Sclerotinia infected vs Mock infected controls in B. napus Westar and Zhong You 821
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
ORGANISM(S): Brassica napus
SUBMITTER: Dwayne Hegedus
PROVIDER: E-GEOD-13262 | biostudies-arrayexpress |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-arrayexpress
Similar Datasets
Project description:The fungal pathogen Sclerotinia sclerotiorum infects a broad range of dicotyledonous plant species and is the causative agent of stem rot in Brassica napus. To elucidate the mechanisms underlying the defense response, we studied the patterns of gene expression in a partially resistant variety of ZhongYou 821 (ZY821) and a susceptible line from Westar over five time points, 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 hours post-inoculation (hpi) using a B. napus oligonucleotide microarray. Maximum differential gene expression was observed at 48 hpi in both genotypes with ZY821 responding more quickly than Westar. Specific sets of genes exhibited higher levels of expression at the earlier stages of the infection (6-12 hpi), including genes encoding defense-associated proteins such as chitinases, glucanases, osmotins and lectins and genes encoding transcription factors belonging to the zinc finger, WRKY, AP2, and MYB classes. Genes encoding enzymes involved in JA, ethylene, and auxin synthesis were induced in both genotypes, as were those for gibberellin degradation. Changes in metabolic pathways affecting carbohydrate and energy metabolism appeared to be directed toward shuttling carbon reserves to the TCA cycle. Genes involved in glucosinolate and phenylpropanoid biosynthesis were highly up-regulated suggesting that secondary metabolites are also important components of the response to S. sclerotiorum in B. napus. Keywords: Time course, infected vs mock infected Time course experiment (6hr, 12 hr, 24 hr, 48 hr, 72 hrs), sclerotinia infected vs mock-infected. Biological replicates: 3, independently harvested. Technical replicates: 2, dye swapped within each time for each biological replicate (total 6 slides per time point) time after innoculation: 6 hours: zy 6h inf vs control rep1, zy 6h control vs inf rep1, zy 6h inf vs control rep2, zy 6h control vs inf rep2, zy 6h inf vs control rep3, zy 6h control vs inf rep3 time after innoculation: 12 hours: zy 12h inf vs control rep1, zy 12h control vs inf rep1, zy 12h inf vs control rep2, zy 12h control vs inf rep2, zy 12h inf vs control rep3, zy 12h control vs inf rep3 time after innoculation: 24 hours: zy 24h inf vs control rep1, zy 24h control vs inf rep1, zy 24h inf vs control rep2, zy 24h control vs inf rep2, zy 24h inf vs control rep3, zy 24h control vs inf rep3 time after innoculation: 48 hours: zy 48h inf vs control rep1, zy 48h control vs inf rep1, zy 48h inf vs control rep2, zy 48h control vs inf rep2, zy 48h inf vs control rep3, zy 48h control vs inf rep3 time after innoculation: 72 hours: zy 72h inf vs control rep1, zy 72h control vs inf rep1, zy 72h inf vs control rep2, zy 72h control vs inf rep2, zy 72h inf vs control rep3, zy 72h control vs inf rep3 biological replicate: zy 6h inf vs control rep1, zy 6h inf vs control rep2, zy 6h inf vs control rep3 biological replicate: zy 6h control vs inf rep1, zy 6h control vs inf rep2, zy 6h control vs inf rep3 technical replicate - labeled-extract: zy 6h inf vs control rep1, zy 6h control vs inf rep1 technical replicate - labeled-extract: zy 6h inf vs control rep2, zy 6h control vs inf rep2 technical replicate - labeled-extract: zy 6h inf vs control rep3, zy 6h control vs inf rep3 biological replicate: zy 12h inf vs control rep1, zy 12h inf vs control rep2, zy 12h inf vs control rep3 biological replicate: zy 12h control vs inf rep1, zy 12h control vs inf rep2, zy 12h control vs inf rep3 technical replicate - labeled-extract: zy 12h inf vs control rep1, zy 12h control vs inf rep1 technical replicate - labeled-extract: zy 12h inf vs control rep2, zy 12h control vs inf rep2 technical replicate - labeled-extract: zy 12h inf vs control rep3, zy 12h control vs inf rep3 biological replicate: zy 24h inf vs control rep1, zy 24h inf vs control rep2, zy 24h inf vs control rep3 biological replicate: zy 24h control vs inf rep1, zy 24h control vs inf rep2, zy 24h control vs inf rep3 technical replicate - labeled-extract: zy 24h inf vs control rep1, zy 24h control vs inf rep1 technical replicate - labeled-extract: zy 24h inf vs control rep2, zy 24h control vs inf rep2 technical replicate - labeled-extract: zy 24h inf vs control rep3, zy 24h control vs inf rep3 biological replicate: zy 48h inf vs control rep1, zy 48h inf vs control rep2, zy 48h inf vs control