PubMed
  37. Science. 2005 Apr 22;308(5721):548-50 - PubMed
  38. Plant Physiol. 1999 Apr;119(4):1233-42 - PubMed
  39. Plant Physiol. 2005 Feb;137(2):738-46 - PubMed
  40. Plant Mol Biol. 2000 Oct;44(3):321-34 - PubMed
  41. Nucleic Acids Res. 1997 Sep 1;25(17):3389-402 - PubMed
  42. Nat Biotechnol. 2002 Sep;20(9):940-3 - PubMed
  43. Phytopathology. 2005 Jan;95(1):114-23 - PubMed
  44. Genome Res. 1999 Sep;9(9):868-77 - PubMed
  45. Trends Plant Sci. 2001 Nov;6(11):520-7 - PubMed
  46. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 Oct 10;97(21):11655-60 - PubMed
  47. Plant Physiol. 1998 Jul;117(3):1103-14 - PubMed
  48. Plant Physiol. 1997 Mar;113(3):719-727 - PubMed
  49. Genome Res. 1998 Mar;8(3):175-85 - PubMed
  50. Plant Physiol. 2002 Aug;129(4):1866-71 - PubMed
  51. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999 Aug 3;96(16):9438-43 - PubMed
  52. Plant Physiol. 2005 May;138(1):105-15 - PubMed
  53. Mol Plant Microbe Interact. 2006 Apr;19(4):407-17 - PubMed
  54. Nature. 2001 Jun 14;411(6839):826-33 - PubMed
  55. Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol. 1997 Jun;48:251-275 - PubMed

Publication Types