Recombinant DNA technology (Immunological screening)
Tuesday theme 1 1220 1235 large briefing room mulusew
1. Recognition of Phytophthora infestans in Potato (Solanum tuberosum l.): Scr74 gene as an
example
Mulusew Kassa Bitew
Dr. Vivianne Vleeshouwers
Emmanouil Domazakis
10th Triennial Conference
October 11 , 2016
3. P. infestans
(Marshall, 1995; Judelson 1997; Vleeshouwers et al., 2011)
• Late blight of potato and tomato, cause of Irish famin
• Can destroy a potato crop within a few days due to:
Elevated virulence as an R gene destroyer
Capability to rapidly adapt to resistance plants
High evolutionary potential
4. Cont’d
• Late blight is the most devastating disease of
potato that affect the entire plant, stem, leaves
and tubers; resulting in a yield loss of 16%
worldwide
(Vleeshouwers et al., 2006)
5. Possibilities to control P.infestans
In many parts of the world, P. infestans is now resistant to
fungicides and
It still poses a major threat, and it has evolved to overcome
most of the control measures that were introduced over the
years.
So:
it is sensible to seek sources of genetic resistance to the
pathogen in the wild potato plants
And to do this understanding the recognition of
Phytophthora infestans in potato and using effector to
accelerate R gene is the root of the problem to figure it
out
6. What helps the pathogen to break the R gene?
A. Reproduction: Sexual ; A1+A2
(Haas et al ., 2009)
• Reproduce asexually
Sporangia
Zoospores
• Sexual reproduction can
also occur when both
mating types are present
Oospores:
♀ oogonium &
♂antheridium
7. What helps the pathogen to break the R gene?
B. largest and the most complex genome sequence so far in
chromarveolates~240Mb.
The fast evolving effector gene are localised to P. infestans genome.
This complex effectors fails in to two categories;
Apoplastic effectors that accumulate in the plant intercellular space
(apoplast) which includes secreted hydrolytic enzymes such as:
proteases
lipases and glycosylase, and
necrotizing toxins such as small cycteine-rich-proteins (SCRs).
Cytoplasmic effector that are translocate directly in to the plant cell by
specialised infection structure called the haustorium belong to the RXLR
and CRN families
(Haas et al ., 2009)
8. How Plant respond to effectors of the pathogen?
(Jones and Dangl, 2006)
Plants have two branches of immune system mediated by:
Apoplastic receptor = Pattern recognition receptors: Trans-membrane PRRs which
respond to microbial associated molecular pattern (MAMPS/PAMP)
Cytoplasmic receptors = nucleotide-binding site leucine-rich repeat (NBS-LRR)
proteins recognizing cytoplasmic effectors
In general:
Most PRR are identified as transmebrane receptor-like kinases (RLk/Ps)
But there is no PRR in P. Infestans, as far as I know
9. What is he question then?
There is a thought that P. infestans effectors are apoplastic
effectors and which is the cause of pathogenicity ever
No Pattern Recognition Receptors (PRR) identified for
oomycetes
?
10. Objectives
Study the sequence variation of the Scr74 gene family on 12 P.
infestans isolates & search for novel Scr74 variants = Polymorphism
of Scr74
Evaluate the response of potato genotypes to the different Scr74
variants through effectoromics = recognition
11. Scr74 effector family of P. infestans
Secreted cysteine-rich protein 74 amino acids = Scr74
Candidate apoplastic effector gene
Highly polymorphic and under diversifying selection
Is this protein being recognized in Solanum sp.?
Does this polymorphism affect the recognition by plant receptors?