rep3 biological replicate: zy 48h control vs inf rep1, zy 48h control vs inf rep2, zy 48h control vs inf rep3 technical replicate - labeled-extract: zy 48h inf vs control rep1, zy 48h control vs inf rep1 technical replicate - labeled-extract: zy 48h inf vs control rep2, zy 48h control vs inf rep2 technical replicate - labeled-extract: zy 48h inf vs control rep3, zy 48h control vs inf rep3 biological replicate: zy 72h inf vs control rep1, zy 72h inf vs control rep2, zy 72h inf vs control rep3 biological replicate: zy 72h control vs inf rep1, zy 72h control vs inf rep2, zy 72h control vs inf rep3 technical replicate - labeled-extract: zy 72h inf vs control rep1, zy 72h control vs inf rep1 technical replicate - labeled-extract: zy 72h inf vs control rep2, zy 72h control vs inf rep2 technical replicate - labeled-extract: zy 72h inf vs control rep3, zy 72h control vs inf rep3
2010-05-06 | E-GEOD-13256 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:The fungal pathogen Sclerotinia sclerotiorum infects a broad range of dicotyledonous plant species and is the causative agent of stem rot in Brassica napus. To elucidate the mechanisms underlying the defense response, we studied the patterns of gene expression in a partially resistant variety of ZhongYou 821 (ZY821) and a susceptible line from Westar over five time points, 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 hours post-inoculation (hpi) using a B. napus oligonucleotide microarray. Maximum differential gene expression was observed at 48 hpi in both genotypes with ZY821 responding more quickly than Westar. Specific sets of genes exhibited higher levels of expression at the earlier stages of the infection (6-12 hpi), including genes encoding defense-associated proteins such as chitinases, glucanases, osmotins and lectins and genes encoding transcription factors belonging to the zinc finger, WRKY, AP2, and MYB classes. Genes encoding enzymes involved in JA, ethylene, and auxin synthesis were induced in both genotypes, as were those for gibberellin degradation. Changes in metabolic pathways affecting carbohydrate and energy metabolism appeared to be directed toward shuttling carbon reserves to the TCA cycle. Genes involved in glucosinolate and phenylpropanoid biosynthesis were highly up-regulated suggesting that secondary metabolites are also important components of the response to S. sclerotiorum in B. napus. Keywords: Time course, and infected vs mock infected Time course experiment (6hr, 12 hr, 24 hr, 48 hr, 72 hrs), sclerotinia infected vs mock-infected. Biological replicates: 3, independently harvested. Technical replicates: 2, dye swapped within each time for each biological replicate (total 6 slides per time point) time after innoculation: 6 hours: westar 6h inf vs control rep1, westar 6h control vs inf rep1, westar 6h inf vs control rep2, westar 6h control vs inf rep2, westar 6h inf vs control rep3, westar 6h control vs inf rep3 time after innoculation: 12 hours: westar 12h inf vs control rep1, westar 12h control vs inf rep1, westar 12h inf vs control rep2, westar 12h control vs inf rep2, westar 12h inf vs control rep3, westar 12h control vs inf rep3 time after innoculation: 24 hours: westar 24h inf vs control rep1, westar 24h control vs inf rep1, westar 24h inf vs control rep2, westar 24h control vs inf rep2, westar 24h inf vs control rep3, westar 24h control vs inf rep3 time after innoculation: 48 hours: westar 48h inf vs control rep1, westar 48h control vs inf rep1, westar 48h inf vs control rep2, westar 48h control vs inf rep2, westar 48h inf vs control rep3, westar 48h control vs inf rep3 time after innoculation: 72 hours: westar 72h inf vs control rep1, westar 72h control vs inf rep1, westar 72h inf vs control rep2, westar 72h control vs inf rep2, westar 72h inf vs control rep3, westar 72h control vs inf rep3 biological replicate: westar 6h inf vs control rep1, westar 6h inf vs control rep2, westar 6h inf vs control rep3 biological replicate: westar 6h control vs inf rep1, westar 6h control vs inf rep2, westar 6h control vs inf rep3 technical replicate - labeled-extract: westar 6h inf vs control rep1, westar 6h control vs inf rep1 technical replicate - labeled-extract: westar 6h inf vs control rep2, westar 6h control vs inf rep2 technical replicate - labeled-extract: westar 6h inf vs control rep3, westar 6h control vs inf rep3 biological replicate: westar 12h inf vs control rep1, westar 12h inf vs control rep2, westar 12h inf vs control rep3 biological replicate: westar 12h control vs inf rep1, westar 12h control vs inf rep2, westar 12h control vs inf rep3 technical replicate - labeled-extract: westar 12h inf vs control