Expression of tomato salicylic acid (SA)‐responsive pathogenesis‐related genes in Mi‐1‐mediated and SA‐induced resistance to root‐knot nematodes

The expression pattern of pathogenesis‐related genes PR‐1, PR‐2 and PR‐5, considered as markers for salicylic acid (SA)‐dependent systemic acquired resistance (SAR), was examined in the roots and shoots of tomato plants pre‐treated with SA and subsequently infected with root‐knot nematodes (RKNs) (Meloidogyne incognita). PR‐1 was up‐regulated in both roots and shoots of SA‐treated plants, whereas the expression of PR‐5 was enhanced only in roots. The over‐expression of PR‐1 in the whole plant occurred as soon as 1 day after SA treatment. Up‐regulation of the PR‐1 gene was considered to be the main marker of SAR elicitation. One day after treatment, plants were inoculated with active juveniles (J2s) of M. incognita. The number of J2s that entered the roots and started to develop was significantly lower in SA‐treated than in untreated plants at 5 and 15 days after inoculation. The expression pattern of PR‐1, PR‐2 and PR‐5 was also examined in the roots and shoots of susceptible and Mi‐1‐carrying resistant tomato plants infected by RKNs. Nematode infection produced a down‐regulation of PR genes in both roots and shoots of SA‐treated and untreated plants, and in roots of Mi‐carrying resistant plants. Moreover, in resistant infected plants, PR gene expression, in particular PR‐1 gene expression, was highly induced in shoots. Thus, nematode infection was demonstrated to elicit SAR in shoots of resistant plants. The data presented in this study show that the repression of host defence SA signalling is associated with the successful development of RKNs, and that SA exogenously added as a soil drench is able to trigger a SAR‐like response to RKNs in tomato.     

An F‐box gene,CPR30, functions as a negative regulator of the defense response in Arabidopsis

Arabidopsis gain‐of‐resistance mutants, which show HR‐like lesion formation and SAR‐like constitutive defense responses, were used well as tools to unravel the plant defense mechanisms. We have identified a novel mutant, designated constitutive expresser of PR genes 30 (cpr30), that exhibited dwarf morphology, constitutive resistance to the bacterial pathogen Pseudomonas syringae and the dramatic induction of defense‐response gene expression. The cpr30‐conferred growth defect morphology and defense responses are dependent on ENHANCED DISEASE SUSCEPTIBILITY 1 (EDS1), PHYTOALEXIN DEFICIENT 4 (PAD4), and NONRACE‐SPECIFIC DISEASE RESISTANCE 1 (NDR1). Further studies demonstrated that salicylic acid (SA) could partially account for the cpr30‐conferred constitutive PR1 gene expression, but not for the growth defect, and that the cpr30‐conferred defense responses were NPR1 independent. We observed a widespread expression of CPR30 throughout the plant, and a localization of CPR30‐GFP fusion protein in the cytoplasm and nucleus. As an F‐box protein, CPR30 could interact with multiple Arabidopsis‐SKP1‐like (ASK) proteins in vivo. Co‐localization of CPR30 and ASK1 or ASK2 was observed in Arabidopsis protoplasts. Based on these results, we conclude that CPR30, a novel negative regulator, regulates both SA‐dependent and SA‐independent defense signaling, most likely through the ubiquitin‐proteasome pathway in Arabidopsis.     

Compact tomato seedlings and plants upon overexpression of a tomato chromatin remodelling ATPase gene

Control of plant growth is an important aspect of crop productivity and yield in agriculture. Overexpression of the AtCHR12/23 genes in Arabidopsis thaliana reduced growth habit without other morphological changes. These two genes encode Snf2 chromatin remodelling ATPases. Here, we translate this approach to the horticultural crop tomato (Solanum lycopersicum). We identified and cloned the single tomato ortholog of the two Arabidopsis Snf2 genes, designated SlCHR1. Transgenic tomato plants (cv. Micro‐Tom) that constitutively overexpress the coding sequence of SlCHR1 show reduced growth in all developmental stages of tomato. This confirms that SlCHR1 combines the functions of both Arabidopsis genes in tomato. Compared to the wild type, the transgenic seedlings of tomato have significantly shorter roots, hypocotyls and reduced cotyledon size. Transgenic plants have a much more compact growth habit with markedly reduced plant height, severely compacted reproductive structures with smaller flowers and smaller fruits. The results indicate that either GMO‐based or non‐GMO‐based approaches to modulate the expression of chromatin remodelling ATPase genes could develop into methods to control plant growth, for example to replace the use of chemical growth retardants. This approach is likely to be applicable and attractive for any crop for which growth habit reduction has added value.