Grapevine Rpv3-, Rpv10- and Rpv12-mediated defense responses against Plasmopara viticola and the impact of their deployment on fungicide use in viticulture.
Disease resistance
Downy mildew
Grapevine
Plasmopara viticola
Rpv10
Rpv12
Rpv3
Stilbenes
Vitis vinifera
avrRpv
Journal
BMC plant biology
ISSN: 1471-2229
Titre abrégé: BMC Plant Biol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967807
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 Oct 2021
14 Oct 2021
Historique:
received:
27
04
2021
accepted:
23
09
2021
entrez:
15
10
2021
pubmed:
16
10
2021
medline:
20
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The high susceptibility of European grapevine cultivars (Vitis vinifera) to downy mildew (Plasmopara viticola) leads to the intensive use of fungicides in viticulture. To reduce this input, breeding programs have introgressed resistance loci from wild Vitis species into V. vinifera, resulting in new fungus-resistant grapevine cultivars (FRC). However, little is known about how these different resistance loci confer resistance and what the potential reduction in fungicide applications are likely to be if these FRCs are deployed. To ensure a durable and sustainable resistance management and breeding, detailed knowledge about the different defense mechanisms mediated by the respective Rpv (Resistance to P. viticola) resistance loci is essential. A comparison of the resistance mechanisms mediated by the Rpv3-1, Rpv10 and/or Rpv12-loci revealed an early onset of programmed cell death (PCD) at 8 hours post infection (hpi) in Rpv12-cultivars and 12 hpi in Rpv10-cultivars, whereas cell death was delayed in Rpv3-cultivars and was not observed until 28 hpi. These temporal differences correlated with an increase in the trans-resveratrol level and the formation of hydrogen peroxide shortly before onset of PCD. The differences in timing of onset of Rpv-loci specific defense reactions following downy mildew infection could be responsible for the observed differences in hyphal growth, sporulation and cultivar-specific susceptibility to this pathogen in the vineyard. Hereby, Rpv3- and Rpv12/Rpv3-cultivars showed a potential for a significant reduction of fungicide applications, depending on the annual P. viticola infection pressure and the Rpv-loci. Furthermore, we report on the discovery of a new P. viticola isolate that is able to overcome both Rpv3- and Rpv12-mediated resistance. This study reveals that differences in the timing of the defense reaction mediated by the Rpv3-, Rpv10- and Rpv12-loci, result in different degrees of natural resistance to downy mildew in field. Vineyard trials demonstrate that Rpv12/Rpv3- and Rpv3-cultivars are a powerful tool to reduce the dependence of grape production on fungicide applications. Furthermore, this study indicates the importance of sustainable breeding and plant protection strategies based on resistant grapevine cultivars to reduce the risk of new P. viticola isolates that are able to overcome the respective resistance mechanism.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The high susceptibility of European grapevine cultivars (Vitis vinifera) to downy mildew (Plasmopara viticola) leads to the intensive use of fungicides in viticulture. To reduce this input, breeding programs have introgressed resistance loci from wild Vitis species into V. vinifera, resulting in new fungus-resistant grapevine cultivars (FRC). However, little is known about how these different resistance loci confer resistance and what the potential reduction in fungicide applications are likely to be if these FRCs are deployed. To ensure a durable and sustainable resistance management and breeding, detailed knowledge about the different defense mechanisms mediated by the respective Rpv (Resistance to P. viticola) resistance loci is essential.