rep1, westar 12h control vs inf rep1 technical replicate - labeled-extract: westar 12h inf vs control rep2, westar 12h control vs inf rep2 technical replicate - labeled-extract: westar 12h inf vs control rep3, westar 12h control vs inf rep3 biological replicate: westar 24h inf vs control rep1, westar 24h inf vs control rep2, westar 24h inf vs control rep3 biological replicate: westar 24h control vs inf rep1, westar 24h control vs inf rep2, westar 24h control vs inf rep3 technical replicate - labeled-extract: westar 24h inf vs control rep1, westar 24h control vs inf rep1 technical replicate - labeled-extract: westar 24h inf vs control rep2, westar 24h control vs inf rep2 technical replicate - labeled-extract: westar 24h inf vs control rep3, westar 24h control vs inf rep3 biological replicate: westar 48h inf vs control rep1, westar 48h inf vs control rep2, westar 48h inf vs control rep3 biological replicate: westar 48h control vs inf rep1, westar 48h control vs inf rep2, westar 48h control vs inf rep3 technical replicate - labeled-extract: westar 48h inf vs control rep1, westar 48h control vs inf rep1 technical replicate - labeled-extract: westar 48h inf vs control rep2, westar 48h control vs inf rep2 technical replicate - labeled-extract: westar 48h inf vs control rep3, westar 48h control vs inf rep3 biological replicate: westar 72h inf vs control rep1, westar 72h inf vs control rep2, westar 72h inf vs control rep3 biological replicate: westar 72h control vs inf rep1, westar 72h control vs inf rep2, westar 72h control vs inf rep3 technical replicate - labeled-extract: westar 72h inf vs control rep1, westar 72h control vs inf rep1 technical replicate - labeled-extract: westar 72h inf vs control rep2, westar 72h control vs inf rep2 technical replicate - labeled-extract: westar 72h inf vs control rep3, westar 72h control vs inf rep3
2009-01-31 | E-GEOD-13254 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:Time series response of potato cv. Désirée, which is tolerant to PVY infection, was analysed in both inoculated as well as upper non-inoculated leaves. Additionally, transgenic plants deficient in accumulation of salicylic acid (NahG- Désirée) were studied in the same setting.
2019-09-25 | PXD015221 | Pride
Project description:Phytophthora blight is a highly destructive soil borne disease caused by Phytophthora capsici Leonian, which seriously threatens global pepper production. Grafting is one of the important means to improve plant disease resistance and prevent soil borne diseases in vegetable production. However, the molecular mechanism by which grafting enhances the resistance of pepper to Phytophthora blight is still unclear. This study used Phytophthora capsici resistant strain ‘ZCM334’ and susceptible strain ‘Early Calwonder’ as rootstocks, and ‘Early Calwonder’ as scions for grafting. Phenotypic observation and cytological analysis showed that compared with the ‘Early Calwonder’ self rooted plants, the ‘ZCM334’ grafted plants had a later onset of disease, stronger resistance, and less damage to leaf cells, indicating that grafting can significantly improve the resistance of pepper to Phytophthora capsici. This study identified differentially expressed proteins (DEPs) in the leaves and roots of ‘ZCM334’ grafted plants and ‘Early Calwonder’ self rooted plants through proteomic analysis based on iTRAQ technology, and 478 and 349 DEPs were identified between their leaves and roots, respectively. These DEPs were mainly involved in metabolic process, cellular process, response to stimulus and catalytic activity processes. We identified and screened 12 DEPs with consistent expression trends in the leaves and roots of ‘ZCM334’ grafted plants and ‘Early Calwonder’ self rooted plants, including seven DEPs related to Phytophthora capsici resistance (CA01g31060, CA02g15780, CA02g30850, CA01g11410, CA05g12260, CA03g35150, and CA03g36980) and five proteins with unknown functions (CA01g26190, CA11g10620, CA12g02730, CA01g20890 and CA02g11340). Through qRT-PCR analysis, a significant correlation was observed between the protein and transcript levels of these 12 DEPs, and their expression characteristics were analyzed in the roots and leaves of ‘ZCM334’ grafted plants and ‘Early Calwonder’ self rooted plants at different stages (0h, 12h, 24h, and 36h) after inoculation with Phytophthora capsici. This study provides valuable information for exploring the molecular mechanisms by which grafting enhances the resistance of pepper to Phytophthora blight and the excavation of these key genes provides research ideas for studying the regulatory network of pepper resistance to Phytophthora capsici.