(Orsomando et al., 2001; Bos et al. 2003 ; Liu et al., 2005)
12. Over view of the Method
Genomic DNA
isolation
PCR amplification
Cloning to pGEM-T
easy vector
Sequencing
Cloning to
pGR106 vector for
PVX
PVX assay
Scoring necrosis
Detached leaf
assay
Scoring P.
infestans growthSelection of Scr74
polymorphic genes
Selection of plant-pathogen
combination based on PVX
results
13. P. infestans isolates & Potato genotypes used in this study
12 isolates of P. infestans used for
studying Scr74 diversity
EC 1 90128
H3OPO4 IPO-C
IPO-0 PIC99183
UK7824 PIC99189
PIC99177 UK3928-A
89148-09 Katshaar
Plant material
Species name genotype name
S. verrucosum (wild
diploid)
VER909-1
VER910-5
VER914-7
VER914-9
VER922-1
VER922-2
VER989-1
VER989-2
VER989-3
VER989-4
S. tuberosum (diploid) RH89-039-16
S. tuberosum (doubled
haploid)
DM1-3616R44
12 Potato genotypes used for PVX assay
14. Scr74 amplification
PCR using Scr74 specific primers:
forward primer Scr74-FCla (59-GGAAATCGATCCGGTCATCGTCACTACTCAACAGCTCG–39)
and
reverse primer Scr74-RNot (59- GGAAGCGGCCGCTTCATTCATTTGATTATCACTGTATCTC-39)
Bands were excised from gel and cloned into pGEM-T easy
pGEM-T
15. Colony development and PCR confirmation
• Plating & blue/white screening
• Colony PCR confirmation
• Isolation of plasmid DNA and sequencing
8 colonies per transformation to E. coli
16. Distribution of Scr74 variants on the tested P. infestans isolates
P. infestans
isolates
Scr74 variants
C3b
B11a
C4_1
C10
B11_1a
E6_a1c
B3a_1ab
E6_1
C4c
B10_1b
B3a_2b
B3a_1b
C4_2c
C4_3c
B3a_1bb
D5_1ad
E5
C4_4c
H1
C3a
D5_2ad
D5_3ad
E6_a2c
B10_2b
D6
D5_1d
D5_2d
90128 x
89148-09 x
EC 1 x
H3OPO4 x
IPO-0 x x x
IPO-C x x x x
Katshaar x x x
PIC99177 x x
PIC99183 x x
PIC99189 x x
UK3928-A x x x x x x
UK7824 x
Reference
Liuetal.,2005
own
own
Liuetal.,2005
own
own
own
own
Liuetal.,2005
Liuetal.,2005
Liuetal.,2005
Liuetal.,2005
own
own
own
own
Liuetal.,2005
own
own
Liuetal.,2005
own
own
own
Liuetal.,2005
Liuetal.,2005
Liuetal.,2005
Liuetal.,2005
One isolate can have one or more Scr74 variants
17. Cloning of novel Scr74
27 different Scr74 variants were identified
Obtained Scr74 variants were cross checked with Liu et al. (2005)
4 novel variants identified
• Scr74-B11 →H3OPO4 , Scr74-E6_1 → PIC99177
• Scr74-H1 → UK3928-A , Scr74-C4_1 → IPO-0
Colony PCR of 4 novel Scr74
variants in PVX vector
18. Amino acid variation of Scr74 variants
Identity
Mature proteinsSignal peptides
8 conserved cysteine a.a. residues → Scr74 gene family is conserved in P.
infestans
7 variants have stop codon = pseudo gene
A total of 21 variablea.a. sites found and 20 are found in the mature protein
Highlight sites under diversifying selection
19. Amino acid sites under diversifying selection
13 amino acid sites were under positive diversifying selection (p > 95%)
Positions 3L, 28R, 30D, 58Y, 38L, 41K, 43T, 48K, 52A, 55I, 36H, 62S, 69S
Analysis was done using PAML package
Model Estimate of parameters InL Diversifying selection sites Model
comparison
2L p- values
M0: One
ratio
w = 1.95 -643 not allowed
M1: neutral P0 = 0.56, P1 = 0.44 -635 not allowed
M2:
Selection
P0 = 0.74, P1 = 0, P2 = 0.26, w =
8.27
-620 3L, 30D, 58Y, 38L,41K, 52A,62S M1 VS. M2 32 1.13E-07
M3:
discrete
P0 = 0.048, P1 = 0.69, P3 = 0.26, w1
= 0.19, w2 = 0.19, w3 = 8.27
-620 3L, 28R, 30D, 58Y, 38L, 41K, 43T,
48K, 52A, 55I, 36H, 62S, 69S
M0 VS. M3 46 2.46E-09
M7: b P = 0.005, q = 0.007 -636 not allowed
M8:
b+w
P0 = 0.074, P =23.3,
q = 99, P1 = 0.26, w = 8.27
-620 3L, 30D, 58Y, 38L, 41K,48K, 52A, 55I, 62S,
69S
M7 VS. M8 32 1.13E-07
InL = log likelihood value, 2L is likelihood ration test= 2(InL alternative hypothesis – InL null hypothesis)
Diversifying selection analysis (based on Liu et al., 2005)
21. Evaluation of the response of potato genotypes to the
different Scr74 variants
Experimental set up
5 plants per genotype
2 spots per effector, per leaf
3 leaves per plant
Controls:
pGR106 empty vector as
negative
CRN2 as positive
control
PVX assay to study the recognition of 17 Scr74 variants
Screen on 12 selected Solanum sp.