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A comparison of the resistance mechanisms mediated by the Rpv3-1, Rpv10 and/or Rpv12-loci revealed an early onset of programmed cell death (PCD) at 8 hours post infection (hpi) in Rpv12-cultivars and 12 hpi in Rpv10-cultivars, whereas cell death was delayed in Rpv3-cultivars and was not observed until 28 hpi. These temporal differences correlated with an increase in the trans-resveratrol level and the formation of hydrogen peroxide shortly before onset of PCD. The differences in timing of onset of Rpv-loci specific defense reactions following downy mildew infection could be responsible for the observed differences in hyphal growth, sporulation and cultivar-specific susceptibility to this pathogen in the vineyard. Hereby, Rpv3- and Rpv12/Rpv3-cultivars showed a potential for a significant reduction of fungicide applications, depending on the annual P. viticola infection pressure and the Rpv-loci. Furthermore, we report on the discovery of a new P. viticola isolate that is able to overcome both Rpv3- and Rpv12-mediated resistance.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
This study reveals that differences in the timing of the defense reaction mediated by the Rpv3-, Rpv10- and Rpv12-loci, result in different degrees of natural resistance to downy mildew in field. Vineyard trials demonstrate that Rpv12/Rpv3- and Rpv3-cultivars are a powerful tool to reduce the dependence of grape production on fungicide applications. Furthermore, this study indicates the importance of sustainable breeding and plant protection strategies based on resistant grapevine cultivars to reduce the risk of new P. viticola isolates that are able to overcome the respective resistance mechanism.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34649524
doi: 10.1186/s12870-021-03228-7
pii: 10.1186/s12870-021-03228-7
pmc: PMC8515710
doi:
Substances chimiques
Fungicides, Industrial
0
Plant Proteins
0
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
470Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Int J Mol Sci. 2019 Jul 18;20(14):
pubmed: 31323823
Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2009;60:379-406
pubmed: 19400727
Curr Biol. 2016 Jul 11;26(13):R608-R619
pubmed: 27404256
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1995 May 9;92(10):4158-63
pubmed: 11607542
Theor Appl Genet. 2012 Feb;124(2):277-86
pubmed: 21947344
Nat Rev Genet. 2010 Aug;11(8):539-48
pubmed: 20585331
Nature. 2006 Nov 16;444(7117):323-9
pubmed: 17108957
Annu Rev Phytopathol. 2006;44:135-62
pubmed: 16602946
Nature. 2001 Jun 14;411(6839):826-33
pubmed: 11459065
Plant Cell. 1990 May;2(5):437-45
pubmed: 2152169
Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2011 Sep;301(3):H1107-17
pubmed: 21622823
Plants (Basel). 2020 Jun 22;9(6):
pubmed: 32580445
PLoS One. 2013 Apr 12;8(4):e61228
pubmed: 23593440
J Exp Bot. 2016 Oct;67(19):5841-5856
pubmed: 27702992
Planta. 2011 Dec;234(6):1097-109
pubmed: 21735199
Sci Rep. 2020 Jul 22;10(1):12193
pubmed: 32699241
BMC Plant Biol. 2019 Aug 6;19(1):343
pubmed: 31387524
Plant J. 2008 Mar;53(5):763-75
pubmed: 18005228
Phytopathology. 2005 Dec;95(12):1445-52
pubmed: 18943556
Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol. 1997 Jun;48:525-545
pubmed: 15012273
Cell. 1994 Nov 18;79(4):583-93
pubmed: 7954825
Hortic Res. 2015 May 20;2:15020
pubmed: 26504571
Physiol Plant. 2015 Mar;153(3):365-80
pubmed: 25132131
Plant Cell. 2013 Oct;25(10):4135-49
pubmed: 24151295
Plant J. 2020 Feb;101(3):529-542
pubmed: 31571285
Sci Rep. 2020 Jan 17;10(1):585
pubmed: 31953499
BMC Plant Biol. 2010 Jul 15;10:147
pubmed: 20633270
Infect Genet Evol. 2014 Oct;27:500-8
pubmed: 24184095
Front Plant Sci. 2020 Oct 08;11:562432
pubmed: 33163011
Fungal Genet Biol. 2012 Oct;49(10):847-55
pubmed: 22789868
Nat Methods. 2012 Jun 28;9(7):676-82
pubmed: 22743772
Plant Cell. 2003 Feb;15(2):317-30
pubmed: 12566575
PLoS One. 2011;6(10):e26405
pubmed: 22053190
Annu Rev Phytopathol. 2013;51:245-66
pubmed: 23663002
Plant J. 2013 Nov;76(4):661-74
pubmed: 24033846
Phytopathology. 2007 Jul;97(7):780-6
pubmed: 18943926
Theor Appl Genet. 2004 Feb;108(3):501-15
pubmed: 14574452
Bio Protoc. 2012;2(18):
pubmed: 27390754
BMC Plant Biol. 2011 Aug 12;11:114
pubmed: 21838877
Trends Biochem Sci. 2000 Feb;25(2):79-82
pubmed: 10664588
Annu Rev Phytopathol. 2002;40:349-79
pubmed: 12147764
BMC Plant Biol. 2013 Oct 04;13:149
pubmed: 24093598
Theor Appl Genet. 2012 Jan;124(1):163-76
pubmed: 21935694
Virulence. 2014;5(7):710-21
pubmed: 25513772
Theor Appl Genet. 2009 Dec;120(1):163-76
pubmed: 19821064