2024-05-24 | PXD045628 | Pride
Project description:Very resistant line (75A:258, carrying the Phr1 allele), moderately resistant line (Wonga, carrying the PhtjR allele) and a susceptible line (Emir) were used in this study. 4 weeks after plant sowing lower parts of stems were scarified and inoculated with Diaporthe toxica (studied plants) or not inoculated (control plants). Stem tissue was sampled at 1, 5, 9, 16 and 23 days post inoculation.
2021-01-11 | E-MTAB-9814 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:The goal of this study was to identify signaling processes associated with infection and recovery of leafy spurge inoculated with Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. manihotis (Xam). Two dye-swap technical replicates for each of 3 biological replicates for each treatment were analyzed. A time course analysis of Xam infected and mock inoculated leafy spurge was performed. Time points were 1, 7 and 21 days after inoculation (or mock inoculation). Thus, 36 labeled samples were hybridized in a 2 dye rolling circle hybridization scheme to 18 arrays.
2010-06-24 | E-GEOD-15751 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:Nonhost resistance, a resistance of plant species against all nonadapted pathogens, is considered the most durable and efficient immune system in plants. To increase our understanding of the response of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) plants to infection by powdery mildew, Blumeria graminis f. sp. Tritici, we used quantitative proteomic analysis (LC-MS/MS). We compared the response of two genotypes of barley cultivar Golden Promise, wild type (WT) and plants with overexpression of phytoglobin (previously hemoglobin) class 1 (HO), which has previously been shown to significantly weaken non-host resistance. A total of 8804 proteins were identified and quantified, out of which the abundance of 1044 proteins changed significantly in at least one of the four comparisons (‘i’ stands for ‘inoculated’)- HO/WT and HOi/WTi (giving genotype differences), and WTi/WT and HOi/HO (giving treatment differences). Among these differentially abundant proteins (DAP) were proteins related to structural organization, disease/defense, metabolism, transporters, signal transduction and protein synthesis. More proteins changed in abundance in WT than in HO after inoculation and most DAP increased in abundance.
2020-08-18 | PXD015089 | Pride
Project description:Barley cv. Morex inoculated with Fusarium graminearum (isolate Butte 86) or water (mock). Sampled at 24, 48, 72, 96 and 144 hours after treatment. ****[PLEXdb(http://www.plexdb.org) has submitted this series at GEO on behalf of the original contributor, Jayanand Boddu. The equivalent experiment is BB9 at PLEXdb.] time: 24 - Treated or untreated: WATER(5-replications); time: 24 - Treated or untreated: Fusarium(5-replications); time: 48 - Treated or untreated: WATER(4-replications); time: 48 - Treated or untreated: Fusarium(4-replications); time: 72 - Treated or untreated: WATER(5-replications); time: 72 - Treated or untreated: Fusarium(5-replications); time: 96 - Treated or untreated: WATER(4-replications); time: 96 - Treated or untreated: Fusarium(4-replications); time: 144 - Treated or untreated: WATER(4-replications); time: 144 - Treated or untreated: Fusarium(4-replications)
2011-11-22 | E-GEOD-33407 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:Brassica napus leaves(18 days old) were inoculated by Sclerotinia sclerotiorum with leaves harvested after 12, 24 and 48 h. Arabidopsis thaliana full-genome 70mer microarray representing at least 23,686 genes were used.
2007-10-01 | E-MEXP-1031 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:we deep-sequenced two small RNA libraries made from V. longisporum infected/non-infected roots and employed Brassica rapa and Brassica oleracea genomes as reference for miRNA prediction and characterization as well. We identified 893 B. napus miRNAs representing 360 conserved and 533 novel miRNAs, and mapped 429 and 464 miRNAs to AA and CC genomes, respectively. Among them, 62 miRNAs were responsive to the V. longisporum infection. two small RNA libraries constructed from V. longsiporum infected and non-infected roots after 6 days were sequenced by Illumina’s Solexa sequencing technology (BGI, China)
2014-10-06 | E-GEOD-58322 | biostudies-arrayexpress