Comparative genomics of two inbred lines of the potato cyst nematode Globodera rostochiensis reveals disparate effector family-specific diversification patterns.
CLE
Effectoromics
Gland proteins
Heterozygosity
Innate immune system
SPRYSEC
Journal
BMC genomics
ISSN: 1471-2164
Titre abrégé: BMC Genomics
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100965258
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 Aug 2021
11 Aug 2021
Historique:
received:
15
04
2021
accepted:
27
07
2021
entrez:
12
8
2021
pubmed:
13
8
2021
medline:
14
8
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Potato cyst nematodes belong to the most harmful pathogens in potato, and durable management of these parasites largely depends on host-plant resistances. These resistances are pathotype specific. The current Globodera rostochiensis pathotype scheme that defines five pathotypes (Ro1 - Ro5) is both fundamentally and practically of limited value. Hence, resistant potato varieties are used worldwide in a poorly informed manner. We generated two novel reference genomes of G. rostochiensis inbred lines derived from a Ro1 and a Ro5 population. These genome sequences comprise 173 and 189 scaffolds respectively, marking a ≈ 24-fold reduction in fragmentation as compared to the current reference genome. We provide copy number variations for 19 effector families. Four dorsal gland effector families were investigated in more detail. SPRYSECs, known to be implicated in plant defence suppression, constitute by far the most diversified family studied herein with 60 and 99 variants in Ro1 and Ro5 distributed over 18 and 26 scaffolds. In contrast, CLEs, effectors involved in feeding site induction, show strong physical clustering. The 10 and 16 variants cluster on respectively 2 and 1 scaffolds. Given that pathotypes are defined by their effectoromes, we pinpoint the disparate nature of the contributing effector families in terms of sequence diversification and loss and gain of variants. Two novel reference genomes allow for nearly complete inventories of effector diversification and physical organisation within and between pathotypes. Combined with insights we provide on effector family-specific diversification patterns, this constitutes a basis for an effectorome-based virulence scheme for this notorious pathogen.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Potato cyst nematodes belong to the most harmful pathogens in potato, and durable management of these parasites largely depends on host-plant resistances. These resistances are pathotype specific. The current Globodera rostochiensis pathotype scheme that defines five pathotypes (Ro1 - Ro5) is both fundamentally and practically of limited value. Hence, resistant potato varieties are used worldwide in a poorly informed manner.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We generated two novel reference genomes of G. rostochiensis inbred lines derived from a Ro1 and a Ro5 population. These genome sequences comprise 173 and 189 scaffolds respectively, marking a ≈ 24-fold reduction in fragmentation as compared to the current reference genome. We provide copy number variations for 19 effector families. Four dorsal gland effector families were investigated in more detail. SPRYSECs, known to be implicated in plant defence suppression, constitute by far the most diversified family studied herein with 60 and 99 variants in Ro1 and Ro5 distributed over 18 and 26 scaffolds. In contrast, CLEs, effectors involved in feeding site induction, show strong physical clustering. The 10 and 16 variants cluster on respectively 2 and 1 scaffolds. Given that pathotypes are defined by their effectoromes, we pinpoint the disparate nature of the contributing effector families in terms of sequence diversification and loss and gain of variants.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Two novel reference genomes allow for nearly complete inventories of effector diversification and physical organisation within and between pathotypes. Combined with insights we provide on effector family-specific diversification patterns, this constitutes a basis for an effectorome-based virulence scheme for this notorious pathogen.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34380421
