January
2008
, Volume
21
, Number
1
Pages
50
-
60
Authors
Alejandra L. D'Antuono,1
Thomas Ott,2
Lene Krusell,2
Vera Voroshilova,2
Rodolfo A. Ugalde,1
Michael Udvardi,2
Viviana C. Lepek1
Affiliations
1Instituto de Investigaciones Biotecnológicas, INTECH, Universidad Nacional de General San Martín, CONICET, Buenos Aires, Argentina; 2Max-Planck-Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Golm, Germany
Go to article:
RelatedArticle
Accepted 4 October 2007.
Abstract
cDNA array technology was used to compare transcriptome profiles of Lotus japonicus roots inoculated with a Mesorhizobium loti wild-type and two mutant strains affected in cyclic β(1-2) glucan synthesis (cgs) and in lipopolysaccharide synthesis (lpsβ2). Expression of genes associated with the development of a fully functional nodule was significantly affected in plants inoculated with the cgs mutant. Array results also revealed that induction of marker genes for nodule development was delayed when plants were inoculated with the lpsβ2 mutant. Quantitative real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction was used to quantify gene expression of a subset of genes involved in plant defense response, redox metabolism, or genes that encode for nodulins. The majority of the genes analyzed in this study were more highly expressed in roots inoculated with the wild type compared with those inoculated with the cgs mutant strain. Some of the genes exhibited a transient increase in transcript levels during intermediate steps of normal nodule development while others displayed induced expression during the final steps of nodule development. Ineffective nodules induced by the glucan mutant showed higher expression of phenylalanine ammonia lyase than wild-type nodules. Differences in expression pattern of genes involved in early recognition and signaling were observed in plants inoculated with the M. loti mutant strain affected in the synthesis of cyclic glucan.
JnArticleKeywords
Additional keywords:competitiveness, infection threads, Lotus glaber, Nod factor perception, phenolic compounds
Page Content
ArticleCopyright
© 2008 The American Phytopathological Society