17 Scr74 variants were screened with PVX
• 13 variants from Liu et al., 2005
• 4 cloned (own new one)
22. Plant material
Species name genotype name
S. verrucosum
(wild diploid)
VER909-1
VER910-5
VER914-7
VER914-9
VER922-1
VER922-2
VER989-1
VER989-2
VER989-3
VER989-4
S. tuberosum
(diploid)
RH89-039-16
S. tuberosum
(doubled haploid)
DM1-3616R44
Potato genotypes tested for response to Scr74
Selected highly homozygous wild potato accessions used for the PVX assay
Grown in vitro for 1-2
weeks till strong roots
develop
Transplanted in the
greenhouse in jiffy pots for
3-4 weeks
Transplanted in big pots for
2-3 weeks
PVX agro-infection scoring
after 2 weeks
24. Scr74-A10 and Scr74-D5-1 gave the strongest
cell-death in 4 S. verrucosum genotypes
One-way ANOVA analysis between effector and genotype
Letters indicate significant difference between effectors in each
genotype at P<0.01
25. Evaluation of P. infestans virulence on our selected
Solanum sp.
(Vleeshouwers et al., 2006)
1st experiment was performed with 6 isolates
All isolates except Katshaar were not aggressive enough
2nd experiment was done with only isolate Katshaar
6 leaves were spot inoculated (4 spots per leaf) per genotype
DM and RH were used as susceptible controls
Leaves were spot-inoculated by pipetting 10 μl
droplets of the diluted spore suspension on the
abaxial side of the leaf
Pilot study to investigate if there is correlation between Scr74 variants
present in the isolate and its virulence on Scr74-responding genotype
26. P. infestans isolate Katshaar infection on 12 Solanum sp.
The lesion size (length and width) was scored & Lesion area calculated
using 𝐴𝐴 =
1
4
𝜋𝜋(𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿 𝐿 ∗ 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝑊𝑊𝑊)
All S. verrucosum genotypes, except VER922-1, VER22-2 and VER909-1
has < 16mm2
Effectors, i.e.,Scr74-D6, Scr74-D5_1 & Scr74-D5_2 were from Katshaar
isolate
Largest lesion area scored in RH & DM genotypes
27. Conclusions
Scr74 is a highly polymorphic gene family in P. infestans (>27
variants exist)
From the 12 wild potato genotypes screened, two S. verrucosum
(VER989-3 & VER989-4) genotypes gave the strongest cell-
death response to two Scr74 effectors (Scr74-A10 & Scr74-
D5_1)
28. There is a potential involvement of Scr74 recognition in plant
defence against P. infestans.
Strongly responding S. verrucosum genotypes have potentially
an immune receptor that might be an RLK or RLP which are part of
PRR since there is clear recognition of the Scr74 effector
Conclusions
29. Recommendation
As our result showed there is resistance wild
genotypes to P. infestans effector & would give
best production if they breed with different local
cultivars
So the identification and characterization of other
pathogen elicitor–plant receptor interactions could
also lead to novel strategies for engineering or
breeding for disease resistance.