doi: 10.1186/s12864-021-07914-6
pii: 10.1186/s12864-021-07914-6
pmc: PMC8359618
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
611Subventions
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : NWO-TTW
ID : 14708
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
ID : 105621/Z/14/Z
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Plant Physiol. 2019 Apr;179(4):1212-1226
pubmed: 30397024
Mol Plant Microbe Interact. 1996 Jan;9(1):47-54
pubmed: 8589422
Genome Biol. 2016 Jun 10;17(1):124
pubmed: 27286965
BMC Bioinformatics. 2018 Nov 29;19(1):460
pubmed: 30497373
Genome Res. 2017 May;27(5):722-736
pubmed: 28298431
NAR Genom Bioinform. 2021 Jan 06;3(1):lqaa108
pubmed: 33575650
BMC Genomics. 2015 Nov 24;16:996
pubmed: 26602546
Nat Methods. 2020 Feb;17(2):155-158
pubmed: 31819265
PLoS One. 2018 Aug 2;13(8):e0201611
pubmed: 30071059
PLoS Pathog. 2018 Oct 18;14(10):e1007300
pubmed: 30335852
PLoS Pathog. 2014 Sep 25;10(9):e1004391
pubmed: 25255291
Proc Biol Sci. 2019 Jan 16;286(1894):20182359
pubmed: 30963865
PLoS Pathog. 2009 Aug;5(8):e1000564
pubmed: 19714238
PLoS One. 2014 Mar 24;9(3):e91634
pubmed: 24662955
Methods Mol Biol. 2007;396:43-58
pubmed: 18025685
Bioinformatics. 2009 Jul 15;25(14):1754-60
pubmed: 19451168
Nucleic Acids Res. 1995 Nov 11;23(21):4407-14
pubmed: 7501463
Phytopathology. 2021 Jan;111(1):137-148
pubmed: 33100145
Nat Commun. 2018 Nov 19;9(1):4844
pubmed: 30451840
Mol Plant Pathol. 2013 Dec;14(9):946-61
pubmed: 23809086
Mol Ecol. 2019 May;28(10):2559-2572
pubmed: 30964953
Phytopathology. 2003 Apr;93(4):382-90
pubmed: 18944351
Nat Methods. 2018 Jun;15(6):461-468
pubmed: 29713083
Mol Plant Pathol. 2020 Sep;21(9):1240-1247
pubmed: 32672422
Evol Appl. 2016 Feb 11;9(3):489-501
pubmed: 26989440
Mol Plant Microbe Interact. 2003 Aug;16(8):720-6
pubmed: 12906116
Mol Ecol. 2008 May;17(9):2208-18
pubmed: 18410291
Annu Rev Phytopathol. 2012;50:175-95
pubmed: 22578179
Front Plant Sci. 2016 Oct 20;7:1575
pubmed: 27812363
Bioinformatics. 2014 May 1;30(9):1312-3
pubmed: 24451623
Nucleic Acids Res. 2013 Jul;41(12):e121
pubmed: 23598997
Nature. 2000 Jul 6;406(6791):36-7
pubmed: 10894530
Nat Biotechnol. 2019 Aug;37(8):907-915
pubmed: 31375807
J Mol Biol. 2004 May 14;338(5):1027-36
pubmed: 15111065
Front Plant Sci. 2015 Aug 11;6:623
pubmed: 26322064
Mol Biol Evol. 2020 Jan 1;37(1):291-294
pubmed: 31432070
Evol Appl. 2019 Dec 03;13(4):727-737
pubmed: 32211063
Genome Res. 2009 Sep;19(9):1639-45
pubmed: 19541911
Mol Plant Microbe Interact. 2009 Mar;22(3):330-40
pubmed: 19245327
Front Microbiol. 2019 Jun 04;10:1241
pubmed: 31214156
Methods Mol Biol. 2019;1962:227-245
pubmed: 31020564
Plant Sci. 2019 Dec;289:110271
pubmed: 31623793
Bioinformatics. 2011 Nov 1;27(21):2987-93
pubmed: 21903627
Mol Plant Microbe Interact. 2009 Sep;22(9):1128-42
pubmed: 19656047
Mol Ecol Resour. 2015 Nov;15(6):1356-65
pubmed: 25846829
Mol Genet Genomics. 2008 May;279(5):535-43
pubmed: 18324416
PLoS One. 2009;4(4):e5066
pubmed: 19343173
Plant Cell. 2008 Nov;20(11):3080-93
pubmed: 19001564
Genome Biol. 2014 Mar 03;15(3):R43
pubmed: 24580726
Phytopathology. 2015 Oct;105(10):1362-72
pubmed: 25871857
Gigascience. 2020 Apr 1;9(4):
pubmed: 32236524
Plant Physiol. 2012 Oct;160(2):944-54
pubmed: 22904163
New Phytol. 2021 Jan;229(1):563-574
pubmed: 32569394
PLoS One. 2014 Nov 19;9(11):e112963
pubmed: 25409509
BMC Bioinformatics. 2014 Jun 20;15:211
pubmed: 24950923
Mol Plant Microbe Interact. 2006 May;19(5):521-9
pubmed: 16673939
Nature. 1952 Dec 13;170(4337):1016
pubmed: 13013295
Plant Cell. 2018 Nov;30(11):2795-2812
pubmed: 30333146
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Jun 19;109(25):10119-24
pubmed: 22675118
J Nematol. 2002 Dec;34(4):279-88
pubmed: 19265945
Mol Biol Evol. 2006 Sep;23(9):1792-800
pubmed: 16790472
Nucleic Acids Res. 2004 Mar 19;32(5):1792-7
pubmed: 15034147
PLoS Genet. 2018 Apr 11;14(4):e1007310
pubmed: 29641602
mBio. 2019 Nov 5;10(6):
pubmed: 31690676
Microb Genom. 2016 Apr 29;2(4):e000055
pubmed: 28348850
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998 Apr 28;95(9):4906-11
pubmed: 9560201